PHASE ONE

DraFt EnvironmEntal StatEmEnt Community Forum Area Report 13 | Calvert, Steeple , Twyford and HS2 London-West Midlands May 2013

ENGINE FOR GROWTH DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Community Forum Area Report ENGINE FOR GROWTH 13 I Calvert, , Twyford and Chetwode High Speed Two (HS2) Limited, 2nd Floor, Eland House, Bressenden Place, London SW1E 5DU

Telephone: 020 7944 4908

General email enquiries: [email protected]

Website: www.hs2.org.uk

© Crown copyright, 2013, except where otherwise stated

Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown.

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

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

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

Product code: ES/17

Printed in Great Britain on paper containing at least 75% recycled fibre. CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Contents Contents

Draft Volume 2: Community Forum Area Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 5 Part A: Introduction 6 1 Introduction 7 1.1 Introduction to HS2 7 1.2 Purpose of this report 7 1.3 Structure of this report 9 Part B: Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode – overview of the area and description of the Proposed Scheme 10 2 Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode 11 2.1 Overview of the area 11 2.2 Description of the Proposed Scheme 14 2.3 Construction of the Proposed Scheme 17 2.4 Operation of the Proposed Scheme 26 2.5 Community forum engagement 27 2.6 Route section main alternatives 28 2.7 Proposals for further consideration 31 Part C: Environmental topic assessments 33 3 Agriculture, forestry and soils 34 3.1 Introduction 34 3.2 Policy framework 34 3.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 34 3.4 Environmental baseline 34 3.5 Construction 36 3.6 Operation 38

1 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Contents

4 Air quality 40 4.1 Introduction 40 4.2 Policy framework 40 4.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 40 4.4 Environmental baseline 40 4.5 Construction 41 4.6 Operation 42 5 Community 43 5.1 Introduction 43 5.2 Policy framework 43 5.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 43 5.4 Environmental baseline 43 5.5 Construction 45 5.6 Operation 46 6 Cultural heritage 47 6.1 Introduction 47 6.2 Policy framework 47 6.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 47 6.4 Environmental baseline 47 6.5 Construction 48 6.6 Operation 50 7 Ecology 52 7.1 Introduction 52 7.2 Policy framework 52 7.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 52 7.4 Environmental baseline 53 7.5 Construction 56 7.6 Operation 60 8 Land quality 62 8.1 Introduction 62 8.2 Policy framework 62 8.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 62 8.4 Environmental baseline 63 8.5 Construction 64 8.6 Operation 66

2 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Contents

9 Landscape and visual assessment 68 9.1 Introduction 68 9.2 Policy framework 68 9.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 68 9.4 Environmental baseline 68 9.5 Construction 69 9.6 Operation 74 10 Socio-economics 79 10.1 Introduction 79 10.2 Policy framework 79 10.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 79 10.4 Environmental baseline 79 10.5 Construction 80 10.6 Operation 81 11 Sound, noise and vibration 82 11.1 Introduction 82 11.2 Policy framework 82 11.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 82 11.4 Environmental baseline 82 11.5 Construction 82 11.6 Operation 83 12 Traffic and transport 87 12.1 Introduction 87 12.2 Policy framework 87 12.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 87 12.4 Environmental baseline 88 12.5 Construction 89 12.6 Operation 92 13 Water resources and flood risk assessment 94 13.1 Introduction 94 13.2 Policy framework 94 13.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 94 13.4 Environmental baseline 94 13.5 Construction 96 13.6 Operation 98 14 References 102

2 3 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Contents

List of figures

Figure 1: HS2 Phase One route and community forum areas 8 Figure 2: Area context map 12 Figure 3: Indicative construction programme for the area 26 Figure 4: Business Sector Composition in Vale and the South East 80

List of tables

Table 1: Location of construction site compounds 19 Table 2: Location of temporary worker accommodation sites 20 Table 3: Demolition works 20 Table 4: Footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions 22 Table 5: Holdings affected by the Proposed Scheme 35 Table 6: Preliminary evaluation of likely status and value of protected and/or notable species occurring within this section of the route 54 Table 7: Significant residual construction effects on ecological receptors within this section of the route 59 Table 8: Significant residual operational effects on ecological receptors within this area 61 Table 9: Significant landscape effects during construction 70 Table 10: Significant visual effects during construction 71 Table 11: Significant landscape effects during operation year 1 (2026) 75 Table 12: Significant visual effects during operation year 1 (2026) 76 Table 13: Options for further mitigation 85 Table 14: Typical vehicle trip generation for site compounds in this area 90

4 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Contents Draft Volume 2: Community Forum Area Report Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 Structure of the HS2 draft Environmental Statement The draft ES documentation for the purpose of this consultation comprises: • A non-technical summary (NTS) – providing a summary of the Proposed Scheme, the likely significant effects of the Proposed Scheme, both beneficial and adverse, and the means to avoid or reduce the adverse effects; and • A main report consisting of two volumes: ȃȃ Volume 1: Introduction to the Environmental Statement and Proposed Scheme which provides an introduction to HS2, an overview of the hybrid bill process and the environmental impact assessment (EIA) methodology, an introduction to consultation and engagement, the main strategic and route-wide alternatives considered; and ȃȃ Volume 2: Includes 26 Community Forum Area (CFA) reports, each with a separate corresponding set of drawings, which together provide the assessment of local environmental effects. An assessment of the effects of the Proposed Scheme on a route-wide basis is presented in Report 27.

HS2 Ltd set up 26 community forums along the line of route of the Proposed Scheme, as a regular way of engaging with local communities1. Volume 2 of this draft ES supports this engagement strategy by providing a draft ES report for each CFA. This is a report for the Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode area, CFA13.

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

1 Details of these community forums are provided on the HS2 Ltd website at http://www.hs2.org.uk/have-your-say/forums/community-forums. Accessed April 22 2013.

5 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Contents Part A: Introduction

6 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Introduction 1 Introduction 1.1 Introduction to HS2 1.1.1 HS2 is planned to be a Y-shaped rail network with stations in London, Birmingham, Leeds, Manchester, South Yorkshire and the East Midlands, linked by high speed trains running at speeds of up to 360 kilometres per hour (kph) (225 miles per hour (mph)).

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

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

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

1.1.5 The Government believes that the HS2 network should link to Heathrow and its preferred option is for this to be built as part of Phase Two. However, the Government has since taken the decision to pause work on the Heathrow link until after 2015 when it expects the Airports Commission to publish its final report on recommended options for maintaining the country’s status as an international aviation hub. 1.2 Purpose of this report 1.2.1 This report presents the likely significant environmental effects as a result of the construction and operation of Phase One of HS2 (the Proposed Scheme) that have been identified to date within the area of Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode (CFA13). It provides a summary of the likely environmental issues and proposed mitigation measures that are being addressed during the design development process within the Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode area.

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

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

6 7 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Introduction

Figure 1: HS2 Phase One route and community forum areas

8 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Introduction

1.3 Structure of this report 1.3.1 This report is divided into three parts: • Part A – an introduction to HS2 and the purpose of this report; • Part B – overview of the area, description of the Proposed Scheme within Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode and its construction, community forum engagement, and a description of the main local alternatives; and • Part C – environmental topic assessments – overview of the policy framework, the environmental baseline within the area, an assessment of construction and operational effects, the proposed mitigation measures, and significant residual effects for the following environmental topics: ȃȃ Agriculture, forestry and soils; ȃȃ Air quality; ȃȃ Community; ȃȃ Cultural heritage; ȃȃ Ecology; ȃȃ Land quality; ȃȃ Landscape and visual assessment; ȃȃ Socio-economics; ȃȃ Sound, noise and vibration; ȃȃ Traffic and transport; and ȃȃ Water resources and flood risk.

1.3.2 The maps relevant to Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode are provided in a separate corresponding document entitled Volume 2: CFA13 Map Book, which should be read in conjunction with this report.

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

9 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Introduction Part B: Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode – overview of the area and description of the Proposed Scheme

10 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode 2 Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode 2.1 Overview of the area 2.1.1 The Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode CFA extends from the parish boundary in the south to the parish boundary in the north, comprising approximately 10km of the Proposed Scheme. The CFA is largely within the county of , with a 300m section of the route that is located in . The area includes land within the parishes of Calvert Green, Steeple Claydon, Twyford, Chetwode, , Godington and Barton Hartshorn.

2.1.2 As shown in Figure 2, to Brackley (CFA14) lies to the north with and (CFA12) to the south. Settlement, land use and topography

2.1.3 The topography is generally flat and becomes gently undulating in the north.The area is predominantly rural in character, with agriculture being the main land use, interspersed with small villages and a scattering of isolated dwellings and farmsteads. The Brook flows in a north-easterly direction, meandering between Twyford and Godington.

2.1.4 The area is dominated by arable farming resulting in large field patterns with established hedgerow field margins. There is also some dairy farming, predominantly in the north of the area. The area is interspersed with some large pockets of ancient woodland, which are remnants of the Bernwood Forest.

2.1.5 There are a number of settlements within the area, the largest being Steeple Claydon, to the east of the route and north of the proposed Infrastructure Maintenance Depot (IMD) which is described in Section 2.2. Key transport infrastructure

2.1.6 The Proposed Scheme would run roughly parallel to the M40 motorway, which is to the west. The A421 Road runs roughly east-west in the north of the area, connecting with the A413 London Road south of in the east. The A41 runs roughly east-west to the south of the area, linking and Aylesbury. The remainder of the local road network consists of unclassified roads.

2.1.7 Two rail routes cross the area: the Bicester to Bletchley line and the Aylesbury Link, which runs from Steeple Claydon to Marylebone. The Bicester to Bletchley line is disused past Queen Catherine Road, east of Steeple Claydon. The Aylesbury Link follows the line of the former (GCML) and is operational as far as the intersection with the Bicester to Bletchley line at Claydon Junction, but disused north of Calvert. The Aylesbury Link and Bicester to Bletchley line are connected by a short curved section of track to the north-east of Calvert. The operational sections of both lines are currently consigned to freight movements and comprise a single track running up to a total of four train movements a day across the two lines.

11 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

Figure 2: Area context map

12 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

2.1.8 Network Rail is working with East West Rail (EWR) and other consortium partners to improve the lines in this area. This would upgrade existing infrastructure on the Bicester to Bletchley and Aylesbury Link lines, including enhanced rail freight and passenger services.

2.1.9 In addition to the country lanes and local access roads, a well-established network of public footpaths, byways and bridleways provides connections between the villages in the area. Long distance footpaths include the Cross Bucks Way and the Bernwood Forest route and the Bernwood Jubilee Way. There are numerous other public rights of way (PRoW). Demographic profile

2.1.10 The population within 1km of the Proposed Scheme in the area is estimated to be approximately 1,800, based on national census data. Approximately 45% of the population is aged 30-59 with a high proportion of under-15 year olds (25%).

2.1.11 This is an area of low ethnic diversity, with 97% of the population consisting of white ethnic groups (94% white British). The proportion of people of working age in employment is 76%, which is higher than that of District (72%) and Cherwell (73%). Most of the housing stock in the area is owner occupied (80%) which is higher than that of Aylesbury Vale District and Cherwell3. Notable community facilities

2.1.12 There are limited community facilities in this area. All of the villages are small and have a limited range of community services. The nearest villages to the route centre line in this area are Calvert, Chetwode, Twyford (within 500m) and Steeple Claydon (within 750 m). The limited range of facilities in the villages means that many residents in the area are likely to be dependent upon travelling in order to access services. Buckingham, to the north, Winslow to the east and Bicester to the west (which are all approximately 7km from the proposed route) are the nearest main centres for health care, shopping and leisure facilities, as well as nursery and secondary schools.

2.1.13 Calvert has a community hall and playground. Twyford has a village hall, a primary school, which caters for children aged 3 to 9, two churches, a village shop and a public house. Chetwode and Godington both have churches. The village of Steeple Claydon has a village shop, a primary school, library, dental practice, two public houses, and two churches. Recreation, leisure and open space

2.1.14 There is a limited range of recreational facilities within the local area. Calvert Green has a number of play areas. Twyford has a recreation ground and pavilion, which is home to Twyford Cricket Club and Football Club. Public houses and community halls provide a focus for social gatherings and for some village events and there are some areas of public open space. Informal open space is a widely used source of recreation in this area. Examples include Decoypond Wood, a nine hectare (ha) privately owned ancient semi-natural woodland, the combined 95ha of Calvert Jubilee nature reserve and Grebe Lake just north of Calvert, and scattered woodlands.

2.1.15 There are a large number of PRoW (footpaths, cycleways and bridleways) in the area, including Bernwood Jubilee Way, Bernwood Forest route, National Cycle Route 51 and Cross Bucks Way that form part of a network of trails that provide recreation.

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

13 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

Planning context and key designations

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

2.1.17 The area is within the administrative areas of Aylesbury Vale and Cherwell District councils. Aylesbury Vale District Council requested the Secretary of State’s direction to withdraw Aylesbury Vale District Core Strategy. As a result the Aylesbury Vale Local Plan Saved Policies remain applicable whilst the Local Development Framework (LDF) is under preparation4. However, emerging policies are not considered within this report unless a document has been submitted to the Secretary of State for approval and is expected to be adopted shortly, such as the Cherwell Local Plan.

2.1.18 Cherwell District Council planning policy is contained in the saved policies of the Cherwell Local Plan adopted in 19965. In 2011 Cherwell District Council approved a Non-Statutory Local Plan, this plan does not form part of the statutory development plan for the District but it was approved as interim planning policy for development control purposes. Cherwell District Council is currently working to prepare a revised version of the Cherwell Local Plan6 (previously known as the Core Strategy), which is expected to be adopted in Spring 2013.

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

2.1.20 There are a number of key planning designations in the area including a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), a Local Wildlife Site (LWS) and other locations around Calvert. The village of Chetwode is a designated conservation area. Listed buildings include: two Grade I listed buildings – the Church of St Mary at Twyford and the Church of St Mary and St Nicholas at Chetwode; the Grade II* listed Church of St at Steeple Claydon; and a number of Grade II listed buildings within the historic settlements of Steeple Claydon, Preston Bissett, Twyford, Barton Hartshorn, Chetwode and Godington, as well as those which form parts of isolated farmsteads, private houses or cottages. 2.2 Description of the Proposed Scheme 2.2.1 The general design of the Proposed Scheme is described in Volume 1. The following section describes the main features of the Proposed Scheme in the Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode area, including the main environmental mitigation measures.

2.2.2 Since the January 2012 scheme was announced by the Secretary of State, route development work has continued, and the Proposed Route now differs as follows: • Alignment of the Oxford to Bletchley and proposed HS2 lines where they intersect at Calvert have been lowered; • A railhead has been introduced adjacent to the Infrastructure Maintenance Depot (IMD) to support construction and installation of the line-of-route elements, including the permanent way (rail, sleepers and ballast), power supply, signalling, overhead line equipment (OLE), communications and control tunnel fit-outs and construction of the IMD. This would require additional land to be taken temporarily;

4 Aylesbury Vale District Council(2004) Aylesbury Vale Local Plan, Saved Policies. 5 Cherwell District Council (1996) Local Plan, Saved Policies. 6 Cherwell District Council (2012) Proposed Submission Cherwell Local Plan.

14 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

• The IMD has been extended eastwards to Queen Catherine Road and realignment of the line between the Bicester to Bletchley line and the Aylesbury Link line; • Rail access from HS2 to the IMD has been introduced to improve the response time for maintenance operations to the south and enhance the operational performance of the railhead; • A realignment of HS2 to the western side of the Aylesbury Link line, which runs from Steeple Claydon to Marylebone, between Quainton and Claydon Junction at Calvert; • School Hill Road has been reinstated online as a consequence of the above realignments avoiding the need to divert the road through the Calvert Jubilee nature reserve; and • Shorter viaduct structures and the adoption of embankments and culverts east of Twyford, east of Godington and south-west of Barton Hartshorn.

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

2.2.4 These changes are discussed in more detail in Section 2.6. Overview

2.2.5 The Proposed Scheme through this area would be approximately 10km in length. It would commence at the northern edge of Sheephouse Wood, to the south of Calvert, and then proceed north-westwards, passing to the west of Steeple Claydon. The route would then pass to the east of Twyford crossing the Padbury Brook, before passing to the west of Chetwode. Continuing north-westwards, it would pass to the east of Godington. This is illustrated on maps CT‑06-054 to CT‑06-060. Proposed Scheme – Section by section

2.2.6 The route would descend gently as it moves northwards away from Sheephouse Wood, passing Calvert in a retained cutting up to 8m deep. The route would continue to follow the line of the former GCML railway, before diverging from it as the route passes under the Bicester to Bletchley Line. Key features of this section would include: • Three multipurpose overbridges would be provided between Sheephouse Wood and Calvert: ȃȃ One overbridge between Sheephouse Wood and Decoypond Wood would be approximately 30m wide and vegetated to encourage the safe passage of wildlife across the Proposed Scheme; ȃȃ One overbridge adjacent to the Calvert landfill site would provide vehicular access between the landfill and sidings (see below), permanent diversions for footpath [SCL/13/2] and bridleway [SCL/18/2], and encourage the safe passage of wildlife; and ȃȃ One overbridge located at School Hill would be a dual-purpose vehicular crossing for the online diversion of School Hill and segregated to encourage safe passage of wildlife.

• Reorganisation of existing rail infrastructure in the Calvert-Steeple Claydon area comprising: ȃȃ Realignment of the Aylesbury Link, which would run parallel to and along the eastern side of the Proposed Scheme (see paragraph 2.1.7); ȃȃ The existing railway sidings used by FCC Environment, the waste management operator for the Calvert landfill site, would be relocated to the eastern side of the Proposed Scheme and the Aylesbury Link, via a new external road utilising the overbridge (see above);

15 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

ȃȃ Realignment of the short curved section of track that currently links the Bicester to Bletchley and Aylesbury Link lines. This would necessitate the demolition of Shepherd’s Furze Farmhouse and associated farm buildings; and ȃȃ Raising the Bicester to Bletchley rail alignment on a new overbridge over the Proposed Scheme to the north of Calvert Jubilee nature reserve. The realigned route would run parallel to the existing Aylesbury Link route (which is also being upgraded as part of the EWR proposals); ȃȃ An access spur from the Proposed Scheme in cutting that would also pass under the raised Bicester to Bletchley (EWR) route into the IMD; and ȃȃ Noise barriers would be placed on the western side of the route at Calvert.

2.2.7 The IMD7, a permanent land take of approximately 37ha, would occupy the north-eastern quadrant formed by the intersection of the Proposed Scheme and the realigned Bicester to Bletchley line. The IMD would operate as a base for maintenance activities to support the railway infrastructure. Key features of the IMD (see map CT‑06-055) would include: • A series of sidings to allow the handling and storage of rail infrastructure replacement materials and maintenance trains; • Maintenance sheds, administration buildings and parking for IMD staff; • Access spurs from the IMD connecting to the proposed route to allow maintenance vehicles to access northern and southern sections of the railway infrastructure; and • Connections to the Bicester to Bletchley line to allow maintenance materials to be delivered by rail.

2.2.8 Continuing north for approximately 3.8km, the route would pass under the Bicester to Bletchley line and then begin to rise and diverge away from the former GCML, which is disused north of Calvert. The Proposed Scheme would pass Twyford on a series of embankments, culverts and viaducts to cross the Padbury Brook, its tributaries and floodplains. The route would then enter an approximately 1.3km cutting, which is up to 5m deep, as it diverges to the east of Godington. Key design features of this section (see map CT‑06-056 and CT‑06-057) would include: • Permanent closure of the road at Perry Hill; • Provision of farm accommodation access and a diverted footpath to the east of Portway Farm; • Online diversion of West Street through provision of an overbridge; • A series of embankments, culverts and a viaduct to cross the Padbury Brook, its tributaries and associated floodplain; • Online and offline overbridge diversions of a number of PRoW (see Section 2.3); and • A combination of earthwork embankments and noise barriers on the west side of the route in the vicinity of Twyford.

2.2.9 To the north of Godington, the Proposed Scheme would pass over a series of embankments and two viaducts, as the route crosses another meander of the Padbury Brook. After clearing the floodplain of the Padbury Brook, it would then be in cutting for approximately 2km, up to 10m deep in places, as the route passes Rosehill Farm, Rosehill Cottages, Sunflower Cottage and Manthorn Farm along the edge of the hamlet of Chetwode. The route would then exit the cutting to re-join the former GCML at the local authority boundary of Buckinghamshire and

7 Note that the IMD would also be used as part of the railhead during the construction phase, which would occupy a total area of 90ha for the construction period.

16 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

Oxfordshire, to the south of Newton Purcell. Key design features of this section would include (see maps CT‑06-058 to CT‑06-060): • A series of embankments, culverts and two viaducts to cross the Padbury Brook, its tributaries and associated floodplain; • Online diversion of the Chetwode Bridleway No. 24 and farm accommodation access; • Chetwode auto-transformer station and a maintenance point access to the south-west of Manthorn Farm; • Offline overbridge diversions of a number of PRoW (see Section 2.3); • Bridleway CHW/24/2 would remain open during offline overbridge construction; and • Public footpath CHW/11/1 would remain open during construction of School End overbridge and then be permanently diverted to this bridge.

2.2.10 Areas for planting have been identified throughout this section of the route, to provide visual screening and potential habitat corridors/links. Planting areas adjacent to the railway and associated earthworks throughout this section are illustrated on maps CT‑06-054 to CT‑06‑060. In some instances, particularly in the vicinity of Sheephouse Wood, these planting areas have been deliberately set back from the Proposed Scheme with the intention of encouraging bats either towards the overbridges (see above), or otherwise away from the Proposed Scheme (to avoid potential collisions with trains). Land required for the Proposed Scheme

2.2.11 The Proposed Scheme would require land on both a temporary and permanent basis. The land required for construction is shown on the construction map series CT‑05 and will be subject to review as the engineering design and formal ES is prepared. The final permanent and temporary land requirements will be set out in the formal ES. 2.3 Construction of the Proposed Scheme 2.3.1 This section sets out the key construction activities that are envisaged to build the Proposed Scheme in the Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode area and the control measures that are proposed to manage the works. General descriptions of construction works that are relevant to the whole of the Proposed Scheme are provided in Volume 1.

2.3.2 A key feature of the construction in this location would be the IMD and railhead, which would be unique to this area. During construction, the IMD would be part of the larger railhead construction site compound. After construction, the majority of the railhead would be removed to leave an area of land permanently for the IMD to support the operation and maintenance of the Proposed Scheme. These are described below. Environmental management and Code of Construction Practice

2.3.3 All contractors would be required to comply with the environmental management regime for the Proposed Scheme, which would include: • The Code of Construction Practice (CoCP)8; and • Local environmental management plans (LEMPs), which would apply within each CFA.

2.3.4 The CoCP, in conjunction with associated LEMPs, would be the means of controlling the construction works associated with the Proposed Scheme, with the objective of ensuring that the effects of the works upon people and the natural environment are eptk to a practicable

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

17 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

minimum. The CoCP will contain generic control measures and standards to be implemented throughout the construction process.

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

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

2.3.7 Track laying activities and work requiring possession of major transport infrastructure (e.g. highways) may be undertaken during night-time, Saturday afternoon, Sunday and/or bank holidays for reasons of safety or operational necessity and would often involve work on consecutive nights, including over weekend possessions.

2.3.8 Working hours for the IMD and railhead (see Section 2.3.11) for the line of route works (and ballast track laying and overhead line equipment (OLE)) would be 24 hours a day seven days a week. Construction site compounds

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

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

2.3.11 The location of all site compounds along with their duration of use and a broad current estimate of the number of workers likely to work at the construction sites is set out in Table 1 and shown in maps CT‑05-054 to CT‑05-060. Construction site details and arrangements are continuing to be refined and will be confirmed in the formal ES.

18 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

Compound Location Typical use Estimated Estimated number of type duration of workers use Average Peak period work day work day

Main Map CT‑05-055 Earthworks (cuttings and embankments) Up to 6 Up to 100 Up to 400 construction piling, watercourse diversions, inverted years site compound siphon or culverts, overbridges, at West Street underbridges and traffic management.

Temporary Map CT‑05-055 Construction or installation of the line of Up to 3 years Up to 270 Up to 400 railhead route elements including the permanent way (rail, sleepers and ballast), power supply, signalling, Overhead Line Equipment (OLE), communications and controls, tunnel fit outs and construction of the IMD.

Satellite Map CT‑05-055 Earthworks (cuttings and embankments) Up to 5 years Up to 150 Up to 300 construction piling, watercourse diversions, inverted site compound siphon or culverts, overbridges at School Hill underbridges and traffic management.

Satellite Map CT‑05-058 Earthworks (cuttings and embankments) Up to 2.5 Up to 60 Up to 100 construction piling, watercourse diversions, inverted years site compound siphon or culverts, overbridges, at Chetwode underbridges and traffic management.

Table 1: Location of construction site compounds9

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

2.3.13 The railhead at Calvert would support installation of rail systems infrastructure, including activities such as track laying and installation of overhead line equipment for a portion of the Proposed Scheme up to 40km south and north of Calvert. It would be one of three such sites for the entire Proposed Scheme. It would also provide storage and preparatory facilities, as well as administration support. It is proposed that the site would be connected to the conventional rail network, to allow for the delivery of bulk materials required during the construction process.

2.3.14 The adjacent areas would be used for the temporary storage of any topsoil stripped as part of the works. Fencing and lighting

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

2.3.16 Lighting of site compounds during hours of darkness would seek to reduce light pollution to the surrounding area, in accordance with the requirements of the CoCP.

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

19 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

Temporary worker accommodation sites

2.3.17 One temporary worker accommodation site would be located within this section of the Proposed Scheme as detailed in Table 2. Temporary worker accommodation sites will adhere to the measures set out within the CoCP.

Location Site description Facilities provided Estimated duration Estimated number of use of workers10

Main construction site Modular Living accommodation, Up to 6 years Up to 200 compound at West Street, temporary living welfare facilities, car map CT‑05-055 accommodation parking

Table 2: Location of temporary worker accommodation sites10 Construction traffic and access

2.3.18 The following lorry routes are currently proposed to access each of the site compounds: • The route for the IMD and rail-head would commence at the M40 junction 9, travelling along the A41 to Bicester, continuing on the A41 to Aylesbury, on to The Broadway, through to Road and then Road, on to Edgcott Road, finally ending at Perry Hill. It is anticipated that materials required for the line of route, such as ballast, would be delivered by rail; • The route for the main construction site at West Street would commence at the M40 junction 9, travelling along the A41 to Bicester, continuing on the A41 to Aylesbury, on to The Broadway, through to Edgcott Road and then Marsh Gibbon Road, on to Edgcott Road, finally ending at Perry Hill; and from the north A421, to the Road, Road, finally ending at Perry Hill; • The route for the construction site compound at School Hill would commence along the A41 to Aylesbury, on to The Broadway, through to Edgcott Road and then Marsh Gibbon Road, on to Edgcott Road, through to Perry Hill and finally ending on School Hill; and from the north from the A421, to the Gawcott Road, Hillesden Road to Perry Hill finally ending on School Hill; • The route for the construction site compound at Chetwode would commence at the A421 and end at School End; and • The proposed lorry route for the construction site compound near Newton Purcell would commence at the A43 to the A421, finally ending on the A4421. Preparatory and enabling works Demolition works

2.3.19 It is anticipated that the Proposed Scheme would require the demolition of 19 buildings and two structures in the area. These works are outlined in Table 3.

Description of structure Location

A residential building (two storey) and an outbuilding Hazelbach, School Hill, Calvert

A residential building (two storey) 12b Brackley Lane

A residential building (two storey) 12a Brackley Lane

Four commercial farm buildings and a residential farmhouse at Shepherd Furze Shepherd’s Furze Farm, Calvert Farm (Grade II listed building) with two residential outbuildings

An electrical substation Addison Road Steeple Claydon

10 Average number living on site based on peak month.

20 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

Description of structure Location

Gas pumping station North of Grebe Lake, Perry Hill

An outbuilding at Portway Farm Portway Farm, Twyford

A residential cottage (two-storey buildings) and an outbuilding (one storey) Old Stable Cottage, Rosehill Farm, Chetwode

A residential building (two storey) Rosehill Cottage, Chetwode

A residential building (two storey) Sunflower Cottage, Chetwode

Three farm outbuildings Manthorn Farm, Chetwode

Table 3: Demolition works Drainage and culverts

2.3.20 It is anticipated that drainage ponds would be required for both railway track and highway drainage. Indicative locations are shown on maps CT‑06-054 to CT‑06-060. Watercourse diversions

2.3.21 The route of the Proposed Scheme and associated highway works require up to 5 diversions of watercourses, the key ones being: • One watercourse at Cowley Old House, which would require a diversion of approximately 240m; and • One watercourse at Barton Hartshorn, which would require a diversion of approximately 115m. Utility diversions

2.3.22 There are a number of major items of utility infrastructure in proximity to the Proposed Scheme, including: high pressure gas mains; large diameter water mains; large diameter sewers; fibre optic/signal cabling; and high and low voltage electricity lines. In summary, the main proposed utility diversions required in the area would be: • General diversion of all utilities within highways realignments; • Diversion of Western Power overhead line equipment and Anglian Water foul water main from existing rail crossing to new School Hill overbridge; • Diversion of telecommunications to the north and south of School Hill for approximately 18 months (temporary and permanent diversions); • Diversion of a water main on the west side of Redland Close for approximately nine months; • Diversion of electricity lines and relocation of sub-station at the intersection of Addison Road and the Bicester to Bletchley line for approximately six months; and • Diversion of medium and high pressure gas main running adjacent to the existing Bicester to Bletchley line and relocation of a pressure reduction station at Perry Hill for approximately four years.

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

21 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

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

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

2.3.26 Proposed highway and road diversions, as shown on maps CT‑05-054 to CT‑05-060, include: • Private access to the south-east of Calvert permanent diversion to a new offline overbridge; • School Hill – permanent diversion to a new online overbridge; • Addison Road/Pond Lane – permanent diversion to a new offline overbridge; • Perry Hill – permanent diversion to an offline overbridge and permanent closure of the road; • West Street – temporary road closure, then permanent offline diversion overbridge; • The Green – permanent closure of the road, diversion adjacent to Sunflower Farm built offline and then traffic switched on to new alignment; • The Green – permanent closure of the road, access to Manthorn Farm temporarily closed during overbridge construction. Diversion would be via School End; and • School End overbridge – temporary road closure with the diversion via the A4421 then traffic switched to new online overbridge.

2.3.27 Temporary impacts on roads, should they be anticipated, will be reported in the formal ES. Footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions

2.3.28 Proposed footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions are shown on map CT‑05-054 to CT‑05‑060 and shown in Table 4. Temporary impacts on these paths would be managed in accordance with the CoCP to reduce the impacts in terms of duration of temporary closures or diversions and length of additional journeys. Further detail about proposed temporary diversions and closures, if required, will be reported in the formal ES.

Name Location Permanent reinstatement or diversion

Route Approximate additional journey length11

Public footpath SCL/13/2 Directly to Existing alignment or overbridge at Sheephouse Negligible the west of Wood. Sheephouse Wood

A3 PROW 080S3 Perry Hill To the south- Footpaths remain open on existing alignment until 1.2km (Public footpaths SCL/6/1; east of Portway offline Perry Hill footbridge is constructed, at the TWY/4/1) Farm and directly same time as construction of School Hill overbridge, to the north of and then footpaths can be permanently diverted. Calvert Jubilee

Steeple Claydon footpath No.8 To the south of Temporary closure during construction of the IMD Negligible (Public footpath SCL8) Steeple Claydon sidings.

22 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

Name Location Permanent reinstatement or diversion

Route Approximate additional journey length11

Steeple Claydon footpath No.9 To the south of Permanent closure and diverted to SCL/8 crossing. 370m (Public footpaths SCL/9 and Steeple Claydon SCL/7)

TWY/18/2 To the north-east Via West Street. 250m (Public footpath) of the sewage treatment works

Twyford footpath PROW 082S1 To the north and Footpath TWY/16/1 remains open during offline bridge 400m (Public footpath) east of Twyford construction. Footpath TWY/17/1 open during viaduct construction works with local temporary diversions where reasonably practicable to suit construction operations (e.g. divert through completed section of viaduct temporarily).

A3 PROW 082S1 Church View To the north Footpaths PBI/6/3, PBI/6/2 and PBI/5(F)/7 remain open PBI/5(F)/7: Farm and north-west during construction of Church View overbridge, before negligible; (Public footpaths PBI/5(F)/7, of Church View permanent diversion. (Combined with watercourse PBI/6/3 and PBI/6/3 and PBI/6/2) Farm crossing). PBI/6/2, 100m

A3 PROW 083S1‐ at Twyford To the north-east Footpath PBI/5A/3 (combined with accommodation Negligible Mill (Public footpath PBI/5A/3) of Twyford Mill route) temporarily diverted around the eastern boundary of construction site during bridge and earthworks construction.

PBI/9/3 (Public footpath) To the east of Footpath PBI/9/3 remains open while proposed route 300m Godington under viaduct established.

A3 PROW 084S2 (Bridleway To the north-east Bridleway CHW/24/2 remains open during 300m CHW/24/2) of Godington and construction with temporary closure or slight south-west of diversion during construction of tie‐in earthworks. Casemore Farm

CHW/18/1 Directly to the Footpath remains open during construction. PRoW 200m (Public footpath) east of Manthorn then permanently diverted to this bridge. Farm and west of Sunflower Farm

CHW/11/1 East of Barton Remains open during construction of School End 200m (Public footpath) Hill Farm overbridge. PRoW then permanently diverted to this and west of bridge. Chetwode

Table 4: Footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions11 Main construction works – Earthworks Earthworks

2.3.29 Major earthworks in the area would include: • A section of earthwork and retained cutting to the east of Calvert and Calvert Jubilee nature reserve (approximately 4.1km long); • A series of embankments to the east of Twyford (approximately 1.2km long); • A series of earthworks embankments to the east of Godington (approximately 1km long); and

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

23 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

• A section of earthworks cutting to the west of Chetwode (approximately 2km long).

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

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

2.3.32 Construction of the main structures within this area would be served by the West Street site compound and the satellite compounds, as shown in Table 1 above.

2.3.33 Works for these would be conducted in six general phases, as follows: • Phase 1: Establishment of compounds would be followed by site setup works, including ground profiling, erection of workforce temporary buildings and the assembly of specialised construction plant; • Phase 2: Enabling works would include road diversions, utility diversions and installation of temporary works; • Phase 3: The construction of the railway, embankments and cuttings, viaducts and a number of roads, footpaths and culverts that cross the route. Several key structures would also be constructed: the cutting at Calvert, the overbridge at Perry Hill and the construction of the IMD; • Phase 4: Realignment of the Bicester to Bletchley line and Aylesbury Link line; • Phase 5: After the completion of the last structure, the area would be demobilised, cleared of all construction plant and associated construction compounds. This would be followed by land reinstatement. After demobilisation the auto-transformer feeder station would be installed; and • Phase 6: The installation and commissioning of new tracks, ballast and overhead lines to serve the Proposed Scheme. Infrastructure Maintenance Depot (IMD) and railhead construction

2.3.34 An indicative construction sequence for the IMD and the associated railhead12 would be as follows: • Phase 1: Mobilisation, site establishment, land clearance and diversion of utilities; • Phase 2: Clearance of topsoil, earthworks and land preparation. This would include the establishment of earthwork bunding around the temporary and permanent works; • Phase 3: Installation of track layout and hard-standing areas for the IMD and railhead; • Phase 4 (which would overlap Phase 3): Erection of buildings, including both temporary and permanent buildings; • Phase 5: Operation of IMD for rail systems construction;

12 The railhead would consist of land that would be required for the duration of construction works only, plus the area of the IMD, which would be required permanently.

24 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

• Phase 6: Demobilisation and decommissioning of the railhead including the removal of non-IMD layout track and temporary buildings; and • Phase 7: Completion of the IMD.

2.3.35 During construction the railhead and IMD would facilitate the construction, installation and fit out of rail infrastructure as detailed in the following section. Rail infrastructure fit-out

2.3.36 The principal elements of rail infrastructure to be constructed are track, overhead line equipment, communications equipment and power supply. The installation of track in open areas would be of standard ballasted track configuration, comprising principally of ballast, rail and sleepers.

2.3.37 The compound at Calvert would support installation of rail systems infrastructure, including activities such as track laying and installation of overhead line equipment for a portion of the Proposed Scheme up to 40km south and north of Calvert. Further details are set out in Volume 1. Power supply

2.3.38 HS2 trains would draw power from overhead line equipment, requiring feeder stations and connections to the 400kV National Grid network. There are no feeder stations within the local area. In addition to feeder stations, smaller auto-transformer stations would be required at more frequent intervals. The anticipated locations of proposed auto-transformer stations are: • An auto-transformer station and access track to the east of Portway Farm and north of Calvert Jubilee nature reserve; and • An auto-transformer station and access track to the south-east of Manthorn Farm, Chetwode.

2.3.39 The locations are shown on maps CT‑06-054 to CT‑065-060. Landscaping and permanent fencing

2.3.40 Landscaping (i.e. earthworks, seeding and planting) would be provided to address visual and noise impacts, as well as to provide screening for intrinsically important ecological habitats and heritage features. Where appropriate, the engineering embankments and/or cuttings would be reshaped to integrate the alignment sympathetically into the character of the surrounding landscape. The planting would reflect tree and shrub species native to the Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode landscape. Opportunities for ecological habitat creation would be considered.

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

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

25 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

Figure 3: Indicative construction programme for the area Commissioning

2.3.43 Commissioning is the process of testing the infrastructure to ensure that it operates as expected. This would take place in the year prior to opening. Further details are provided in Volume 1. 2.4 Operation of the Proposed Scheme 2.4.1 In this area, HS2 trains would run at speeds up to 360kph. During Phase One of HS2, up to 14 trains per hour (tph) would pass in each direction. This would increase to a potential maximum of 18tph in each direction should Phase Two also become fully operational.

26 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

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

2.4.3 The Infrastructure Maintenance Depot (IMD) would operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Up to 300 staff would work out of the depot in shifts during each 24hr period.Supplies would be delivered to the depot via road or rail, as would be reasonably practicable.

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

2.5.2 A series of community forum meetings and discussions with individual landowners, organisations and action groups were undertaken. Community forum meetings were held on: • 11 April 2012 at Steeple Claydon Village Hall; • 26 June 2012 at Calvert Green Community Centre; • 4 September 2012 at Calvert Green Community Centre; • 15 November 2012 at Best Western Hotel; and • 5 February 2013 at Calvert Green Community Centre.

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

2.5.4 The main themes to emerge from these meetings were: • Potential impacts on the surrounding nature reserves and Sheephouse Wood, including any wildlife habitats within these; • The interface between the EWR, Energy from Waste and HS2 Ltd projects, particularly with regards to required land take; • Potential noise effects of the Proposed Scheme when on viaduct; • Potential impacts on the local road network and the effects any changes may have on local communities, for example increased journey times due to construction traffic on local roads; • Potential impact and land take resulting from the temporary railhead and permanent IMD; • Potential impacts of temporary construction sites on agricultural land and its return to an agricultural use; • Potential effects of noise on dairy farming and productivity; • How noise would be assessed and how noise effects would be mitigated; and • Potential effects on users of the local rights of way that link villages in the area, especially footpaths leading to the school in Steeple Claydon.

2.5.5 The cumulative effects of the EWR, Energy from Waste and HS2 Ltd projects will be addressed in the formal ES.

27 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

2.6 Route section main alternatives 2.6.1 The main strategic alternatives to the Proposed Scheme are presented in Volume 1. The main local alternatives considered for the Proposed Scheme within the local area are set out within this section.

2.6.2 Since April 2012, as part of the design development process, a series of local alternatives have been reviewed within workshops attended by engineering, planning and environmental specialists. During these workshops, the likely significant environmental effects of each design option have been reviewed. The purpose of these reviews has been to ensure that the Proposed Scheme draws the right balance between engineering requirements, cost and potential environmental impacts. Infrastructure Maintenance Depot (IMD)

2.6.3 The January 2012 announced route and the Proposed Scheme includes an IMD between Calvert and Steeple Claydon. HS2 Ltd had previously considered a number of alternative locations for the IMD. Environmental consideration of the IMD options was published in Appraisal of Sustainability – Post Consultation Route Refinements, January 2012, and is summarised below13.

2.6.4 A preferred location for the IMD site formed part of the 2011 London-West Midlands consultation route at a site near Calvert and Steeple Claydon. The public consultation on the IMD focused largely on issues around road access, workforce availability, and night-time working. On road access, concern was expressed that the local road network around the IMD site at Calvert was not suited to the number of vehicles that would require access to the site. With little unemployment in the local area, it was suggested that the jobs created by the depot would be filled from elsewhere rather than by members of the local population. Concern was also expressed that with night-time working at the site, local residents, particularly from Steeple Claydon, would be impacted.

2.6.5 A comparative appraisal was undertaken of the proposed IMD site at Calvert with two alternative sites to the north-west of Aylesbury Vale Parkway station.

2.6.6 The proposed depot site at Calvert would be sited alongside the proposed route and immediately north of the existing Oxford to Bletchley railway line. The depot would be connected by rail to the main HS2 railway and to the rest of the railway network via the existing Oxford to Bletchley line. The other two alternative sites would not have direct links to both the main HS2 railway and the rest of the railway network.

2.6.7 There was very little to distinguish between the three depot site options in direct land take terms, as none would have direct impacts on designated environmental features but the Calvert site is the only option located within 100m of a dwelling. The two alternative sites could have marginally higher impacts in terms of cultural heritage, landscape and visual and archaeology.

2.6.8 Further alternatives have not been considered under the development of the location of the IMD and the January 2012 announced route was taken forward within the Proposed Scheme. Finemere Wood to Sheephouse Wood

2.6.9 The Proposed Scheme would follow the alignment of the existing Aylesbury Link rail corridor at close to ground level between Finemere and Sheephouse Wood. Three further options were considered involving lower alignments than the Aylesbury Link. The section of route that

13 High Speed 2 Ltd (2012) Appraisal of Sustainability – Post Consultation Route Refinements.

28 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

would be most affected by these options is within CFA12 (Waddesdon and Quainton). For this reason, these options are described in the CFA12 report. Rail access to the IMD

2.6.10 To the north of Calvert and west of Twyford, the January 2012 announced route included one access line to the IMD from the southbound line of the Proposed Scheme. Since January 2012 further operational requirements have been considered and a new rail connection into the IMD added.

2.6.11 The following two options were considered: • Option A: The January 2012 announced route which included the provision of access from the IMD to the Proposed Scheme through the provision of a northern link and associated additional sidings to facilitate turn-back of maintenance trains going southwards; and • Option B: The Proposed Scheme which would provide a direct southern access from the Proposed Scheme to the IMD at Calvert, which would replace the additional turn back sidings on the north-facing link.

2.6.12 Both options would have construction impacts and land take associated with them: for Option A this would be on the east side of the proposed HS2 line at Twyford and for Option B on the east of the proposed line at Calvert. However, Option B would provide a more direct and quicker link to the route south of Calvert, compared to Option A. This would lead to a localised reduction in noise due to fewer night-time train movements in the immediate vicinity of Twyford.

2.6.13 In addition, whilst Option B would increase the cost of constructing the project it would have whole life benefits as a result of more efficient maintenance activities. For these reasons Option B was adopted in the Proposed Scheme. Bicester to Bletchley line crossing of the Proposed Scheme

2.6.14 The Proposed Scheme in this location would cross the Bicester to Bletchley line to the north of the Jubilee Calvert nature reserve adjacent to the IMD. The proposals to upgrade the Bicester to Bletchley line as part of the EWR proposals are expected to have been implemented at the time of construction of the Proposed Scheme. The scheme announced in January 2012 did not consider the EWR proposals and options were therefore considered to prevent conflicts between the two schemes and reduce disruption during construction.

2.6.15 The following three options were considered for this crossing, which would affect the section of the route between School Hill to the east of Twyford: • Option A: The January 2012 announced route, with the Bicester to Bletchley line passing over HS2, which would be at ground level; • Option B: The Proposed Scheme, with HS2 partially lowered and the Bicester to Bletchley line partially raised offline. This option would necessitate repositioning of the Bicester to Bletchley line’s Claydon Junction and the short curved section of track connecting to the Aylesbury Link line; and • Option C: HS2 passing underneath the Bicester to Bletchley line, which would stay at its current level.

2.6.16 The potential to put HS2 over the top of the Bicester to Bletchley line was discounted early on the basis that this would have increased both costs and environmental impacts.

29 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

2.6.17 In general the differences between Options A, B and C would be marginal in terms of environmental impact. All three options would result in the demolition of several buildings at the Grade II listed Shepherd’s Furze Farm (see Section 2.3).

2.6.18 Both Options A and B would require slightly more land take because the Bicester to Bletchley line would need to be realigned to the north of its current alignment. In addition, Option A would require a higher overbridge that, of the three options, would result in the largest visual effects.

2.6.19 Option C would have required more extensive excavation and below-ground construction over a greater distance, and so was not preferred.

2.6.20 Option B was considered to provide the best balance of environmental impacts and cost. For these reasons, Option B has been adopted in the Proposed Scheme.

2.6.21 HS2 Ltd is continuing to explore the development of these options with EWR and Network Rail; see Section 2.7 for more information. Green tunnel at Chetwode

2.6.22 The Proposed Scheme passes adjacent to Chetwode and would be close to a number of properties including listed buildings. The route would be in cutting through the section and this is consistent with the route announced in January 2012.

2.6.23 Members of the local community have proposed an alternative option. They would prefer that the railway was in green tunnel as it passes Chetwode, in order to mitigate potential noise and visual effects.

2.6.24 If a green tunnel were constructed with the railway at its proposed depth, the top of the structure would be above ground level. Therefore, to construct this option, the depth of the cutting would need to be increased. This would increase the area of land affected by the railway. Furthermore, the alignment in this location would be constrained by the existing rivers and their associated floodplains. Placing the route in a green tunnel would require a significant further lowering of the route to allow rivers to be reinstated over the Proposed Scheme. This would have a significant impact on the alignment and properties adjacent to the route for some distance in either direction.

2.6.25 To increase the depth over an extended length of the alignment would increase the volume of material generated and based on the typical rates for construction would add to the cost of the Proposed Scheme.

2.6.26 The Proposed Scheme includes earthworks and noise barriers in order to provide mitigation for noise and visual effects although these are constrained by the proximity of the properties to the alignment. These proposals will be developed further for the formal ES.

2.6.27 For these reasons this option has not been incorporated into the Proposed Scheme. Replacement of viaducts with embankments and culverts (various locations)

2.6.28 The route would travel along the Padbury Brook valley, crossing the brook and its tributaries a number of times via a combination of viaducts and embankments over culverts.

2.6.29 The January 2012 announced route included viaducts to cross all Flood Zone 3 areas. With the benefit of more detailed floodplain information, options for shortening each viaduct by replacing part of each with embankments and/or culverts were considered. Whilst this design change could increase impacts to the water environment, it would also help to reduce the potential visual and operational noise and vibration impacts.

30 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

2.6.30 This resulted in shorter viaduct structures and the adoption of embankments and culverts, or extended/oversized culverts, at three locations: • Floodplain crossings to the east of Twyford; • Floodplain crossing to the east of Godington; and • Floodplain crossing to the south-west of Barton Hartshorn.

2.6.31 Work is ongoing regarding crossings of watercourses; see Section 2.7 for more information. 2.7 Proposals for further consideration 2.7.1 A number of further engineering developments to the Proposed Scheme and community proposals are being investigated, including: • Existing railway sidings used by FCC Environmental Ltd – The Proposed Scheme would reinstate this siding to the east of the route, at Calvert. An alternative location for the reinstatement of the sidings has been identified south of Sheephouse Wood. This has been discussed with FCC Environmental Ltd and may have some benefit for the local community as some of the activities associated with the siding would be further away from residents within Calvert itself. However, there are potential impacts for ecology and the watercourses crossing the route. Work is ongoing to consider these implications and whether they could be addressed through design or further mitigation. This draft ES assesses the reinstatement of the sidings at Calvert. HS2 Ltd is continuing to consider the alternative location for the siding south of Sheephouse Wood. The final proposed option will be included in the formal ES; • Bicester to Bletchley line crossing – Further to the options described above, HS2 Ltd is in dialogue with EWR and NWR to refine the proposals, in particular to explore the feasibility of accommodating HS2 within the EWR upgrade proposals. This is still being explored because it could potentially reduce the combined construction programme for the two schemes, and consequently associated local impacts; and • The design of viaducts is currently based on flood risk data received from third parties. Where viaducts, bridges, embankments or other structures intrude into floodplains, the effects of these structures will be assessed in detail and included in the final design and formal ES, in order to ensure there would be no significant increase in flood risk toey k receptors. Through the flood risk assessment process, hydraulic modelling may demonstrate appropriate reductions or increases to the proposed lengths and heights of viaducts and other river crossing structures. If shown to be required, the design would compensate for any loss of floodplain by creating new flood storage areas nearby. In particular, further work is underway to explore options for installation of culverts on watercourse IDB M23, which would be affected by the IMD.

2.7.2 The following community proposals are also being considered, pending further assessment prior to issue of the formal ES: • New station on EWR for site operatives – The Proposed Scheme assumes that workers would travel to the railhead by road. The local community suggested an alternative with a station or platform being provided at Calvert in order to provide opportunity for staff to come to the site on trains on the Bicester to Bletchley line. This was proposed in order to reduce the volume of traffic using local roads around the IMD and the impacts associated with those vehicle movements. Locally this was seen as having the added benefit of providing a station for residents’ use after construction, if it were retained permanently. This option is still being considered by HS2 Ltd and further work is needed to identify

31 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode

whether there would be sufficient numbers of workers to justify a platform at this location14. • Reinstate road at Perry Hill – The Proposed Scheme would necessitate a permanent closure of Perry Hill at Calvert where it would intersect with the IMD. The local community have proposed that Perry Hill should be diverted and pass under the Bicester to Bletchley line and over the HS2 line to maintain this transport link, avoiding the need for the alternative transport route to be upgraded and associated local agricultural impacts. A number of ways of maintaining Perry Hill are being investigated further by HS2 Ltd at this time to identify the likely costs and benefits.

• Bunding at Twyford – The Proposed Scheme passes Twyford on an embankment and viaduct with cuttings at either end. Some bunding on the western side has been included within the Proposed Scheme to provide noise attenuation to receptors at Twyford. The local community proposed that the bund at Twyford be above pantograph height to further mitigate noise and visual effects from the pantograph. As the Proposed Scheme is on embankment at this location, extending a bund to above the height of the pantograph (on top of the train) would have to be a large structure, approximately 8m tall and – depending on the gradient of the slope – around 25 metres wide. In addition, there would be restrictions on what could be proposed due to areas of floodplain close to the route. Therefore, it is not considered feasible to extend the height of the pantograph. However, the noise and visual assessment work is continuing and the mitigation proposals will be developed in response to this work. This could involve increasing the height of the proposed bund or using a combination of earthworks and noise barriers in the proposals put forward for the formal ES.

14 This draft ES assumes that vehicles will be used to transport workers to the IMD. Hs2 Ltd is in discussion with Network Rail on this point, as the station would be served by EWR trains.

32 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode Part C: Environmental topic assessments

33 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Agriculture, forestry and soils 3 Agriculture, forestry and soils 3.1 Introduction 3.1.1 This section of the report provides a summary of the impacts and the likely significant effects to agriculture, soils and forestry arising from the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. The section covers soils, agricultural land quality, farm enterprises, forestry and agri‑environment schemes. 3.2 Policy framework 3.2.1 There are no Saved Policies relevant to agriculture, forestry and soils in the Aylesbury Vale Local Plan 2004. Policy EN16 of the Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan 2011 seeks to protect the best and most versatile (BMV) agricultural land and direct development to existing developed areas. Where this is not possible it seeks to use agricultural land of lesser value except where sustainability suggests otherwise. 3.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 3.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the farm impacts and agricultural land quality assessments are set out in Volume 1.

3.3.2 The approach to the agricultural land quality assessment in this area anticipates that agricultural land required for temporary purposes during construction would be re-instated as agricultural land, wherever practicable, to at least its pre-existing quality by following best practice. 3.4 Environmental baseline 3.4.1 The Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode area is undulating, and ranges from around 80m to 105m Above Ordnance Datum. The Padbury Brook and Grebe Lake at Calvert are significant topographical features of the area.

3.4.2 The principal underlying geology is that of the Peterborough member of the Oxford Clay Formation (which is overlain by superficial deposits of mixed glacial material typically consisting of brownish grey mudstone). Near Twyford, superficial river terrace deposits of sand and gravel are present.

3.4.3 To the north of the area, the Kellaways Formation, which comprises sandstone, siltstone and mudstone, extends into limestone of the Cornbrash Formation. This is overlain in the northern half of the study area by superficial glacial till deposits.

3.4.4 The National Soil Map shows the main groups or associations of soil types present in the local area15. The predominant soil association is the Denchworth association, which consists of stoneless, wet clayey soils, which are typically poorly drained.

3.4.5 Soils in the southern section overlying the Oxford Clay belong to the Wickham 2, Evesham 2 and Beccles associations. All comprise fine loamy or clayey topsoils over slowly permeable clay subsoils. These soils are commonly assessed as imperfectly to poorly drained.

3.4.6 Soils around the tributaries of the , north of Twyford, are of the Fladbury 1 association. Fladbury soils are clayey and prominently mottled, often poorly or very poorly drained.

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

34 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

3.4.7 The change of geology in the north gives rise to the Ashley, Ragdale and Bishampton associations, which have variably stony, fine loamy topsoils and clayey subsoils.

3.4.8 Published national mapping shows that the study area comprises mostly poor quality Grade 4 agricultural land, corresponding with the Denchworth and Fladbury soils16. There is undifferentiated Grade 3 (good to moderate quality) extending south of Preston Bissett corresponding with an area of Beccles 3 association soils. The poorer quality of the agricultural land in the south reflects the wet nature of the soils, which often experience prolonged periods of waterlogging.

3.4.9 Detailed field surveys have identified a low proportion of best and most versatile agricultural land in this area. Within the study area there are patches of Subgrade 3a land, amounting to approximately 22% of agricultural land and mainly to the north. The majority of the agricultural land (78%) is Subgrade 3b. This corroborates the findings shown on the Defra ‘Likelihood of Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land’ map17, which predicts that the agricultural land has less than 20% likelihood of being of BMV quality (see map CT‑02-12).

3.4.10 The agricultural land is predominantly in arable production, with occasional fields in grassland, particularly in the vicinity of the Padbury Brook.

3.4.11 The agricultural surveys to date have identified 15 holdings in the study area, as set out in Table 5. These include arable farms ranging from approximately 40ha to over 1400ha, mixed beef and/or sheep with arable farms, and two beef farms. There is one substantial dairy holding within the study area (Portway Farm) and one large equestrian unit at Godington, both of which rely heavily on ready access to land and buildings, and which are, therefore, more sensitive to temporary land take and/or severance.

Holding Primary farming activities

Claydon Estate No data provided – assumed arable, beef, sheep

Portway and Shepherds Furze Farms, Twyford Dairy

Elm Tree and Stonecourt Farm, Steeple Claydon Arable

Lake Farm, Steeple Claydon Arable, beef, sheep

Unspecified paddock Grassland

Home Farm, Twyford Beef

Cowley Lodge Farm, Twyford Arable

Charndon Grounds, Twyford No data available

Cowley Farm, Preston Bissett Arable

Casemore Farm, Preston Bissett Arable

Grange Farm, Godington Equestrian

Moat Farm, Godington Arable

Chetwode Manor Arable

Barton Hill Farm Sheep, arable

Barton Grounds Farm Beef

Table 5: Holdings affected by the Proposed Scheme

16 Natural England (2002)Provisional Agricultural Land Classification mapping at 1:250,000 (version date 10 January 2002); http://www.gis.naturalengland.org.uk/pubs/gis/gis_register.asp; Accessed 18 February 2013. 17 Defra (2005) Likelihood of Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land.

35 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

3.4.12 A number of farms are engaged in diversified activities, with buildings let for non-agricultural enterprises such as Bed and Breakfast, a caravan/leisure site, barns converted for residential use and a motocross circuit.

3.4.13 The area generally is sparsely wooded (<6% coverage) with few woodland blocks. The exception is towards the south where there are a number of woodland blocks associated with the Claydon Estate, including Decoypond Wood (a 9ha ancient semi-natural woodland). Although limited information is currently available, the wood is understood to be managed as part of the overall management of the Estate. Elsewhere small woodland copses are recorded.

3.4.14 Most of the land is entered into the Entry Level Environmental Stewardship Scheme, which encourages environmental management practices such as hedgerow management, buffer strips and low input grassland. The whole of the local area is designated as a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone where measures have been introduced to reduce the potential for nitrogen losses from agricultural sources into watercourses. 3.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

3.5.1 HS2 Ltd would require all of its contractors to comply with the CoCP, which would include the following measures: • Measures to maintain farm access and avoid traffic over land which would be used temporarily during construction; • Ensuring that each affected farm holding would receive specific and relevant liaison regarding the construction activities that would affect the holding; • Ensuring that agricultural land and corresponding soil quality can be reinstated post construction where this is the agreed end use; • Ensuring that the impacts on infrastructure and livestock for individual farm holdings would be reduced where reasonably practicable; • Ensuring that there would be appropriate access provided to areas of severed land during and post-construction; and • Ensuring the appropriate handling and conservation of soil stockpiles to allow them to be reused without any substantive reduction in long term productive capability.

3.5.2 Soil resources would be stripped at the outset of the construction phase and stored. Where land is required temporarily for construction of the Proposed Scheme, stored soils would be used to reinstate those sites to a pre-construction agricultural condition. Soils removed from the area of permanent works would be utilised, where reasonably practicable, in the construction of the Proposed Scheme. In this area, soils that would be affected include: Denchworth soils, which are heavy clay, throughout the area; Ashley soils, which are heavy soils, in the north; and Beccles association soils, which are slowly permeable and wet, in the central part of the area and south of the Padworth Brook. All three soil types would need to be handled carefully during restoration to ensure that any effect is negligible, and therefore not significant.

3.5.3 The agricultural land in the area is mostly of moderate quality. However, towards the north, patches of better quality (Subgrade 3a) land are found. Overall during construction, as a result of the temporary land take of the better quality land, it is likely that the effects would be significant due to the relative scarcity of BMV agricultural land in this area. Land that would be permanently lost is predominantly of moderate quality and the residual permanent effect is not likely to be significant.

36 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

3.5.4 Aspects of the Proposed Scheme that would assist to reduce effects on agricultural resources include agricultural overbridges, some combined with PRoW, to reduce the effects of severance at Portway Farm, Home Farm, Cowley Farm and Moat Farm.

3.5.5 Loss of forestry land would be mitigated by replanting in nearby locations. Such locations would include areas of agricultural land that are no longer agriculturally accessible as a result of severance caused by the Proposed Scheme. Due to the amount of forestry land lost relative to the proportionate scarcity of such land in the area, the loss of forestry land would remain a significant effect during the construction phase, but would reduce to not significant as planting matures.

3.5.6 At present fifteen holdings have been identified that would be affected in this area. Based on the information currently available, it is likely that the following eight would experience significant effects during construction, though no holding would necessarily cease as a result: • Portway and Shepherds Furze Farms, Twyford due to a combination of the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed, the demolition of farm and residential buildings, severance and the possible effect of diverted traffic on the movement of cows to grazing land; • Elm Tree and Stonecourt Farms, Twyford due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Lake Farm, Twyford due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Home Farm, Twyford due to a combination of the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed and severance; • Moat Farm, Godington due to a combination of the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed and the loss of a motocross track; • Chetwode Manor due to a combination of the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed, the demolition of farm and residential buildings and severance; • Barton Hill Farm, Newton Purcell due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; and • Barton Grounds Farm, Newton Purcell due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed.

3.5.7 For three farms the effects include the loss of farm buildings. At Portway and Chetwode Manor these are mainly distant or old, non-essential buildings. At Shepherds Furze Farm, however, some of the modern and fully used buildings would be lost, as well as the Grade II listed residence, and the use of all the farm buildings there would be likely to cease. Following restoration, the long-term effects would be reduced. However, for four farms the permanent effect would be likely to remain significant due to a combination of the effects of land loss proportionate to farm size and severance/workability effects. Portway Farm would be particularly affected due to land loss and the closing of Perry Hill, which would be likely to cause an increase in traffic past the farm. This would be likely to make crossing the road with dairy cows more difficult18.

3.5.8 Stonecourt Farm and Lake Farm would also remain significantly affected due to the extent of permanent land take for the IMD. Moat Farm would remain adversely affected due to the loss of land and the motocross facility.

18 Options for Perry Road are still being considered by HS2 Ltd, see Section 2.7.

37 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

3.5.9 The emission of dust, noise and vibration during construction would be controlled by implementing best practice as set out in the CoCP. The construction process could lead to transportation of weed seeds and plants along the route. Since the land affected is largely in agricultural use, there is the potential for the spread of existing weeds. Particularly invasive and damaging weeds are listed in the Weeds Act 1959, and Defra has powers to require occupiers of land on which invasive and damaging weeds are growing to take action to prevent spreading. Application of control measures within the CoCP would mitigate this potential effect19. Likely residual significant effects

3.5.10 Although the mitigation outlined above would reduce the effects of severance, and land not required for the permanent alignment would be restored back to agriculture following construction, there would still be permanent residual significant effects for the following four holdings: • Portway and Shepherds Furze Farms; • Elm Tree and Stonecourt Farms, Twyford; • Lake Farm, Twyford; and • Moat Farm, Godington. Further mitigation

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

3.6.1 There are no particularly sensitive agricultural noise receptors that would be likely to be affected by the operation of the trains.

3.6.2 Many types of livestock, including cattle, are known to acclimatise to sources of disturbance that occur on a regular basis. However, the potential would remain for disturbance of livestock (for example, livestock that is not ‘resident’ to adjacent land). HS2 Ltd will report in the formal ES on the ongoing assessment of the potential for these effects along the route. However, the dairy buildings at Portway Farm are 200m from the proposed tracks, with intervening embankments, access tracks and permanent fencing, therefore any impact on livestock would be unlikely, and therefore not significant.

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

3.6.4 The construction process could lead to transportation of weed seeds and plants along the route. Since the land affected is largely in agricultural use there is the potential for the spread of existing weeds; particularly invasive and damaging weeds as listed in the Weeds Act 1959 and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 198120,21. Defra has powers to require occupiers of land on which they are growing to take action to prevent their spread. Application of control measures within the CoCP would regulate this potential effect.

19 Weeds Act 1959 (7 & 8 Eliz II c. 54). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. 20 Weeds Act 1959 (7 & 8 Eliz II c. 54). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. 21 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (c.69). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

38 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Agriculture, forestry and soils

Likely residual significant effects

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

39 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Air quality 4 Air quality 4.1 Introduction 4.1.1 This section of the report provides an assessment of the impacts and likely significant effects on air quality arising from the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme, covering nitrogen dioxide (NO2), fine particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5) and dust22. Emissions of these pollutants are typically associated with construction activities and equipment, road traffic. 4.2 Policy framework 4.2.1 Policies EN3 and EN5, and saved policy ENV1, of the Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan 2011 seek to resist development that would give rise to a material adverse impact on air quality. The Aylesbury Vale Local Plan 2004 does not have any policies that address air quality. However, Policy GP.8 is an overarching policy seeking to protect public amenity, whilst Saved Policy GP.95 seeks to protect the amenities of existing occupiers.

4.2.2 Policy BSC 8 of the Proposed Submission Local Plan 2012 relates to the improvement of air quality within the district, whilst Policy ESD 10 requires air quality assessments to be conducted for development proposals that would have a significant adverse impact on biodiversity by generating an increase in air pollution. 4.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 4.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the air quality assessment are set out in Volume 1.

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

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

4.4.3 Aylesbury Vale District Council operates some diffusion tube sites measuring annual average concentrations of NO2, but these are mostly restricted to locations in some of the nearby towns and alongside major roads. No automatic monitoring stations are present in the study area, although there are three in Aylesbury.

4.4.4 The available mapping and monitoring data indicate that all parts of the study area currently experience concentrations of NO2, PM2.5 and PM10 that are well below those defined by the limit values and the national objective values. This view of air quality is supported by the local authorities and their review and assessment process, which has not resulted in any Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) being declared in the study area (see map CT‑02-12).

22 PM10 is any particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter equal to or less than 10µm. Particulate matter of this size is respirable. PM2.5 is any particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter equal to or less than 2.5µm. This size fraction of particulate matter is respirable and has been linked to adverse effects on human health.

40 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Air quality

4.4.5 As part of its review and assessment process, Cherwell District Council has identified a number of areas of poor air quality, in particular in Bicester and Banbury23. The Council has declared an AQMA at Hennef Way, Banbury. Both Bicester and Banbury lie more than 6km from the Proposed Scheme and it is anticipated that construction traffic would not result in effects in these areas. There are three AQMAs declared for NO2 in the distant town of Aylesbury. All of these are too far from the proposed route to be affected by construction activities and associated traffic.

4.4.6 The Proposed Scheme would be close to a number of small villages including Barton Hartshorn, Chetwode, Godington, Twyford and Calvert. In addition, there are a number of isolated farmhouses and residential properties in the vicinity of the route, and nearby roads, which would potentially be used to access the construction sites. Receptors in the vicinity of the Calvert IMD include residential properties at Stone Court Farm, Rose Hill Farm and Lake Farm.

4.4.7 Two sensitive ecological receptors lie adjacent to the Proposed Scheme. The Tingewick Meadows Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) lies in the northern part of the study area, approximately 2km from the proposed route. This is an example of old meadowland and supports many local or rare species. In addition, Sheephouse Wood SSSI lies within the study area close to the route of the Proposed Scheme in the adjacent Waddesdon and Quainton area (CFA12). 4.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

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

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

4.5.3 In the study area, dust generating activities would comprise the construction of new structures and earthworks, notably a series of cuttings and embankments and the Calvert IMD. Dust emissions from the construction sites could arise from: demolition of buildings; earthworks required for ground preparation; bulk excavation; processing and stockpiling of fill materials; construction of structural embankments; landscaping; the construction and the use

23 AEA Technology (2009), Air Quality Updating and Screening Assessment for Cherwell District Council.

41 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Air quality

of construction compounds; construction of permanent replacement road infrastructure and bridges; and the potential deposition of mud and dirt onto local roads by vehicles leaving the site.

4.5.4 With the mitigation outlined above, the assessment of impacts arising from dust emissions has concluded that impacts would be negligible for residential and ecological receptors. None of these effects would be significant.

4.5.5 Construction activity could also affect local air quality through the additional traffic generated on local roads as a result of construction traffic routes and changes to traffic patterns arising from temporary road diversions. Examination of the changes in traffic flows for017 2 along the affected roads has shown that traffic on five roads meet the criteria for further air quality assessment. These would be: • School Hill; • Perry Hill; • Main Street; • Addison Road; and • West Street.

4.5.6 Following a more detailed assessment of impacts arising from the additional emissions on these roads, impacts of increased NO2 and PM10 concentrations at roadside receptors were found to be negligible. Therefore no significant adverse effects are anticipated. Likely residual significant effects

4.5.7 The methods outlined within the draft CoCP to control and manage potential air quality effects are considered effective in this location. Hence, no residual effects are considered likely. 4.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

4.6.1 Impacts from the operation of the Proposed Scheme relate mainly to changes in the nature of traffic. There are no direct atmospheric emissions from the operation of trains that would cause an impact on air quality; these have therefore not been assessed.

4.6.2 Traffic data in the Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode area have been screened to identify roads that required further assessment and to confirm the likely effect of the change in emissions from vehicles using those roads in 2026. No roads would have traffic flow changes that are sufficiently large to meet the criteria for a more detailed assessment. Therefore, it has been concluded that any impacts would be negligible and effects would not be significant. Likely residual significant effects

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

42 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Community 5 Community 5.1 Introduction 5.1.1 This section of the report provides a summary of impacts and likely significant effects on local communities resulting from the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. 5.2 Policy framework 5.2.1 A number of policies from the Aylesbury Vale Local Plan 2004, the Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan 2011 and the saved policies of the Chiltern Local Plan, 1996 afford protection to community facilities, social infrastructure, open space and PRoW. They seek to: • Prevent the loss of community buildings and facilities, including public houses and post offices, and support the provision of new community facilities (Aylesbury Vale Local Plan Policies GP32 and GP93; Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan 2011 Policies S26 and R11; Cherwell Local Plan 1996 Saved Policy S29); • Protect and enhance various green infrastructure assets and open space, and to add to these assets where possible (Aylesbury Vale Local Plan Policies GP8 and GP66, Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan 2011 Policies R1, R2, R3, R4, R7 and R14, EN13 and EN35; Cherwell Local Plan 1996 Saved Policy R7); • Prevent the loss of allotments in the district (Aylesbury Vale Local Plan Policy GP92, Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan 2011 policy R17); and • Ensure the safeguarding of PRoW or suitable alternatives where severance/diversion is necessary (Aylesbury Vale Local Plan Policy GP84; Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan 2011 Policies TR8, TR16, TR17 and TR31).

5.2.2 Policy BSC 8 of the Proposed Submission Cherwell Local Plan 2012 relates to the improvement of health and well-being within the district. There are also a number of development areas identified in the document, and a number of policies relating to the development of community facilities.

5.2.3 There is one allocation of more than 0.5 hectare located within 2km of the route centre line in the Aylesbury Vale District Local Plan at Calvert Green (25.2ha), which has a stated capacity of 300 residential units. 5.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 5.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the community assessment are set out in Volume 1.

5.3.2 An additional assumption relates to the effects due to severance of PRoW (public footpaths and bridleways) and highway and pedestrian diversions which are assessed within Section 12 – Traffic and transport. However, where PRoW are considered a destination in themselves as a recreational resource, they have been considered within this community assessment. In this area, there are two PRoW to which this applies: the Cross Bucks Way and the Bernwood Jubilee Way. Where impacts on open space and PRoW are considered, these have been informed by open space and PRoW usage and quality surveys. 5.4 Environmental baseline 5.4.1 The study area includes the area of land within the construction boundary (comprising permanent and temporary land take), as well as a suitable buffer as relevant to inform the respective environmental topics upon which the assessment is based.

43 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Community

5.4.2 Part of the route throughout the study area is in cutting with some sections of embankment and viaduct. The baseline description has focused on the worksites associated with the overbridges, the cutting and footbridge at Twyford, the cutting at Chetwode, the IMD north of Calvert and along the length of the route within the Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode areas (see maps CT‑05-054 to CT‑05-060).

5.4.3 The area is largely rural in character, with a number of villages, including Calvert, Twyford, Godington, Chetwode and Barton Hartshorn, as well as the larger settlement of Steeple Claydon. There is also a large former quarry, now used as a waste management site at the southern end of the area: the Calvert landfill site, operated by FCC Environment. (See maps CT‑03-27 to CT‑03-30 and maps LV-11-27 to LV-11-30.) School Hill Bridge and Calvert Green Bridge

5.4.4 A playground is located outside of the proposed area of permanent and temporary land take, and on the outer edge of the study area within Calvert Green residential estate (see map CT‑03-27). The Calvert Green Community Centre on Cotswold Way is also located outside the proposed area of permanent and temporary land take.

5.4.5 In the study area, but adjacent to the proposed route, lies a sports ground (near Sandstone Close), which appears to be disused and in poor condition. Infrastructure Maintenance Depot (IMD)

5.4.6 Grebe Lake is a former clay pit close to the proposed site of the IMD. It is used for sailing, boating, kayaking and angling (see map CT‑03-28). The Great Moor Sailing Club organises races at the lake most weekends of the year, and is based here, with around 300 members. The lake is bordered to the east by the Calvert Jubilee nature reserve and to the south-west by a playground and picnic area. A strip of land to the north and east of the two lakes (part of the Calvert Jubilee nature reserve) would fall within the area of temporary land take, whilst the lake itself would fall outside of the area of temporary land take but within the study area.

5.4.7 The settlement of Steeple Claydon lies adjacent to and partially overlooks the IMD. A number of community facilities are found in Steeple Claydon, including a library, a GP surgery and a dental practice. West Street overbridge

5.4.8 A number of allotment plots are found just to the north of Portway Road, near Portway Cottages (see map CT‑03-28). These allotments lie outside of the permanent and temporary land take but within the study area.

5.4.9 The footpath TWY/19/3 runs adjacent to the Proposed Scheme between Portway Farm and Twyford Recreation Ground, where it meets footpath TWY/18/1, which is a footpath linking Perry Hill (to the east of the route) with the village of Twyford via School Lane. The former would not be within the area of permanent or temporary land take, but would be within the study area, whilst the latter would cross both. Culverts and cutting at Twyford

5.4.10 The village of Twyford contains a number of community facilities, including public houses, churches, a post office, a village hall, and a village store. However, the majority of these lie outside the study area. Twyford Church of England First School’s catchment includes Calvert Green, along with and .

44 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Community

5.4.11 The Twyford Recreation Ground and Pavilion, home to Twyford Cricket Club and Twyford United Football Club would be outside of the area of permanent and temporary land take, but within the study area. It is also the location of the annual ‘Twyfest’, a family-friendly music event held to raise money for the local village hall.

5.4.12 St Mary’s Church and burial ground also lies outside of the area of permanent and temporary land take but within the study area to the north of Twyford.

5.4.13 Twyford also acts as the conduit for a number of other footpaths that would cross the proposed route, linking it with Cowley Lodge and Cowley Farm, and with a wider network of other footpaths. These include the Cross Bucks Way promoted route and also footpaths TWY/16/1, TWY/15/1/2, PBI/5(F)/7, PBI/6/2 and PBI/6/3 (see maps LV-11-27 to LV-11-30). All of these would run through the area of permanent and temporary land take at some point. Cutting at Chetwode

5.4.14 St. Mary and St. Nicholas’s Church in Chetwode lies on School Lane. It would be outside the area of permanent and temporary land take but inside the study area.

5.4.15 Footpaths BHA/2/2 and BHA/3/1 provide connections between the villages of Barton Hartshorn and Newton Purcell, and would cross the proposed route and therefore passing through both the area of permanent and temporary land take. 5.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

5.5.1 The draft CoCP includes a range of scheme wide provisions which would help mitigate community effects associated with construction, including: • Appointment of community relations personnel; • A community helpline to handle enquiries from the public; • Sympathetic layout of construction sites to reduce impacts; • Maintenance of public roads, cycle ways and PRoW around construction sites to avoid their deterioration due to construction traffic; and • Specific measures in relation to air quality and noise to reduce impacts on amenity for the neighbouring communities. Residential property

5.5.2 The Proposed Scheme would require the demolition of seven residential properties within the study area as follows: • The route would cross underneath the junction between School Hill and Brackley Lane in Calvert. The existing bridge at School Hill would be rebuilt as part of the Proposed Scheme and would require the demolition of three residential dwellings: Hazelbach and numbers 12a and 12b on Brackley Lane; • North-west of Calvert, a short curved section of track would be built to divert the existing Aylesbury Link railway line eastwards and connect it with the EWR line. Part of Shepherd’s Furze Farm would be in the footprint of this new track and would be demolished; and • South of Chetwode, three residential properties would be demolished: Old Stable Cottage, Rosehill Cottage and Sunflower Cottage.

45 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Community

5.5.3 Whilst these demolitions would cause considerable disruption to the occupiers and would require them to relocate, in terms of the effect on the local community the permanent loss of these dwellings would be minor adverse in each location. Therefore, it is not considered that there would be any significant effects on the community resulting from demolitions.

5.5.4 The Proposed Scheme would cross a number of roads throughout the area. These include School Hill and Perry Hill in Calvert and West Street in Twyford. Perry Hill would be permanently closed but new bridges would be built to permanently realign School Hill and West Street. This would maintain the access between the villages on the west of the Proposed Scheme (Calvert, Charndon, Twyford) with the community facilities in the larger settlement of Steeple Claydon (to the east). The closure of these roads and the construction of the new bridges would be appropriately phased, and diversions would be put in place, to maintain access for residents to Steeple Claydon. As such, the effects on community accessibility would be negligible and would not be significant. Community infrastructure

5.5.5 There are not considered to be any significant adverse effects on community or recreational infrastructure in this area as a result of land take or isolation impacts. Public rights of way and open space

5.5.6 There are not considered to be any significant adverse effects on oWPR or open space as a result of land take or isolation impacts. Amenity

5.5.7 The formal ES will report the assessment of effects, including in-combination effects, on community amenity. Likely residual significant effects

5.5.8 At this stage of assessment it is not considered that there would be any significant residual effects on the local communities along this section of the ProposedScheme.

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

5.6.1 Potential effects on the community resulting from the operation of the Proposed Scheme could arise from changes in amenity. This assessment of effects draws upon other technical disciplines (e.g. air quality, noise and vibration, landscape and visual, transport and traffic) findings to inform the amenity assessment. The presence of in-combination impacts from these other disciplines could result in significant amenity effects on a number of community facilities and resources in the area. This will be reported in the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects

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

46 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Cultural heritage 6 Cultural heritage 6.1 Introduction 6.1.1 This section of the report presents a summary of the impacts and likely significant effects on heritage assets and the historic environment as a result of the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. Heritage assets comprise: • Archaeological and palaeo-environmental remains; • Historic landscapes; and • Historic buildings and the built environment. 6.2 Policy framework 6.2.1 The Aylesbury Vale Local Plan contains Saved Policies that seek to: • Preserve and enhance the special characteristics of conservation areas and to prevent development harmful to their character and appearance (Saved Policy GP53); and • Provide for sites of archaeological importance and historic parks or gardens (Saved Policies GP59 and GP6).

6.2.2 Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan Policies EN39, EN40, EN43 and EN44 include various provisions that seek to protect, preserve and enhance listed buildings, their settings and conservation areas. Policy EN47 promotes the conservation, protection and enhancement of archaeological heritage. A number of the Cherwell Saved Local Plan policies also afford protection to heritage assets, notably Policies C18, C23 and C25.

6.2.3 Policy Bicester 3: South West Bicester Phase 2 of the Proposed Submission Cherwell Local Plan 2012 states that development proposals should seek to protect cultural heritage and archaeology. 6.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 6.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the cultural heritage assessment are set out in Volume 1.

6.3.2 Detailed Historic Environment Record (HER) data were obtained for an area of 1km from the centre line of the Proposed Scheme in Buckinghamshire. 6.4 Environmental baseline 6.4.1 The topography of the area is relatively flat, with limited changes of elevation in the southern area. The northern part of the study area is slightly more undulating, and was formed by the valleys of streams feeding the Padbury Brook, a tributary of the River Great Ouse. The predominant geology is clay. However, there are recorded deposits of gravels alongside the minor watercourses within the study area. Pleistocene remains (comprising evidence of mammoth, rhinoceros, elephant and horse) have also been recorded.

6.4.2 Although there is little direct evidence for later prehistoric and Roman remains, there is evidence in the wider landscape for occupation of both the clay uplands and the major river valleys. A Roman road near Newton Purcell forms the northern boundary of the study area, and a Roman trackway has been located at Quarry.

6.4.3 Evidence for the early medieval period is also extremely rare. The present settlement and landscape pattern probably developed in the medieval periods, focused on the settlements at

47 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Cultural heritage

Twyford, Chetwode, Barton Hartshorn and Charndon. These villages are surrounded by woodland and agricultural land, with outlying manors (such as Chetwode) and farmsteads in the surrounding countryside. The settlement at Calvert is of later date, established for the workers of the Calvert Brickworks in the 19th century.

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

6.4.5 Designated assets are represented on maps CT‑01-27 to CT‑01-30.

6.4.6 The following designated features are located within the permanent land take and temporary land take boundaries: • Shepherds Furze Farmhouse, a Grade II listed building; • Chetwode Conservation Area; and • Decoypond Wood ancient woodland.

6.4.7 The following designated features are located within the draft zone of theoretical visibility (ZTV): • Two Grade I listed buildings: the Church of St Mary at Twyford and the Church of St Mary and St Nicholas at Chetwode; • One Grade II* listed building: the Church of St Michael at Steeple Claydon; and • Some 76 Grade II listed buildings comprising 19 within the historic settlement at Steeple Claydon; 13 at Preston Bisset, nine at Twyford; four at Barton Hartshorn; four at Chetwode (including the Hermitage); two at Godington; as well as those which form parts of isolated farmsteads, private houses or cottages. Non‐designated assets

6.4.8 Within the area of permanent and temporary land take the following assets have been identified: • Two railway bridges on the former route of the GCML; • Two milestones close to Calvert; • Potential archaeological remains of Pleistocene date between Twyford and Steeple Claydon; • Potential archaeological remains of prehistoric and Roman date at Godington; • Remains of medieval dates at Twyford and at Chetwode; and • Potential archaeological remains of medieval and post-medieval date at Rosehill Farm, at Steeple Claydon, Godington Mill and at Sunflower Farm. 6.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

6.5.1 The construction works have the potential to affect heritage assets. Impacts would occur to assets within the area of temporary and permanent land take, as well as the settings of heritage assets within the ZTV.

48 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Cultural heritage

6.5.2 The draft CoCP sets out the provisions that would be adopted to control effects on cultural heritage assets. The provisions include: • Management measures to control damage to assets that are to be retained within the area of land used temporarily during construction and the preparation of project wide principles, standards and techniques for works affecting heritage assets; • A programme of archaeological investigation and recording to be undertaken prior to construction works affecting the assets; and • A programme of historic building investigation and recording to be undertaken prior to modification or demolition of the assets.

6.5.3 In addition, the following measures have been included as part of the design of the Proposed Scheme to avoid or reduce impacts on heritage assets: • The provision of earthworks and planting to screen views to the Proposed Scheme from the historic settlement at Twyford, including the Church of St Mary and the other listed buildings within its limits; and • Design of landscape earthworks at Chetwode to reduce direct impacts to the Grade II listed Hermitage and system of moats.

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

6.5.5 Assets that would experience a significant physical effect in this area are: • Shepherds Furze Farmhouse, an asset of moderate heritage value, which would be demolished; • Chetwode Conservation Area, the southern part of which will be severed by the Proposed Scheme; and • Removal of potential buried archaeological remains, of moderate heritage value and of prehistoric to post-medieval date, located: ȃȃ Between Twyford and Steeple Claydon; ȃȃ At Godington; ȃȃ At Twyford; ȃȃ At Chetwode; ȃȃ At Rosehill Farm; ȃȃ At Steeple Claydon; ȃȃ At Godington Mill; and ȃȃ At Sunflower Farm.

6.5.6 The settings of the following specific heritage assets would experience significant effects: • The Hermitage, an asset of moderate heritage value, which would be affected by changes to its setting resulting from the change to the character and context of its surroundings; • Sunflower Farm, an asset of moderate heritage value, would be affected by changes to its setting resulting from the change to the character and context of its surroundings; • Complexes of listed buildings of moderate and high value within the historic settlement of Twyford, which would be affected by changes to their settings; and

49 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Cultural heritage

• Complexes of listed buildings of moderate and high value within the conservation area at Chetwode that would be affected by changes to their settings.

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

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

6.5.9 Although a programme of archaeological and historic building investigation contributes to knowledge gain, such works would not fully mitigate the effect or reduce the impact on heritage assets. The following permanent effects would therefore remain: • The demolition of Shepherds Furze Farmhouse; • Physical impact upon Chetwode Conservation Area; and • Potential buried archaeological remains of prehistoric to medieval date at the locations described above. Further mitigation

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

6.6.1 The introduction of the Proposed Scheme into an area of existing open landscape has the potential to introduce impacts on the setting of both heritage assets and the historic landscape itself resulting from, for example, severance, noise, vibration and other factors. The Proposed Scheme includes elevated sections on embankment and viaduct, together with realignment of the existing highway infrastructure and the introduction of road and footbridges over the Proposed Scheme.

6.6.2 The provision of earthworks and planting would provide an effective means of mitigation to reduce the operational effects of the Proposed Scheme. However, mitigation would not be fully effective until planting has matured.

6.6.3 The following specific heritage assets would experience significant effects through changes to their setting: • The historic settlement and listed buildings at Twyford, including the Grade I listed St Marys Church; and • The listed buildings at Chetwode, including the Grade I Church of St Mary and St Nicholas and the Grade II listed Hermitage. Likely residual significant effects

6.6.4 Appropriate design of the viaduct and road bridge at Twyford would reduce the effect on the setting of the listed buildings within the historic settlement. However, the introduction of these highly visible features into a rural landscape would result in a significant adverse residual effect.

50 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Cultural heritage

6.6.5 Even with earthworks and planting, the presence of the scheme through the Chetwode Conservation Area and close to the Hermitage would result in a significant residual effect, since the character and setting of these assets will be permanently altered. Further mitigation

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

51 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Ecology 7 Ecology 7.1 Introduction 7.1.1 This section of the report provides a summary of the predicted impacts and significant effects upon species and habitats as a consequence of the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. This includes effects upon sites recognised or designated on the basis of their importance for nature conservation. 7.2 Policy framework 7.2.1 The Aylesbury Vale District Local Plan Saved Policies GP.40 and GP.39 seek to retain trees and hedgerows of wildlife importance and to protect them during construction. Policy GP.66 seeks to protect and enhance the environment and habitat of watercourses.

7.2.2 Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan Policy EN24 and Cherwell Local Plan Saved Policy C1 seek to prevent development, which would result in damage to or loss of areas of designated wildlife importance and sites of ecological value. Policy EN22 of the Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan seeks to retain and enhance features of nature conservation value, whilst Saved Policy C2 of the Cherwell Local Plan and EN25 of Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan seek to prevent development that would adversely affect protected species or habitats.

7.2.3 In addition, regional guidance relevant to this assessment is provided in the Buckinghamshire & Milton Keynes Biodiversity Action Plan24. 7.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 7.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the ecological assessment are set out in Volume 1.

7.3.2 The current assessment draws on existing information gathered from national organisations and from regional and local sources including Buckinghamshire County Council; the Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire Wildlife Trust (BBOWT); the Buckinghamshire Amphibian and Reptile group; the North Buckinghamshire Bat Group (NBBG); and the Upper Thames (Berkshire, Bucks and Oxon) Branch of Butterfly Conservation.

7.3.3 Biological records from the West Thames branch of the Environment Agency (EA) have now been received but are yet to be incorporated. Data from the Buckinghamshire Badger Group have also been requested.

7.3.4 Field surveys undertaken to date have been limited to locations where landowner permission has been obtained or areas accessible to the public. They include (but are not limited to): habitat and hedgerow surveys; great crested newt surveys; bat surveys, including radio- tracking surveys at locations between Sheephouse Wood SSSI and Calvert Jubilee nature reserve, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode; dormouse; otter; water vole; reptile; breeding and wintering birds; and terrestrial invertebrates.

7.3.5 Radio-tracking surveys do not form part of the standard methodology and have been conducted as an additional form of bat survey in this area to establish the flight paths of bats, notably Bechstein’s bat. A site-specific project licence was obtained from Natural England to conduct the work using established trapping and radio-tracking methods.

24 Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes Biodiversity Partnership (2008) Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes Biodiversity Action Plan 2000-2010, Revised 2008.

52 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Ecology

7.3.6 Surveys will continue during 2013 and will include (but are not limited to) the following, subject to access: • Additional trapping and radio-tracking of bats (in particular Bechstein’s bat) at locations between Sheephouse Wood SSSI and Calvert Jubilee nature reserve. These surveys are subject to approvals from Natural England, which are currently being agreed; and • Fish, River Corridor Survey, River Habitat Survey and white-clawed crayfish surveys of the Padbury Brook. 7.4 Environmental baseline 7.4.1 This section presents the environmental baseline that is relevant to the consideration of impacts and effects reported below.

7.4.2 Land within and adjacent to the Proposed Scheme in this section of the route consists of arable and pasture fields bounded by hedgerows and woodland. The Proposed Scheme would pass between ancient woodlands that are part of the former Bernwood Forest. There are also neutral grasslands, hedges, streams and ponds along the route, in addition to a landfill site and two large lakes near Calvert.

7.4.3 Statutory and non-statutory designated sites are shown on maps CT‑01-27 to CT‑01-30.

7.4.4 There is one SSSI within 500m of the Proposed Scheme, Sheephouse Wood SSSI, which is south-east of Calvert25. The majority of the site lies within CFA12 (Waddesdon and Quainton). It is designated as a nationally important example of ancient woodland, and for assemblages of plants, woodland birds (including three species of woodpecker and woodcock) and invertebrates (including black hairstreak butterfly) (see map CT‑01-27). The site is of national value.

7.4.5 Local Wildlife Sites (LWSs) and Biological Notification Sites (BNS), which are located within the extent of or adjacent to the Proposed Scheme, or are considered to be potentially subject to significant effects are relevant to the assessment. There are five such Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) which meet these criteria, each of which is considered to be of county/metropolitan value: • Calvert Jubilee LWS (also a BBOWT nature reserve) is situated to the north of School Hill and lies partially within the extent of the Proposed Scheme. It is designated for grassland, scrub, woodland and wetland habitats as well as for its assemblage of wintering birds; • Calvert Brick Pits LWS is adjacent to Calvert Jubilee LWS. The northern edge of the site lies partially within the extent of the Proposed Scheme. It is designated for its very species-rich scrubby habitats, particularly for butterflies – species recorded at the site include dingy skipper, grizzled skipper and small heath; • Barton Hartshorn Railway Wood LWS is to the north-west of School End and is located partially within the extent of the Proposed Scheme. It is designated for its remnant fen, wet woodland and wet grassland habitats; • Calvert Railway Station LWS is to the south of School Hill located within the extent of the Proposed Scheme. The site was designated for its wet grassland and scattered scrub, notable plants, invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles. However, these are no longer present due to recent vegetation clearance; and • Decoypond Wood LWS to the south-east of Calvert village, located partially within the Proposed Scheme. It is designated for ancient semi-natural woodland.

25 Note that Finemere SSSI is further south, and reported in CFA 12 Waddesdon and Quainton.

53 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Ecology

7.4.6 There are a further two Biological Notification Sites (BNS) located within or adjacent to the Proposed Scheme, namely Chetwode Cutting and the Railway Cutting North of Twyford. Pending field survey, they are each considered to be of up to county/metropolitan value. Both are sections of disused railway line, the former of interest for neutral grassland and ponds and the latter for scrub.

7.4.7 Other habitats located outside of the designated sites identified above and which are relevant to the assessment include the following: • Hedgerows – hedgerows occur throughout the area. The majority qualify as a habitat of principal importance identified in Section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 200626 and as a local Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) habitat. Some also meet wildlife and landscape criteria specified in the Hedgerows egulationsR 199727. Based on the potential for these features to act as green corridors, the hedgerow network is considered to be of up to district/borough value; • Ponds – approximately 20 ponds are located within the extent of or adjacent to the Proposed Scheme. A few are likely to qualify as habitats of principal importance and local BAP habitats. The ponds are therefore considered unlikely to be of more than district/ borough value; and • Watercourses – the Padbury Brook would be crossed by the route twice: to the north of Twyford and to the east of Moat Farm. It is the largest watercourse in the area and is likely to support aquatic invertebrates, fish populations and to be a habitat of principal importance. It is therefore considered to be of up to district/borough value.

7.4.8 A summary of the likely value of species covered by the assessment (excluding any features of species interest for which the sites described above are designated) is provided in Table 6.

Resource/ Value Rationale Receptor

Bechstein’s bat Up to international This species is listed in the Wildlife and Countryside Act (WCA) 1981 (as amended) and Annex II of the Habitats Directive, and is considered ‘very rare’.28 Records include a maternity roost within 1.2km of the route and confirmed presence in DecoypondWood LWS within 100m of the route. These records are on the northern edge of the known European distribution for this species. This raises the importance of this population in maintaining the favourable conservation status of the species in the UK and Europe. It is also known to use several woodlands to the south of the section of the route covered by this report – see CFA 12 report (Waddesdon and Quainton).

Black hairstreak Regional There is a concentration of records between Oxford and MiIton Keynes. The Proposed Scheme would pass between several colonies. The majority of the UK distribution extends north-east to Peterborough.

Red kite Regional Red kite are listed on Schedule 1 of the WCA. The main breeding stronghold is located further to the south and there are no known locations of nests and roost sites in the area. However, a large number of birds have been recorded in the area and they are considered to be part of a regionally important population centred on the Chilterns.

Hazel dormice Unlikely to be Hazel dormice are listed under the WCA and the Conservation of Habitats and Species more than county/ Regulations (2010 as amended). There are areas of suitable habitat that would be close metropolitan to the Proposed Scheme, but complete and partially complete surveys have not yet confirmed presence. As such, they are considered unlikely to be present.

26 Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 (2006 Chapter 16). 27 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (2002).The Hedgerows Regulations 1997. A guide to the law and good practice. 28 The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 transposed the Habitats Directive into national law.

54 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Ecology

Resource/ Value Rationale Receptor

Water vole Unlikely to be Water voles are listed under the WCA. There is suitable habitat along Padbury Brook, more than county/ but very few previous records in the wider landscape and mink have also been recorded metropolitan to the north but very close to this area. As such, they are considered unlikely to be present.

Otter Unlikely to be Otters are listed under the WCA and the Conservation of Habitats and Species more than county/ Regulations (2010, as amended). The Padbury Brook has extensive suitable habitat and metropolitan evidence of presence was recorded near the Proposed Scheme.

Bats (except Unlikely to be All species are listed on the WCA and Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations Bechstein’s) more than district/ (2010, as amended). Low to moderate numbers of at least seven further species of bat borough have been recorded, most of which are likely to forage or roost in or near the Proposed Scheme.

Great crested Unlikely to be Great crested newts are listed under both the WCA and the Conservation of Habitats newt more than district/ and Species Regulations (2010, as amended). There are four known breeding ponds borough in the area and suitable habitat present but this species is widespread in North Buckinghamshire. The majority of suitable habitat is near Calvert.

Breeding birds Unlikely to be Breeding birds are protected under the WCA. Diverse habitat is present throughout – (outside of more than district/ the area and some species of conservation concern have been recorded close to the designated borough Proposed Scheme, such as kingfisher, hobby and Cetti’s warbler. areas listed above)

Reptiles Unlikely to be Although suitable habitat is present, there are few records for widespread species – more than district/ grass snake, common lizard and slow-worm. borough

Barn owl Up to district/ The barn owl is listed on Schedule 1 of the WCA. There are few records close to the borough Proposed Scheme; however, suitable habitats such as hedges, semi-improved grassland, woodland and scrub are present. There is no evidence of nesting barn owl in or near the Proposed Scheme and loss of foraging habitat (in the absence of known nearby nest sites) is negligible.

Fish Up to district/ Suitable habitat is limited to Padbury Brook and the two large lakes at Calvert. Few borough records for common species have been received.

Badger Unlikely to be There is extensive suitable habitat and some evidence of the presence of badgers in this more than local/ area. parish

Terrestrial Unlikely to be A range of grassland and woodland habitats of interest for invertebrates are present, invertebrates more than local/ and there are records for less-common species of principal importance outside the (excluding black parish designated sites: small heath butterfly and cinnabar moth. hairstreak)

Plants Unlikely to be Small teasel and mat grass – both scarce at county level – and sainfoin (a near- more than local/ threatened species) are present in or near the Proposed Scheme. parish

Aquatic Unlikely to be Padbury Brook may support an assemblage of common or widespread macro- invertebrates more than local/ invertebrates. Ponds may also be of value. Limited survey results to date. White-clawed parish crayfish are unlikely to be present as signal crayfish have been recorded in the area.

Table 6: Preliminary evaluation of likely status and value of protected and/or notable species occurring within this section of the route

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

55 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Ecology

7.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

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

7.5.2 The value of ecological features in this area has led to the development of an integrated wildlife mitigation strategy encompassing this CFA and the adjacent CFA12 (Waddesdon and Quainton). It includes plantings, and the construction of seven multi-purpose bridges or underpasses between Edgcott Road and Calvert would provide, amongst other functions (see below), safe crossing points for wildlife, particularly for bats. Four of the multi-purpose structures (two overbridges and two underpasses) are described in the CFA12 report. In this CFA it includes the following measures which have been identified as part of the design of the Proposed Scheme and avoid or reduce impacts on features of ecological value: • An overbridge between Sheephouse Wood and Decoypond Wood, which would provide for wildlife and footpath reinstatement; • An overbridge adjacent to the WRG landfill site. This would be a multipurpose structure, providing for wildlife,vehicular access between the landfill and sidings (see below), permanent diversions for footpath [SCL/13/2] and bridleway [SCL/18/2]; • An overbridge located at School Hill. This would be a multipurpose structure, providing for wildlife and vehicular crossing for the online diversion of School Hill; and • Crossing points would be linked to existing woodlands via a network of planted areas. Further areas – set back to encourage species to avoid the Proposed Scheme as much as possible – would be planted to strengthen links between woodlands. These new and alternative habitat areas would serve a range of species including Bechstein’s bat, bats of other species, black hairstreak, badger, and great crested newt. Following maturation of these new habitats, potential severance impacts would be negated or reduced to not significant. The areas proposed for plantings in the area between the Sheephouse Wood and Calvert are illustrated in maps CT‑06-054 to CT‑06-05529. 7.5.3 Approximately 14ha of woodland and scrub would be removed between Sheephouse Wood and the northern end of Calvert Jubilee LWS, with a further 11ha in CFA12 (a combined loss of 25ha). These losses are a consequence of both clearance required for the construction of the Proposed Scheme, and that required to limit bat activity in close proximity to the route during operation (described here as it could also lead to effects during construction). The total area of planned planting for similar habitats would be greater than the area impacted. The locations shown on maps CT‑06-050 to CT‑06-053, illustrate the extent of land that may be required. The details of the proposed planting areas will be confirmed in the formal ES.

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

7.5.5 The assessment also assumes implementation of the measures set out within the draft CoCP, which includes translocation of protected species where appropriate, including: implementing a surface water or groundwater monitoring plan; obtaining the necessary consents for any soakaway or filtration systems; translocation of species; and controls on lighting to reduce any

29 Areas to the south of Sheephouse Wood are reported in CFA 12 – Waddesdon and Quainton.

56 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Ecology

adverse effect on sensitive ecology; and control of dust to avoid effects on black hairstreak eggs and larvae.

7.5.6 For Bechstein’s bat, the proposed mitigation described above would: • Address the impacts of habitat fragmentation and the loss of foraging habitat that would occur from the removal of up to 2.3km of linear woodland from along the Aylesbury Link and Decoypond Wood LWS; • Mitigate the fragmentation of hedges and tree-lines that currently link woodland either side of the route; and • Enable the bats to reach habitat required for breeding and foraging.

7.5.7 Proposed planting would not be sufficiently mature to provide habitat linkages immediately, and as such fragmentation of habitats used by Bechstein’s bats would still arise during and in the years following construction. Due to the rarity of Bechstein’s bat and as the roost is close to the known northern limit of its distribution, temporary habitat fragmentation could result in a temporary adverse effect on the conservation status of Bechstein’s bat that is significant at up to the national level.

7.5.8 Construction would result in the loss of about 4.8ha of grassland, scrub and woodland from the eastern and northern edges of Calvert Jubilee LWS. This extent of habitat loss represents 12% of the site; however, it represents about 30% of the terrestrial habitat present (the site mostly comprises open water) and would be permanent. This would result in an adverse effect on the LWS integrity that would be significant at the county/metropolitan level.

7.5.9 Construction would also result in the loss of about 0.3ha (17%) of wet woodland and grassland from Barton Hartshorn Railway Wood LWS (see map CT‑01-30). This would result in a permanent adverse effect on site integrity that is significant at the county/metropolitan vel.le

7.5.10 The Proposed Scheme would take about 2.33ha (71%) of neutral grassland and several ponds at Chetwode Cutting BNS (see map CT‑01-030). These habitats are the key reason for the designation of the site and therefore a loss of this extent would result in a permanent adverse effect on site integrity that is significant at the county/metropolitan vel.le

7.5.11 The Proposed Scheme would result in the loss of about 0.6ha (8%) of ancient woodland from the western side of Decoypond Wood LWS (see map CT‑01-027). As ancient woodland cannot be fully recreated, the loss would remain a permanent adverse effect that is significant at the county/metropolitan level.

7.5.12 The mitigation strategy for this section of the route includes provision for the planting of an area of woodland and scrub habitats larger than that impacted. The planting would improve connectivity between surrounding woods, which are all ancient. It would include the translocation of soils, coppice stools and woodland herbs from the ancient woodland in order to reduce the time for development of woodland of the greatest possible ecological value. While not fully replicating the (ancient) woodland lost, on maturation (at least 20 years) the large increase in woodland, including the translocation and appropriate management of the new habitat, would help improve the ecological value of the areas of woodland and would result in a beneficial effect that is significant at the district/boroughvel. le

7.5.13 Removal of scrub, hedges and wood-edge habitat would lead to the loss of four known colonies of black hairstreak (out of approximately 40 in the area). The proposed mitigation described above would address the loss and fragmentation of habitat used by black hairstreak. Once planted blackthorn is sufficiently established to provide breeding habitat, it would be colonised by nearby populations and an overall beneficial effect is likely to occur. However, there would remain the potential for a temporary adverse effect on conservation

57 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Ecology

status that is significant at the district/borough level. Planting of blackthorn scrub would also mitigate for the loss of habitat for brown hairstreak, while other invertebrates are unlikely to be significantly affected by the Proposed Scheme.

7.5.14 For other bat species, the loss and fragmentation of woodland, scrub and hedges would have a similar effect to that described for Bechstein’s bats above, and would be mitigated in the same way. However, in addition there is the potential for the loss of roosts. Prior to the provision of suitable alternative roosting habitat, there is the potential for a permanent adverse effect on the conservation status of bats (other than Bechstein’s), which would be significant up to district/borough level.

7.5.15 Approximately 90 hedges would be removed or severed by the Proposed Scheme, causing losses of about 40km in length (worst case i.e. assuming complete loss within and at the boundary of the Proposed Scheme) and affecting some that meet wildlife and landscape criteria specified in the Hedgerow Regulations 1997. Most would qualify as habitats of principal importance. These losses would result in a permanent adverse effect on the hedgerow network’s conservation status and loss of ‘important’ hedges, which would be significant at the district/borough level. They would also reduce connectivity between the woodlands. However, this would be addressed by the plantings described previously. It is not anticipated that there would be any adverse effects additional to those already described for bats and black hairstreak.

7.5.16 There would be a loss of approximately 20 ponds (of the 36 located within 500m of the Proposed Scheme in this area), including two that are known to support breeding great crested newts. Around Calvert where great crested newts are most abundant, the habitat corridors described previously would help to link existing and new populations and thus reduce the impacts in this location. Despite these new habitat links, the direct loss of breeding ponds throughout the area, prior to the incorporation of replacement ponds and associated terrestrial habitat, means that there would be a permanent adverse effect on the conservation status of great crested newts, which would be significant at up to the district/borough level.

7.5.17 Land take would result in the loss of about 5ha (1%) of scrub, woodland and grassland habitat, likely to be of value for invertebrates, from the northern edge of Calvert Brick Pits LWS (see map CT‑01-28). As scrub and woodland represents less than 50% of the LWS, the loss of a small percentage could affect the success of the terrestrial species for which the site is partially designated, particularly butterflies and birds. The loss is considered unlikely to compromise site integrity, but would result in a permanent adverse effect on the sites integrity that is significant at the local/parish level.

7.5.18 The loss of about 0.4ha (5%) of scrub from the Railway Cutting North of Twyford BNS as a result of construction would not affect the integrity of the site, but is considered to represent a permanent adverse effect that would be significant at the local/parish velle (see map CT‑01‑28).

7.5.19 Calvert Railway Station LWS, designated for about 2.14ha of scrub and grassland, is entirely within the Proposed Scheme. However, the site has already been cleared and it is unlikely that any species of interest would return. There would therefore be no additional effects from the Proposed Scheme.

7.5.20 Based on current survey information, hazel dormice and water voles are considered unlikely to be present within this section of the route. No significant effects on these species are therefore anticipated.

58 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Ecology

7.5.21 A summary is provided in Table 7. It is considered unlikely that any other ecological effects associated with construction would be more than the local/parish level. These will be considered further and where in combination they are significant, they will be reported in the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects

7.5.22 Taking into account mitigation proposed in the design of the Proposed Scheme set out above, anticipated significant residual ecological effects during construction are detailed inTable 7.

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

Bechstein’s bat Temporary adverse effect on conservation status due to Up to national severance of flight lines and loss of foraging habitat

Calvert Jubilee LWS Permanent adverse effect on site integrity due to loss of 4.8ha of County/metropolitan grassland and scrub

Barton Hartshorn Railway Permanent adverse effect on site integrity due to loss of 0.3ha of County/metropolitan Wood LWS wet woodland and grassland

Chetwode Cutting BNS Permanent adverse effect on site integrity due to loss of County/metropolitan approximately 2.3ha of neutral grassland and several ponds

Decoypond Wood LWS Permanent adverse effect due to loss of approximately 0.6ha of County/metropolitan ancient woodland

Permanent beneficial effect through planting of new Up to district/borough broadleaved woodland (mitigation shared with Bechstein’s bats and black hairstreak butterfly)

Black hairstreak butterfly Temporary adverse effect on conservation status due to habitat District/borough loss, severance and reduction in connectivity

Bats (except Bechstein’s) Potential for a permanent adverse effect on conservation status Up to district/borough due to loss of roosts

Hedgerows Permanent adverse effect on conservation status due to loss of District/borough about 40km of hedgerows

Great crested newt Permanent adverse effect on conservation status due to loss of Up to district/borough 20 breeding ponds

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

7.5.23 Further measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design are set out below: • Measures to limit the time required for planted vegetation to become sufficiently mature to provide habitat connectivity for bats, birds and black hairstreak, include: ȃȃ Early translocation of elements of ancient woodland, hedgerows, scrub and blackthorn, and the use of mature stock, wherever practicable when establishing the planted areas described above; and ȃȃ Use of temporary measures such as movable wattle screens, to guide wildlife foraging and movement during construction and until vegetation matures at significant crossing points; • Provision of alternative roosting habitat for bats; • Provision of replacement ponds and suitable terrestrial habitat for great crested newt; and

59 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Ecology

• Ensuring new habitat planting should not shade any existing vegetation known to support black hairstreak, or that is being planted for them. 7.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

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

7.6.2 The following measures have been identified as part of the design of the ProposedScheme in order to avoid or reduce impacts on features of ecological value. The assessment assumes that these will be implemented; however, they will be subject to refinement following further survey and assessment work and in response to the consultation on this draft ES: • Multi-purpose structures and plantings to link habitats described in relation to construction phase effects; • Clearance of a strip of vegetation (excluding ancient woodland) at least 20m wide along the eastern edge of the route from Finemere Wood (in CFA12) to Calvert to restrict crossing points for bats to those described in above; and • A screen along the western edge of Decoypond Wood (adjacent to the route) to reduce noise effects and bird and bat mortality.

7.6.3 Bats, including Bechstein’s bat, when moving along hedgerows and other linear vegetation- features near the route would be at potential risk of being struck by trains or possibly harmed by turbulence. The risk would be particularly high near Sheephouse Wood and Decoypond Wood where there are existing records or known bat crossing points. The mitigation described in Section 7.5, alongside that described in paragraph 7.6.2 above would reduce the risk of bats flying in close proximity to the route of the Proposed Scheme, and direct them towards the crossing points provided. The erection of the screen would further encourage bats (and other species) to only cross the route at the designed crossing points.

7.6.4 However, until mitigation planting become sufficiently mature to guide bats to safe crossing points there is considered to be the potential for a temporary adverse effect on conservation status as a consequence of direct mortality. For Bechstein’s bat, this is considered potentially significant at up to the national level. For other bat species it is considered potentially significant at up to the district/borough level. Once mitigation planting has matured the mitigation measures outlined are considered likely to reduce this effect to a level where it is not significant.

7.6.5 Black hairstreak butterflies are considered potentially susceptible to mortality as a consequence of both direct strike and potentially the vortices created around and following passing trains. The mitigation described in Section 7.5 would avoid permanent adverse effects. However, effects are likely to remain until planted blackthorn matures sufficiently to provide an increased area of breeding habitat and movement corridors. An absence of sufficient mature habitat would result in a temporary adverse effect of approximately ten years on the black hairstreak butterfly’s conservation status, which would be significant at up to district/ borough level.

60 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Ecology

7.6.6 Barn owls are potentially at risk of colliding with trains, particularly near Decoypond Wood and Sheephouse Wood, where there is suitable woodland and grassland habitat. The overbridges and associated habitat linkages would provide corridors for barn owls to cross the route. However, the grassland strip (devoid of woody vegetation) along the Proposed Scheme, needed to mitigate the killing and injury of bats, may encourage barn owls to forage close to trains, with the risk that they may be killed. Mortality, even if infrequent, could impact on the conservation status of this Schedule 1 species and the ongoing reduction in numbers would result in a permanent adverse effect on a receptor of district/borough value that would also be significant at up to district/borough level.

7.6.7 Red kite are at potential risk of colliding with trains and power lines if attracted to the route to feed on carrion. However, the red kite’s wariness of landing in unfamiliar areas and the noise and frequency of the trains would reduce the risk of most birds landing on or near the route. Based on the infrequent level of mortality anticipated it is considered that the operation of the Proposed Scheme will result in a permanent adverse effect on the red kite conservation status that would be significant at local/parish level.

7.6.8 Local/parish effects, which in combination may be significant, will be described in the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects

7.6.9 Taking into account mitigation proposed in the design of the Proposed Scheme set out above, the anticipated significant residual ecological effects during operation are detailed inTable 8.

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

Bechstein’s bat Temporary adverse effect on conservation status due to Up to national mortality through train strike or turbulence until planting matures

Bats (except Bechstein’s) Temporary adverse effect on conservation status due to Up to district/borough mortality through train strike or turbulence until planting matures

Black hairstreak butterfly Temporary adverse effect on conservation status due to train Up to district/borough strike or turbulence until planting matures

Barn owl Temporary adverse effect on conservation status due to train Up to district/borough strike

Table 8: Significant residual operational effects on ecological receptors within this area Further mitigation

7.6.10 Further measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design include: • Further measures to limit the time required for planted vegetation to become sufficiently mature to provide habitat connectivity for bats, birds and black hairstreak, as described in Section 7.5; and • Management to ensure a short sward is maintained either side of the Proposed Scheme between Decoypond Wood and Sheephouse Wood. This would seek to stop the development of a rough, tussocky habitat that would be suitable for small mammals. This would reduce foraging opportunities for barn owl close to the Proposed Scheme and minimise the risk of them being hit by passing trains.

61 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Land quality 8 Land quality 8.1 Introduction 8.1.1 This section provides a summary of the likely impacts and significant effects to land quality and geology, as a result of the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme. Consideration is given to land that contains contamination and land that has special geological significance, either from a scientific, mining or mineral resources point of view, including areas of current underground or opencast mining and areas of designated mineral resources.

8.1.2 Areas of land have been identified, both within and adjacent to construction areas, that could affect or be affected by the construction of the route because they are contaminated (for example contaminated soils may need to be removed or the construction may alter existing contamination pathways). Each of these areas has been studied in order to determine the scale of any potential impacts caused by existing contamination and what needs to be done to avoid significant consequences to people and the wider environment. In addition, a review has been undertaken to establish whether the operation of the Proposed Scheme would lead to contamination of its surroundings and what needs to be done to prevent such contamination. This process is known as a contamination risk assessment. 8.2 Policy framework 8.2.1 Policy CS1 of the Aylesbury Vale Local Plan states that development proposals in this area, other than those involving minerals extraction, would need to demonstrate: that they would not sterilise any mineral resources; that consideration has been given to prior extraction of the protected mineral; or that the need for the proposed development outweighs the economic value of the mineral resource.

8.2.2 The Non-Statutory Cherwell Local Plan 2011 seeks to ensure that where development takes place on contaminated land, adequate measures will be put in place to remove the threat of contamination and prevent the contamination of surface or underground water resources (Policy EN17).

8.2.3 Saved Policy ENV1 of the Cherwell Local Plan seeks to prevent development that would give rise to materially detrimental levels of pollution. Saved Policy ENV12 requires contamination to be removed or treated, to prevent pollution of groundwater. 8.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 8.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the land quality assessment are set out in Volume 1.

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

8.3.3 There are no topic specific assumptions or limitations within this study area.

62 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Land quality

8.4 Environmental baseline Geology

8.4.1 Geological mapping shows three areas of made ground30 within 250m of the route. The first is at Calvert landfill 4 pit, located at the southern end of the route section adjacent to the west side of the route (see map CT‑03-27). The second is to the north of Calvert village and the historical site of Calvert landfill 1 pit, south-west of the route (see map CT‑03-27), and the third is east of Twyford, to the north-east of the route (see map CT‑03-28). A shallow cover of track bed materials will be present within the route alignment where it follows the existing railway line. A cover of made ground may also be present in built up areas of the route section as a result of previous cycles of development, both on and off-site.

8.4.2 Superficial deposits31 are absent from the southern third of the route. In central areas they consist of River Alluvium comprising clay, silts, sands and gravels, and River Terrace Sands and Gravels generally following the route of Padbury Brook and its tributaries. In the vicinity of Barton Hartshorn, superficial deposits consist of Glacial Till, comprising a clay or sand matrix with sand and gravel but also with glaciofluvial sand and gravel deposits outcropping at the surface on the route north-west of School End.

8.4.3 The bedrock geology underlying the majority of the route section is the Ancholme Group, which consists of: the Oxford Clay Formation, comprising mudstone; and the Kellaways Formation, comprising mudstone, siltstone and sandstone. The Cornbrash Formation of the Great Oolite Group, described as limestone, underlies the northernmost 500m of the route. Groundwater and surface water

8.4.4 The Kellaways Formation, the Cornbrash Formation, the River Alluvium and the River Terrace Sand and Gravels have all been designated Secondary A Aquifers by the EA. The Oxford Clay Formation has been designated as Unproductive.

8.4.5 A search for groundwater and surface water abstractions in the study area confirmed that there is one licensed surface water abstraction from a field drain south ofChetwode, but no licenced abstractions from groundwater within 1km of the route. No Source Protection Zones (SPZs) would be crossed. There are no British Geological Survey (BGS) records for water wells within 500m of the route. There are four unlicensed private abstractions within 2km of the route, according to Cherwell District Council (see map CT‑04-12).

8.4.6 Padbury Brook would cross the route in three locations, one crossing to the east of Twyford, and two further crossings to the north-east of Godington.

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

8.4.8 The following discussion on land uses relates to the higher risk sites (both historical and current land uses) identified during the assessment and that have been put forward for more detailed assessment32. These are shown on maps CT‑03-27 to CT‑03-30.

30 ‘Made ground’ is a term given to any man-made or artificial deposits. It may be derived from a variety of materials including entirely natural products such as quarried stone, sand, gravel or clay or from the residues of industrial processes (such as ash or clinker) or a mixture of materials. It is frequently used interchangeably with the term ‘fill’. 31 ‘Superficial deposit’ is a term given to a geological deposit or formation that was laid down during the Quaternary period (within the previous 2,600,000 years). Such deposits were largely formed by fluvial (river) and glacial or periglacial processes including wind-blown deposits known as ‘loess’. 32 The definition of ‘higher risk’ sites in this instance relates to the contamination potential of the source, the type of construction works that are proposed at that location (e.g. tunnel, cutting or embankment) and the proximity of receptors e.g. people, groundwater bodies etc.

63 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Land quality

8.4.9 There are a number of potential contamination sources that may have impacted soils or groundwater (at least locally) within the search area. These include: current activities at Calvert landfill (CT‑03-27) at the southern end of the study area, which is licensed for disposal of hazardous waste; the historical landfills around Calvert (CT‑03-27), licensed to take a mixture of inert, industrial, commercial and household waste; infilled areas aroundCalvert landfill; existing railways along the length of the route; and military use of nearby land (CT‑03‑30), including an airfield at Barton Hartshorn (former RAF Finmere) at the northern end of the area. Potential contaminants include metals, semi-metals, asbestos, organic and inorganic chemicals at all sites, and radiological substances and explosive ordnance at the former RAF Finmere site. Mining/mineral resources

8.4.10 A former clay pit and an area of sand and gravel quarrying is shown to the south-west of the route at the southern end of the route section in the area now occupied by Calvert landfill, Grebe Lake, a nature reserve and housing for the village of Calvert.

8.4.11 There are no areas in this part of the route that are currently being worked or that have planning permission for future mineral extraction. In addition, this area of the route is not located in a preferred extraction area, a mineral safeguarding area or a mineral consultation area. Geo-conservation resources

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

8.4.13 Contaminated land has the potential to affect a range of receptors if exposure to the contaminants occurs. The following potential receptors within the area have been identified: • People living or working on or adjacent to the route of the Proposed Scheme; • Secondary A Aquifers (Kellaways and Cornbrash Formations, River Alluvium and River Terrace Sands and Gravels); • Padbury Brook; • Nearby farmland or ecological resources; and • The built environment (such as listed buildings/structures, housing, foundations to structures). 8.5 Construction Land contamination Assessment of impacts and mitigation

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

64 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Land quality

8.5.2 During the construction phase, there would be the potential for effects on receptors from soil disturbance and off-site migration of contaminants at excavation locations, where these coincide with land contamination.

8.5.3 The draft CoCP requires that a programme of ground investigation would take place prior to construction in order to confirm areas of contamination and a risk assessment undertaken to determine what, if any, site specific remediation measures would be required to allow the Proposed Scheme to be constructed safely and to prevent harmful future migration of contaminants. Any remediation scheme would be agreed with the regulatory authorities.

8.5.4 This section of the route would start in a retained earthwork cutting along the existing rail route for approximately 4km as far as Twyford. The route then passes through a series of alternating embankments and cuttings to the end of the route section, with an approximately 60m long viaduct (Twyford West Viaduct) over Padbury Brook, and two viaducts (Godington Viaduct 1 and Godington Viaduct 2) northeast of Godington.

8.5.5 The IMD at Calvert would be located to the north-east of the route, to the north of Calvert alongside the existing Bicester to Bletchley railway at Claydon Junction. The line is proposed to be upgraded as part of the EWR project and a new intersection bridge would be constructed where the HS2 proposed route and EWR cross.

8.5.6 There would be two auto-transformer stations, Portway Farm auto-transformer station at Calvert IMD, and Chetwode auto-transformer station to the south of Chetwode.

8.5.7 The railway cutting immediately adjacent to the operational Calvert landfill would require excavation into what is expected to be natural ground adjacent to the landfill after passing through any tracked material. The landfill is formed in a former pit below the existing railway ground level and is also raised above the existing rail level. The landfill lining (below ground) is offset from the route alignment by varying distances, but expected to be 0-252 metres or more. The cutting would have retained wall sides with ground anchors. The potential for gas migration to occur from the landfill via new pathways such as the ground anchors exists. It is also possible that leachate may migrate into the cutting. Similarly, the cutting through the Calvert Jubilee nature reserve, which is made ground, could expose leachates. These would need to be addressed as part of the scheme design. Further mitigation measures to prevent gas or leachate migration from the landfill could include vents and/or barriers built into the proposed retaining wall structures. After application of the measures set out in the draft CoCP, and embedded measures in the design of the scheme, would have no significant effect.

8.5.8 For the remaining sites identified as subject to potential impacts, the construction phase is expected to have no significant effects.

8.5.9 There are three construction sites, the main one (including the railhead) being at West Street, and satellite sites at School Hill near Calvert and at School End at Chetwode. Whilst the construction compounds would store and use potentially contaminative materials such as fuels, oils and solvents, they would be managed in accordance with the draft CoCP, thus minimising the impacts of contamination from these sources.

8.5.10 The type of material likely to be encountered in these areas is unknown. Notwithstanding this, the draft CoCP sets out measures to monitor for and respond to any pollution incidents and unsuspected contamination, in line with best practice. HS2 Ltd would consult with any landowners or operators, as appropriate. Where significant contamination is encountered, a suitable remediation strategy would be developed in consultation with the local authority prior to implementation. Remediation would be undertaken as part of the construction phase.

65 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Land quality

Likely residual significant effects

8.5.11 The assessment shows that, through the application of the CoCP and embedded design measures during the construction phase, there would be no significant effect between current baseline and post-construction conditions.

8.5.12 Where remediation of contaminated soils or groundwater has been carried out, there would be a beneficial effect for the environment in the long term with respect to contamination. Mining/mineral resources Assessment of impacts and mitigation

8.5.13 There are no areas in this part of the route that are currently being worked or that have planning permission with respect to mining or mineral resources. In addition, this area of the route is not located in a preferred extraction area, a mineral safeguarding area or a mineral consultation area. Likely residual significant effects

8.5.14 There are no residual effects associated with mining and mineral resources predicted in this area. Geo-conservation resources Assessment of impacts and mitigation

8.5.15 There are no geo-conservation resources identified within the study area. Likely residual significant effects

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

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

8.6.2 Facilities to be accommodated at Calvert IMD would include: storage facilities for materials and equipment; fuelling activities; offices; welfare areas for maintenance staff; electrical and mechanical workshops; a gantry crane; and back-up power generation.

8.6.3 Two auto-transformer stations would be constructed in this area. An auto-transformer station can, in principle, be a source of contamination through accidental discharge or leaks of coolants. However, the proposed stations, in common with other modern substations, would use secondary containment appropriate to the level of risk. Calvert IMD would also store and use fuels, oils and other maintenance materials. These would be stored in accordance with best practice to avoid localised impacts in the long term. Maintenance and operation of the railway would be in accordance with environmental legislation and best practice. Spillage and pollution response procedures similar to those outlined in the draft CoCP would be established for all high risk activities and employees would be trained in responding to such incidents.

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

66 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Land quality

8.6.5 Where contamination remediation works have been carried out during the construction period, there may need to be a requirement to undertake post-remediation monitoring of, for example, groundwater. Likely residual significant effects

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

67 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Landscape and visual assessment 9 Landscape and visual assessment 9.1 Introduction 9.1.1 This section of the report presents the assessment of the likely significant landscape and visual effects. It starts by describing the current conditions found within and around the route of the Proposed Scheme, the nature and pattern of buildings, streets, open space and vegetation and their interrelationships within the rural environment. A summary of the significant effects that would arise from the construction and operation on landscape character areas and visual receptors is provided. 9.2 Policy framework 9.2.1 The Aylesbury Vale Local Plan contains a number of policies that seek to ensure that development respects and complements the existing landscape character, conserves existing natural features of value, and respects important public views and skylines (Saved Policy RA.8, GP.35, GP.38, GP.39, and GP.40).

9.2.2 The Non-Statutory Cherwell Local Plan contains policies that aim to limit the likely impact of any development on the natural and built environment, and conserve and enhance local landscape character (Policy EN1, Policy EN34, Policy EN35, and Policy EN37). In addition, Cherwell Local Plan Saved Policy C7 seeks to resist development that would cause demonstrable harm to the topography and character of the landscape.

9.2.3 A number of policies relevant to landscape and visual assessment are included in the Proposed Submission Cherwell Local Plan 2012, including: • Policy ESD 13: Local Landscape Protection and Enhancement; • Policy ESD 15:Green Boundaries to Growth; and • Policy ESD 17: The Oxford Canal.

9.2.4 In addition, the local and regional guidance relevant to this assessment includes a range of published character assessments and local green infrastructure strategies, such as the Aylesbury Vale Landscape Character Assessment33. 9.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 9.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the landscape and visual impact assessment are set out in Volume 1.

9.3.2 There are no topic specific assumptions or limitations within this study area. 9.4 Environmental baseline 9.4.1 The following section sets out the baseline conditions for the landscape and visual assessment in the study area. Maps LV-11-27 to LV-11-30 show the location of landscape character areas and visual receptor viewpoints.

9.4.2 Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode are located within the low-lying, gently undulating landscape of clay vales. The character of the area is rural. Settlement is generally dispersed, with three notable villages within the study area: Steeple Claydon, Twyford, and Preston Bissett. Land use comprises mixed agriculture, with pasture dominating. Field sizes are modest and generally quite regular in shape reflecting the 18th and 19th century enclosure pattern. Woodland cover, except to the east of Calvert, is low, but mature field hedgerows

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

68 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Landscape and visual assessment

provide enclosure and structure to the landscape. To the south, the rural character is already adversely affected by the presence of Calvert landfill. Principal historic landscape elements include the listed building and designated parkland at Claydon House, and conservation areas in Chetwode, Twyford, and Preston Bissett. Industrial heritage is reflected in two flooded former clay pits in Calvert and the dismantled former GCML. A network of minor roads and tracks traverse the study area, with the only major road being the A421 which passes along the northern edge of the study area. The rail lines in the area carry freight, infrequently carrying landfill waste to Calvert Pits. There are two long distance paths crossing the landscape: the Cross Bucks Way and the Bernwood Jubilee Way. Landscape character assessment

9.4.3 Landscape character areas (LCAs) are defined as areas with broadly homogenous characteristics and are influenced by national and district published character assessments. The Proposed Scheme in this area is located within two national character areas (NCA) 108: Upper Thames Clay Vales, and 88: The Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire Claylands, as defined by the Character of England mapping and Natural England34. For the purposes of this assessment, the study area has been sub-divided into seven discrete LCAs, three of which are most likely to be affected. Claydon Bowl LCA, a bowl-shaped wooded lowland landscape; Twyford Vale LCA, a shallow gently sloping farmed valley; and Preston Bissett Plateau Edge LCA, an undulating farmed plateau, all have a high sensitivity to change. Visual baseline

9.4.4 Viewpoints, split into residential, recreational and transport have been selected to represent groups of receptors within this area. Residential (i.e. residents) and recreational receptors have a high sensitivity to change, whilst transport receptors (i.e. users of private or public transport) have a medium sensitivity to change. The residential receptors in this area are located at Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford, Chetwode and at dispersed properties along both sides of the route. Recreational receptors are concentrated along various PRoW throughout the area, including the Bernwood Jubilee Way and Cross Bucks Way. Transport receptors are located on roads throughout the study area and have a medium sensitivity to change. There are no protected views located within the study area. 9.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

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

9.5.2 Measures that have been incorporated into the draft CoCP to avoid or reduce landscape and visual effects during construction include: • Maximising the retention and protection of existing trees and vegetation where reasonably practicable; • Use of well-maintained hoardings and fencing; • Replacement of any trees intended to be retained which may be accidentally felled or die as a consequence of construction works;

34 Natural England (1996); The Character of England 1996; http//www.naturalengland.org.uk/publications/nca/default.aspx.

69 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Landscape and visual assessment

• Early implementation of planting and other landscape measures where there is no conflict with construction activities or other requirements of the Proposed Scheme; and • Appropriate maintenance of planting and seeding works and implementation of management measures, to continue through the construction period as landscape works are completed.

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

9.5.4 The key changes in landscape character would arise from the presence of construction plant and activity within this rural landscape, the removal of or change to existing landscape elements, and the presence of three construction worksites.

9.5.5 Changes would be most noticeable in Claydon Bowl LCA. There would be vegetation losses arising from the construction of the Calvert IMD and temporary railhead. There would also be impacts on characteristic views south due to cranes associated with the worksite at School Hill and the construction of overbridges at School Hill, Addison Road and Steeple Claydon Footpath No. 8.

9.5.6 Significant effects would also arise within both Twyford Vale LCA and Preston Bissett Plateau Edge LCA due to the impact on existing topography of proposed new cuttings and embankments and due to a reduction in tranquillity. This construction activity would contrast with the existing rural character of the three LCAs.

9.5.7 Table 9 summarises the LCAs that would be significantly affected during construction of the Proposed Scheme.

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

Claydon Bowl LCA High High Major adverse Construction activities associated with the IMD and EWR alignment causing severance of farmland and hedgerow vegetation losses. Changes to topography and vegetation losses arising from the construction of the Calvert cutting and a series of overbridges along the Proposed Scheme. Construction activities arising from the new WRG sidings.

Twyford Vale LCA High High Major adverse Loss of farmland, vegetation and changes to local topography associated with the construction of the IMD and temporary railhead. Changes to topography and vegetation losses arising from the construction of the Proposed Scheme including the Calvert Cutting, the Twyford embankment, Twyford cutting and Godington embankment and a series of overbridges.

Preston Bissett Plateau Edge LCA High High Major adverse Loss of farmland, vegetation and changes to local topography associated with the construction of the Chetwode cutting and Barton Hartshorne embankment. Changes to the local gentle topography arising from the construction of a series of overbridges along the Proposed Scheme.

Table 9: Significant landscape effects during construction

70 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Landscape and visual assessment

Visual assessment

9.5.8 Residents of dwellings along the route would experience visual impacts, as the construction works would be visible, including plant and machinery. Changes would also be apparent from a number of PRoW throughout the area, including the Bernwood Jubilee Way, and from roads including West Street in Twyford (see map LV-11-28). In particular, residents in Steeple Claydon would experience visual impacts associated with the construction of the Calvert IMD, during the day and at night. Works to construct road and footpath crossings would also be visible. School Hill overbridge would be visible from residential receptors in Calvert. The West Street and Perry Hill accommodation overbridges would be visible from receptors east of Twyford. In addition, construction activity associated with the viaducts at Twyford and Godington would be visible from nearby residential and recreational receptors. The construction of the Proposed Scheme and associated earthworks would also be visible close to residential and recreational receptors around Chetwode.

9.5.9 There would be no perceptible views from receptors to the south-west of the Proposed Scheme between Poundon and Fringford and to the north-east of the route between Steeple Claydon and Hillesden where vegetation cover restricts extensive views. Receptors to the north-east of the route around Tingewick and Finmere would have no views since built-form, mature woodland, and hedgerow vegetation obscures extensive views.

9.5.10 An assessment of effects arising from lighting during construction where( required) will be prepared and reported in the formal ES.

9.5.11 Table 10 summarises the views which would be significantly affected by the construction of the Proposed Scheme. The numbers in brackets identify the viewpoint locations which are shown on maps LV-11-27 to LV-11-30. The assessed level of effect is considered to be the maximum level at the height of construction activity in the view at each location. The duration of this effect would in most instances be less than the entire construction period and will be considered in the formal ES. An indicative construction programme is set out in Section 2.3 of this report.

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

Residential receptors

View north-east from the School Hill-Brackley Lane junction, Calvert High High Major adverse (151.2.001) Visibility of construction of School Hill overbridge construction works. Vegetation losses along existing railway line.

Views south-west from residential properties in Steeple Claydon High High Major adverse (154.2.002) (154.2.003) (156.002) Visibility of construction of IMD and temporary railhead across open farmland from both viewpoints. Visibility of construction of Addison Road overbridge, West Street overbridge and School Hill overbridge specifically from 154.2.002. Visibility of construction of the Steeple Claydon footbridge No.8 and Addison Road overbridge specifically from 154.2.003.

Views north from residential properties in Twyford (155.2.001 ) High High Major adverse (155.2.002) 157.2.001) Visibility of construction of Proposed Scheme filtered through hedgerow vegetation. Visibility of construction of West Street overbridge and Twyford footbridge specifically from 155.2.001. In the case of 157.2.001 the Twyford footbridge would be particularly prominent.

71 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Landscape and visual assessment

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

Views south-west from scattered residential properties on the east on High Medium Moderate adverse the Proposed Scheme (158.2.001 and 160.2.001) Visibility of construction of the Proposed Scheme 600m away. Twyford footbridge construction works visible in particular from 158.2.001. Construction of Twyford Mill and Church view overbridges specifically visible from 160.2.001.

View south-west from Main Street, Preston Bissett (162.2.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of construction of Godington Viaducts No. 1 and 2 700m away together with the construction of the Chetwode Bridleway overbridge.

View south-west from The Green, Chetwode (164.2.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of construction of the Proposed Scheme, namely the Chetwode cutting. In particular the construction of The Green road diversion and consequent vegetation losses.

View north-east from Barton Hill Farm (165.2.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of construction of the Chetwode Cutting close to the viewer including vegetation losses along the dismantled railway line. Visibility of construction of the School End overbridge.

View south-west from residential properties in Chetwode (166.2.001 High High Major adverse and 166.2.003) Visibility of the construction activities associated with the Chetwode Cutting and the School End overbridge. At 166.2.003 loss of a mature hedgerow boundary would be apparent in the distance.

Recreational receptors

View west from near Great Pond Farm High Medium Moderate adverse (152.3.001) Visibility of the construction of the Calvert Cutting and the WRG sidings. Visibility of construction of the School Hill overbridge further afield.

View south-west from PRoW south of Stone Court Farm High High Major adverse (154.3.001) Visibility of construction of the western end of the IMD including IMD buildings. Visibility of the temporary railhead close to the viewer. Visibility of construction of West Street overbridge and Perry Hill footbridge further afield.

View south-west from the PRoW south of Steeple Claydon Allotment High High Major adverse Gardens (154.3.002) Visibility of the construction of the eastern end of IMD and temporary railhead. Visibility of construction of Steeple Claydon footbridge No.8, Addison Road, School Hill and The Green and West Street overbridges.

View south-west from PRoW near Three Bridge Mill, Twyford High Medium Moderate adverse (156.3.001) Visibility of construction of the Proposed Scheme and the Twyford overbridge in the background.

View north-east from PRoW between Twyford and Twyford Mill High Medium Moderate adverse (157.3.001) Visibility of construction of the Proposed Scheme including the Church View overbridge, the Twyford Viaduct and Twyford Mill overbridge.

View south-west from PRoW south-west of Cowley Lodge (158.3.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of the construction of the Proposed Scheme close to the viewer including construction of the Twyford footbridge.

72 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Landscape and visual assessment

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

View north from the PRoW west of Twyford Mill (159.3.01) High Low Moderate adverse Visibility of the construction of the Proposed Scheme Twyford cutting and Godington embankment approximately 800m away. Partial visibility of the construction of the Twyford Mill overbridge (some vegetation screening).

View north-east from Bridleway north of Twyford Mill (159.3.03) High High Major adverse Construction of the Twyford Mill overbridge would be clearly visible close to the viewer (approximately 50m).

View south from PRoW west of Cowley Farm High Low Moderate adverse (160.3.001) Visibility of construction of the Twyford and Portway embankments approximately 570m away. Visibility of the construction of the Twyford footbridge and Church View overbridge.

View north from PRoW east of Moat Farm (161.3.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of construction of the Godington Viaduct No. 1 and 2 approximately 420m away. Visibility of the construction of the Chetwode bridleway.

View north-east from the PRoW south of Manthorn Farm (163.3.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of construction of the Chetwode cutting close to the viewer (approximately 125m). Visibility of construction of The Green overbridge at Manthorn Farm. Loss of Manthorn Farm Wood.

Transport receptors

View south-west from School Hill, east of Calvert (152.4.01) Medium Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of construction of the Calvert Cutting, School Hill overbridge and Calvert overbridge.

View north from West Street, east of Twyford Medium High Major adverse (155.4.01) Visibility of construction of the Proposed Scheme close to the viewer (approximately 130m away). Visibility of construction of West Street overbridge and Twyford Footbridge.

View north from Main Street, south-east of Twyford (155.4.02) Medium Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of construction of the Proposed Scheme at approximately 1km away. Visibility of construction of the West Street overbridge and Twyford footbridge.

View south-west from road west of Lake Farm Medium High Major adverse (156.4.01) Visibility of the construction of the Perry Hill footbridge very close and directly in front of the viewer. Visibility of construction of the West Street overbridge. The construction of the Calvert cutting and the IMD would be partly visible further afield.

View north-east from School End, west of Chetwode (165.4.01) Medium High Major adverse Visibility of the Chetwode cutting construction works close to the viewer. The construction of the School End overbridge would be visible, close to the viewer.

Table 10: Significant visual effects during construction

73 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Landscape and visual assessment

Likely residual significant effects

9.5.12 Due to the highly visible nature of the construction activities along the Proposed Scheme there would be significant residual effects, as set out in Table 9 and 10 above, although they would be temporary and reversible in nature, lasting only for the duration of the construction works. Residual effects would generally arise from the foreground visibility of construction activity associated with the Proposed Scheme earthworks, overbridges, road realignments, and viaducts. Residual effects would be experienced by residential receptors in and around Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode, and from scattered residential properties along the route. In addition, significant residual effects would remain for a number of recreational and transport receptors in this area. 9.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

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

9.6.2 The assessment assumes that the measures set out above will be implemented; however, they may be subject to refinement following further survey and assessment work and in response to the consultation on this draft ES. Landscape assessment

9.6.3 The potential significant effects on the landscape in 2026 (i.e. the assumed year of opening) would occur within all three of the LCAs experiencing effects during construction. The effects on the LCAs would arise from the introduction of the following elements into the rural environment: Calvert IMD; new engineered landforms cutting across the existing gently undulating landscape; 8m high overhead line equipment (OLE); elevated road and footpath overbridges; and regular high speed trains.

9.6.4 Lighting associated with night-time operation at the Calvert IMD would also impact character at night within both Claydon Bowl LCA and Twyford Vale LCA.

9.6.5 Table 11 summarises the LCAs that would be significantly affected by the Proposed Scheme in year one of operation (2026).

74 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Landscape and visual assessment

LCA Sensitivity of Magnitude of Level of effect to LCA change LCA35

Claydon Bowl LCA High High Major adverse Presence of the Proposed Scheme, in particular the Calvert Cutting. Presence of the proposed IMD and WRG sidings and a series of overbridges (School Hill, Calvert Green and Addison Road bridges). These changes would sever an agricultural landscape with consequent vegetation losses.

Twyford Vale LCA High Medium Moderate adverse Presence of the Proposed Scheme, in particular the Calvert Cutting and the Twyford embankment. Presence of the proposed IMD and a series of overbridges (EWR, Perry Hill, Church View Farm overbridges). Presence of the Twyford viaduct. These changes would sever an agricultural landscape with consequent vegetation losses.

Preston Bissett Plateau Edge LCA High Medium Moderate adverse Presence of the Proposed Scheme, in particular the Chetwode Cutting and the Barton Hartshorne embankment. Presence of the Chetwode auto-transformer station and a series of overbridges (The Green and School End overbridges and Barton footbridge). These changes would sever an agricultural landscape with consequent vegetation losses.

Table 11: Significant landscape effects during operation year 1 (2026)35 Visual assessment

9.6.6 The potential significant effects on views in 2026 (i.e. the assumed year of opening) apply to fewer viewpoints than would be affected during construction. Whilst significant impacts remain, mitigation earthworks and planting at a number of locations along the Proposed Scheme would act as screening in future years. The screening potential would increase over time as planting matures and increases in height.

9.6.7 The most apparent changes to views would be at viewpoints where the route of the Proposed Scheme is raised on viaduct or embankment, for example the 4m high, 60m long Twyford viaduct (see map LV-11-29). Considerable changes to views would also arise in the vicinity of the Calvert IMD, with residential receptors in Steeple Claydon particularly affected. Night-time operation of the IMD would also impact views at night from Steeple Claydon.

9.6.8 There would be no perceptible views from receptors between Poundon and Fringford to the south-west of the route where vegetation cover restricts extensive views. The area north-east of the Proposed Scheme between Steeple Claydon and Hillesden would have no views, since hedgerow vegetation restricts extensive views. To the north-east, around Tingewick and Finmere, built-form, mature woodland, and vegetation obscure extensive views.

9.6.9 Views of the Proposed Scheme would be partially obscured by the rising landform at Cowley Farm, by the retention of intervening hedgerows and trees at Preston Bissett and due to the route being within a cutting at Chetwode.

9.6.10 Substantial changes would also occur where highway and PRoW diversions introduce overbridges and associated engineered landforms to the gently undulating landscape. West Street and Perry Hill accommodation overbridges would impact views from the east of Twyford, and Twyford footbridge would impact views from residential and recreational receptors in and around Twyford.

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

75 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Landscape and visual assessment

9.6.11 Photomontages have been produced illustrating the view of the Proposed Scheme during operation year 1 from viewpoints 154-2-003 from Steeple Clayton (figure LV-12-37), 157-2-001 from properties in Twyford (figure LV-12-38) and 164-2-001 from The Green, Chetwode (figure LV-12-39).

9.6.12 Table 12 summarises the visual receptors that would be significantly affected by the Proposed Scheme in year one of operation (2026). The numbers in brackets identify the viewpoint locations which are shown on maps LV-11-27 to LV-11-30.

Viewpoint Sensitivity of Magnitude of Level of effect to visual receptors change visual receptors36

Residential receptors

View north-east from the School Hill-Brackley Lane junction, High Medium Moderate adverse Calvert (151.2.001) Visibility of School Hill overbridge and the overhead line equipment (OLE) associated with the Proposed Scheme.

View south-west from Addison Road, Steeple Claydon High Medium Moderate adverse (154.2.002) (156.2.002) Visibility of IMD across open farmland as most prominent element above the line of the mitigation earthworks. Visibility of overhead power lines and Addison Road overbridge, West Street overbridge and School Hill overbridge.

View south-west from Church End, Steeple Claydon (154.2.003) High High Major adverse Visibility of IMD across open farmland as most prominent element above the line of the mitigation earthworks. Visibility of Steeple Claydon footbridge No.8 and Addison Road overbridge.

View north from Portway Road, Twyford (155.2.001) (155.2.002) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of the overhead power lines above the line of the mitigation earthworks restored to farmland filtered through hedgerow vegetation. Visibility of West Street overbridge, Perry Hill overbridge and Twyford footbridge.

View north-east from Church Gate, Twyford (157.2.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of the overhead power lines above the line of the mitigation earthworks restored to farmland filtered through hedgerow vegetation. Twyford footbridge would be particularly prominent.

View south-west from Cowley Farm (160.2.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of the proposed overhead power lines. Intervening hedgerows visually screen track level of Proposed Scheme. Visibility of Twyford Mill overbridge.

View south-west from Main Street, Preston Bissett (162.2.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of the Proposed Scheme including the Godington Viaducts No. 1 and 2 (700m away) together with the Chetwode Bridleway and accommodation access overbridge.

View south-west from The Green, Chetwode (164.2.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of The Green permanent road diversion directly in front of the viewer. Visibility of the Proposed Scheme OLE. Visibility of Chetwode auto-transformer station.

View south-west from School End, Chetwode (166.2.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of the School End overbridge directly in front of the viewer.

76 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Landscape and visual assessment

Viewpoint Sensitivity of Magnitude of Level of effect to visual receptors change visual receptors36

Recreational receptors

View south-west from PRoW south of Stone Court (154.3.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of the IMD buildings and structures above the line of the earthworks mitigation. Visibility of overbridges including West Street overbridge and Perry Hill footbridge further afield.

View south-west from PRoW south of Steeple Claydon High High Major adverse (154.3.002) Visibility of the proposed OLE. Visibility of Steeple Claydon footbridge No. 8, Addison Road overbridge, School Hill and The Green and West Street overbridges.

View south-west from PRoW south-west of Cowley Lodge High High Major adverse (158.3.001) Visibility of Proposed Scheme on embankment. Visibility of Twyford footbridge as prominent element directly in front of viewer.

View north-east from Bridleway north of Twyford Mill High High Major adverse (159.3.003) Visibility of Twyford Mill overbridge close to and directly in front of the viewer (approximately 50m).

View south from PRoW west of Cowley Farm (160.3.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of the OLE. Visibility of both the Twyford Footbridge and Church View overbridge.

View north-east from the PRoW south of Manthorn Farm High High Major adverse (163.3.001) Visibility of The Green overbridge as it crosses the Chetwode Cutting. Absence of Manthorn Farm Wood opens up new views. Visibility of the OLE.

Transport receptors

View north from West Street, east of Twyford Medium Medium Moderate adverse (155.4.01) Visibility of the Proposed Scheme, mainly the OLE, close to the viewer (approximately 130m away). Visibility of West Street overbridge and Twyford footbridge.

View south-west from road west of Lake Farm Medium Medium Moderate adverse (156.4.001) Visibility of Perry Hill footbridge very close and directly in front of the viewer. Visibility of the West Street overbridge. Visibility of the overhead power lines associated with the Proposed Scheme in the shallow Calvert cutting.

View north-east from School End, west of Chetwode Medium Medium Moderate adverse (165.4.001) Visibility of the School End overbridge close to the viewer as a prominent element Visibility of newly restored farmland to mitigation earthworks on south-west side of Chetwode cutting.

Table 12: Significant visual effects during operation year 1 (2026)36

9.6.13 Where planting has been proposed, effects in year 15 (2041) and 60 (2086) of operation would be reduced compared to year one (2026), due to the increased height and maturity of trees.

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

77 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Landscape and visual assessment

An assessment of effects for these assessment years will be prepared and presented within the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects

9.6.14 Due to the highly visible nature of the Proposed Scheme, significant residual effects would remain, as set out in Tables 11 and 12 above. Residual effects would arise as a result of the introduction of new viaduct structures, road realignments and overbridges associated with the Proposed Scheme. This would affect the character of the local landscape and views from residential receptors within Steeple Claydon and Twyford, and from PRoW along the route. Further mitigation

9.6.15 Further measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design are as follows: • Further mitigation planting to screen views of the Proposed Scheme; • Enhancing the linear extent of vegetation associated with the dismantled railway line between Twyford and Chetwode is to be retained where practicable. This would help screen views from residential properties around Twyford and from a number of PRoW west of the route; • The design of new features such as the Calvert IMD to be developed aesthetically to fit within the landscape setting; and • Balancing ponds at various locations along the route to be incorporated appropriately within the landscape earthworks and planting design strategy.

78 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Socio-economics 10 Socio-economics 10.1 Introduction 10.1.1 This section provides a summary of the assessment methodology and scope, environmental baseline, and likely significant economic and employment effects during construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme.

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

10.1.3 The beneficial and adverse socio-economic effects of the ProposedScheme are reported at two different levels; route-wide and CFA. Effects on levels of employment are reported at a route-wide level within Report 27 (Route-wide effects). Localised effects on businesses and observations on potential local economic effects are reported within eachCF A. 10.2 Policy framework 10.2.1 The planning policy documents (and their status) applicable to the area are described in Section 2. Policies of relevance to the socio-economic assessment are set out below.

10.2.2 Policy GP.17 of the Aylesbury Vale Local Plan37 and Policy EMP5 of the Non-Statutory Cherwell Local Plan seek to retain existing employment sites and uses. The Proposed Scheme runs along the eastern boundary of the Calvert brickworks which is designated in the Aylesbury Vale Local Plan as a Major Development Area under Policy RA.25 for mixed-use of housing and employment. The Proposed Scheme does not impact upon these policy designations.

10.2.3 Structure Plan Policy TR11 safeguards the EWR Route, close to the Scheme, and Policy TR15 supports it reopening and opposes development that would prejudice that objective. Local Plan Policy GP.25 seeks to prevent development that might prejudice the use of the East West Rail route between Bicester and Bletchley and the northward link from Aylesbury. Linked to this, Policy GP.26 seeks to prevent development that would prejudice station schemes or related rail transport proposals at Calvert. The Proposed Scheme does not impact upon these policies. 10.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 10.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the socio-economic assessment are set out in Volume 1. 10.4 Environmental baseline 10.4.1 Section 2.1 provides a general overview of the CFA which includes data of specific relevance to socio-economics, notably demographic and employment data. The following provides a brief overview in terms of employment, economic structure and labour market within the CFA.

10.4.2 The vast majority of the CFA, including the main settlements, lies within the Aylesbury Vale District of Buckinghamshire with a small portion lying within Cherwell District in Oxfordshire.

37 Aylesbury Vale District Council (2004), Local Plan: Saved Policies

79 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Socio-economics

10.4.3 In 2011, approximately 66,000 people worked in Aylesbury Vale and approximately 66,000 in Cherwell38. The respective employment rates39 recorded within the districts for 2011 were 73% and 72%, higher than those recorded for both the South East (68%) and England (65%)40. As of September 2012 the unemployment rates for Aylesbury Vale and Cherwell stood at 7% and 6% respectively, both below the England average of 8%41.

10.4.4 Within Aylesbury Vale District, the professional, scientific and technical services sector accounts for the largest proportion of businesses (17%), with the construction (12%), information and communication (8%) and business administration and support services (8%) sectors also accounting for a large proportion of businesses within the borough42. This is shown in Figure 443. For comparison, within the South East region, the professional, scientific and technical services sector also accounts for the largest number of businesses (16%), with construction (11%), retail (10%) and information and communication (8%) sectors also accounting for relatively large numbers of businesses within the region.

Professional, scientific & technical

Construction

Information & communication

Business administration and support services

Arts, entertainment, recreation and other services

Agriculture, forestry & fishing

Retail

Production

Aylesbury Vale Other South East 0% 5% 10%15% 20% 25% 30%35%

Figure 4: Business Sector Composition in Aylesbury Vale and the South East

Source: Office for National Statistics (2011), UK Business: Activity, Size and Location44 10.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

10.5.1 No significant direct effects on non-agricultural employment have been identified within the area.

38 Office for National Statistics (ONS) (2011), Business Register and Employment Survey 2011. 39 The proportion of working age (16-74 years) residents that are in employment. 40 ONS (2012), Census 2011. 41 ONS (2012), Annual Population Survey. 42 ONS (2011), UK Business: Activity, Size and Location. 43 Figure 4 presents the proportion of businesses within each business sector in the borough but not the proportion of employment by sector. 44 ‘Other’ includes; Accommodation & food services; Motor Trades; Transport and Storage; Finance and Insurance; Property; Public administration and defence; Education; and Health sectors.

80 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Socio-economics

10.5.2 There are plans to locate construction compounds for the Proposed Scheme at the following locations: • West Street main construction site; • School Hill satellite site; and • Chetwode satellite site.

10.5.3 Additionally there would also be a railhead north east of Calvert and to the south of Steeple Claydon supporting the construction of the IMD. The use of these sites could result in the creation of up to 2,230 person years of construction employment45 that, depending on skill levels required and the skills of local people, are potentially accessible to nearby residents and to others living further afield. It could also lead to opportunities within local businesses supplying to the project or through the expenditure of workers in local businesses. Quantification of direct and wider construction employment effects are captured at a route‑wide level (see Report 27 (Route-wide effects)).

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

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

10.6.1 The Proposed Scheme will create direct and wider operational employment opportunities at locations along the route including stations, train crew facilities and IMDs. There would be an IMD at Calvert which would create increased direct and wider employment. Initial estimates suggest that direct employment alone may be 250 jobs46. Some of these opportunities would be accessible to residents of the CFA, and wider opportunities to residents living further afield, either by working on the project itself or through opportunities for local businesses to supply the project or to benefit from expenditure of construction workers. Operational effects are captured and assessed at a route-wide level (see Report 27 (Route-wide effects)). Likely residual significant effects

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

45 Construction labour is reported in construction person years, where one construction person year represents the work done by one person in a year composed of a standard number of working days. 46 Appraisal of Sustainability (2011), Section 8.15 Economic Prosperity, Appendix III Chapter 2.

81 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Sound, noise and vibration 11 Sound, noise and vibration 11.1 Introduction 11.1.1 This section provides a summary of the likely noise and vibration significant effects associated with the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme for the Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode CFA. This section should be read in conjunction with Volume 1. 11.2 Policy framework 11.2.1 The policy framework for sound, noise and vibration is set out in Volume 1. 11.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 11.3.1 The approach to the assessment of sound, noise and vibration and the key assumptions are set out in Volume 1, with local variations as described below. A summary of the operating assumptions is given in Section 2.4 of this report. Assumptions

11.3.2 In addition to those given in Volume 1 and Section 2.4 of this report, the following assumptions apply to the assessment of sound, noise and vibration in this area.

11.3.3 It has been assumed that the Infrastructure Maintenance Depot (IMD) would operate mainly during the daytime when inspection and maintenance trains would be maintained and prepared and any necessary maintenance materials would generally be received. As soon as possible after the close of passenger service, inspection trains would depart from the IMD travelling the length of the Proposed Scheme whilst inspecting the railway infrastructure and equipment. As soon as possible after the issue of inspection trains, trains required for any planned maintenance would depart from the IMD to travel to the required maintenance location. Trains requiring urgent, unplanned maintenance identified by that night’s inspection would depart from either the IMD or the closest maintenance siding as required. Inspection and maintenance trains would return to the IMD before the start of passenger services. 11.4 Environmental baseline 11.4.1 The baseline sound environment for this area is generally low, as most of the land is of a rural nature with low traffic levels on the local roads and infrequent freight rail movements, on the rail line near to Calvert. Significant sound sources include the industrial facility near Calvert, distant road traffic, overflying aircraft, natural sounds (such as birdsong) and agricultural activities. Noise sensitive receptors in the area are mostly residential, with many isolated rural properties and small communities.

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

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

82 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Sound, noise and vibration

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

equivalent continuous sound level from 23:00 to 07:00 or LpAeq,night) from the Proposed Scheme would be approximately 10dB lower than the daytime sound level. The 50dB contour therefore

83 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Sound, noise and vibration

indicates the distance from the Proposed Scheme at which the night-time sound level would be 40dB. This contour represents where the lowest observed community noise effects would be expected to occur during the day (with respect to annoyance) and night (with respect to sleep disturbance). It is generally unlikely that there would be any adverse noise effects outside of this contour. With regard to sleep disturbance the assessment has also taken account of the maximum sound levels generated by each train pass by.

11.6.4 Residential receptors within the daytime 65dB contour, and therefore the night-time 55dB contour, have been identified as being likely to experience a significant adverse effect from HS2 noise alone. This is in line with the daytime threshold in the Noise Insulation Regulations 1996 and the Interim Target defined in the World Health Organization’s Night Noise Guidelines47,48.

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

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

11.6.7 This initial assessment has identified potential airborne noise effects on the following non‑residential receptors and land uses (e.g. schools, hospitals, hotels): • Holy Trinity Church, Godington (identified by SV13-A on maps SV-01); • St Mary and St Nicholas Church, Chetwode (identified by SV13-B on maps SV-01); and • St Marys Church, Twyford (identified by SV13-C on maps SV-01).

11.6.8 This initial assessment has identified potential airborne noise effects on the following quiet areas: • Claydon Bowl LCA which includes Decoypond Wood (identified by SV13-D on maps SV-01). The existing sound levels and character of this LCA where it is closest to the Proposed Scheme are affected by the operation of freight services on the existing rail line and the operation of Calvert Landfill Site.

11.6.9 Rights of way (outside of the LCAs identified in paragraph 11.6.8) are by their nature transitory routes, with users not staying in any one location for long periods. Train sound from the Proposed Scheme would be intermittent and its level would vary as the distance between the Proposed Scheme and the PRoW varies. Noise effects would generally be reduced by the landscape earthworks envisaged to reduce visual impact of the scheme and envisaged noise mitigation to protect other receptors. No significant noise effects have therefore been identified on PRoW within this CFA.

11.6.10 Further operational sources in this CFA will be located at the IMD proposed at Calvert, and the auto-transformer stations at Chetwode and Portway Farm (refer to maps CT‑06 Permanent features). The ongoing development of the scheme will incorporate noise mitigation into the engineering design in the form of noise barrier screening, plant location, design of public address system and acoustic enclosures.

47 Noise Insulation (Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems) Regulations 1996. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. 48 World Health Organization (2009) Night Noise Guidelines for Europe.

84 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Sound, noise and vibration

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

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

11.6.13 The envisaged mitigation (especially landscape earthworks and noise barriers) described in this section substantially reduces the potential airborne sound impacts and noise effects that would otherwise arise from the Proposed Scheme. Nonetheless, potential significant adverse noise effects have been identified for residential receptors in the following communities: • Calvert in the area of Brackley Lane closest to the route (identified by SV13-01 on maps SV‑01); • The north-eastern end of Twyford closest to the route in the area of Church Street, Grange Close and School Lane (identified by SV13-02 on maps SV-01); • Chetwode, at a number of properties closest to the route (identified bySV13-03 on maps SV-01); and • Approximately two individual receptors in the vicinity of Rosehill Farm, Chetwode and one in the vicinity of The Hermitage, Chetwode, that are closest to the Proposed Scheme (identified by SV13-D01 and SV13-D02 on maps SV-01).

11.6.14 At these receptors, the forecast noise from long term railway operation may exceed the daytime threshold set by the Noise Insulation Regulations 1996 and the night-time Interim Target identified in the World Health Organization Guidelines.

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

11.6.16 Improvements in the performance of mitigation that may further reduce or avoid the potential significant airborne noise effects are being considered for the formal ES. Potential options are included in Table 13.

Potential significant effect Further mitigation option

Chetwode Additional noise barriers and increased height noise barriers (SV-13-C03)

Twyford Increase the height of the noise barrier near Twyford to a 4m or 5m fence barrier, or equivalent (SV-13-C02) landscape earthwork false cutting, or combination of fence barrier and earthworks.

Calvert Increase the height of the noise barrier near Calvert to a 4m or 5m fence barrier, or equivalent (SV-13-C01) landscape earthwork false cutting, or combination of fence barrier and earthworks.

Table 13: Options for further mitigation

11.6.17 The suggested further mitigation options would reduce or avoid the potential significant airborne noise effect at these locations.

85 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Sound, noise and vibration

11.6.18 Noise insulation would be offered following the principles of the Noise Insulation egulationsR 1996 where, taking account of the mitigation incorporated into the Proposed Scheme, the

long term operational noise level exceeds 68dBLpAeq,18 hour. It is estimated that two dwellings – marked as SV13-D01 on maps SV-01 – would potentially experience noise levels higher than the insulation trigger level.

86 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Traffic and transport 12 Traffic and transport 12.1 Introduction 12.1.1 This section describes the likely impacts and effects arising from the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme through the Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode area on all forms of transport. 12.2 Policy framework 12.2.1 Transport related local government policy is contained in the local transport plan (LTP3) for Oxfordshire County Council and Buckinghamshire County Council.

12.2.2 Buckinghamshire County Council’s LTP3 covers the period 2011-2016 and is aligned with their Sustainable Community Strategy which sets the overarching long term plan for the county up to 202649,50. The LTP3 implementation plan refers to the Proposed Scheme passing through Buckinghamshire.

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

12.3.2 The scope of the assessment was discussed with the relevant local highway authorities including Oxfordshire County Council on 26 September 2012 and Buckinghamshire County Council on 30 November 2012.

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

12.3.4 It should be noted that the transport and passenger modelling of HS2 is continuing to be developed and therefore the assessment may be updated prior to the formal ES.

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

12.3.6 Materials and equipment for the construction of the rail line (ballast, sleepers, rail lines, overhead gantry etc.) would be delivered by rail to the temporary railhead at Calvert.

49 Buckinghamshire County Council (2011) Local Transport Plan 3 (2011-2016). 50 Bucks Strategic Partnership (2009) Sustainable Community Strategy for Buckinghamshire 2009-2026. Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire County Council.

87 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Traffic and transport

12.3.7 The following key limitations exist in the reporting of significant effects: • The capacity of junctions that would be affected by the ProposedScheme has not yet been assessed in detail. A more detailed assessment will be carried out for the formal ES where necessary; • Forecast future year traffic flows with and without the Proposed Scheme are based on an approach that does not take account of wider effects, e.g. redistribution and reassignment of traffic, modal shift and peak spreading. As a consequence, local transport effects may be over-estimated; • The forecast construction traffic flows, temporary diversions, traffic management arrangements and phasing of construction interventions are based on initial scheme designs. Subsequent design development will have resulted in some changes to the quantities of construction materials, the size of the workforce at each construction compound and the phasing of construction activities. Consequently, forecast construction traffic flows used for this assessment do not precisely reflect the currently Proposed Scheme. These will be updated and the assessment revised accordingly for the formal ES; and • The assessment assumes that construction lorry traffic would use the following routes between compounds and primary road and/or motorway network, as shown in maps CT‑05-054 – CT‑05-060: ȃȃ School Hill via Perry Hill, Edgcott Road, Marsh Gibbon Road, Edgcott Road, The Broadway & A41 and/or Perry Hill, Edgcott Road, Gawcott Road & A421, providing access to School Hill overbridge satellite site compound; ȃȃ Perry Hill via Edgcott Road, Marsh Gibbon Road, Edgcott Road, The Broadway & A41 and/or Edgcott Road, Gawcott Road & A421, providing access to West Street overbridge main construction site; ȃȃ Perry Hill via Edgcott Road, Marsh Gibbon Road, Edgcott Road, The Broadway & A41 and/or Edgcott Road, Gawcott Road & A421, providing access to the temporary railhead; ȃȃ School End via country lane & A421, providing access to Chetwode cutting satellite site compound; and ȃȃ A4421 via A421 and A41, providing access to Newton Purcell overbridge satellite site compound. 12.4 Environmental baseline 12.4.1 Traffic surveys were carried out during June and September 2012 and February 2013 to establish current traffic flows on the road network subject to assessment.

12.4.2 The highway network subject to assessment within this area includes the A4421, A421 and A41, School Hill, Perry Hill, Addison Road, Main Street, West Street, School End, Portway Road, The Green, Country Lane (between School End and A421) and Country Lane through Barton Hartshorn and Edgcott Road/Gawcott Road.

12.4.3 Bus services currently operate along the following roads within close vicinity of the Proposed Scheme: • School End; and • West Street.

88 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Traffic and transport

12.4.4 The Marylebone to Aylesbury line which extends beyond Aylesbury Parkway provides freight only services, operated by Freightliner and DB Schenker, carrying waste from London to Calvert.

12.4.5 There are several public footpaths, bridleways and cycleways that would cross the route of the Proposed Scheme, which includes the National Cycle Route 51 from Oxford to Milton Keynes. All PRoW which would be intersected by the Proposed Scheme have been surveyed, taking account of the nature of the PRoW and their usage. As appropriate, these covered weekday and weekend use. These indicated that none of the roads, footpaths, bridleways and cycleways that would cross the route are used by more than 40 people per day walking, cycling or riding with the exception of one being used by approximately 150 users per day.

12.4.6 Relevant traffic accident data has been obtained from Oxfordshire County Council and Buckinghamshire County Council for the three year period of 2009 to 2011, for the road network subject to assessment.

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

12.4.8 The future baseline traffic volumes have been calculated by applying growth factors derived from TEMPRO for the future years of 2021, 2026 and extrapolation to 2041. The factors have been derived for the individual road types and relevant wards. The baseline also takes account of the proposed changes to the Energy from Waste Facility at Greatmoor. No other changes to the traffic and transport baseline are anticipated in the Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode area. 12.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

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

12.5.2 The following measures have been included as part of the engineering design of the Proposed Scheme and would avoid or reduce impacts on travellers: • Railhead provided on the site as appropriate early in the construction programme to allow construction materials to be brought in by rail rather than road; • Construction materials and equipment transported along haul road adjacent to the Proposed Scheme alignment where reasonably practicable to reduce lorry movements on the public highway; • Defined lorry routes for construction equipment and materials to ensure only the most suitable roads are used; • The majority of roads crossing the Proposed Scheme would be kept open during construction resulting in no significant diversions; • Surplus excavated material would be reused wherever possible along the alignment of the Proposed Scheme which would reduce lorry movements on the public highway; and • Temporary alternative routes provided for PRoW closed during construction to reduce loss of amenity.

12.5.3 The temporary railhead at Calvert would receive a small number of trains every day delivering materials and equipment for the construction of the railway. The number of trains and the operation of the service would be agreed with Network Rail and as such would not be anticipated to have any significant impact on railway operations.

89 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Traffic and transport

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

12.5.5 Construction activities would result in the following permanent and temporary road closures and associated diversions lasting for a month or more, as shown in map CT‑05-054: • Temporary closure of School Hill requiring a temporary diversion via Perry Hill, West Street and Addison Road; • Temporary closure of West Street requiring a temporary diversion via Perry Hill, School Hill and Main Street; • Temporary closure of School End requiring a temporary diversion via Country Lane through Barton Hartshorn and A4421; and • Permanent closure of Perry Hill requiring a permanent diversion via School Hill, Main Street and West Street.

12.5.6 The temporary/permanent road closures would be sequenced so that only one of the roads would be closed at any one time to reduce impacts and consequential effects.

12.5.7 Temporary closure of School End and West Street would result in the temporary diversion of the 133 and 18 bus services.

12.5.8 Four construction compounds would be required with separate vehicular access points. The construction vehicle movements would therefore be spread over a number of roads. Access points to construction compounds are shown in maps CT‑05-054 – CT‑05-060.

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

12.5.10 The typical numbers of vehicles estimated to be generated by the site compounds in this area are shown in Table 14.

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

LGVs51 HGVs

Main construction site compound at West Perry Hill Up to 6 years 20-160 Up to 30 Street, map CT‑05-055

Temporary railhead, map CT‑05-055 Perry Hill Up to 3 years 70-220 Up to 10

Construction site compound at School Hill, School Hill Up to 5 years 70-200 Up to 30 map CT‑05-055

Construction site compound at Chetwode, School End Up to 2.5 years 40-80 Up to 10 map CT‑05-058

Table 14: Typical vehicle trip generation for site compounds in this area

12.5.11 Construction of the Proposed Scheme is anticipated to result in significant increases in traffic flows (i.e. more than 30% for HGV or all vehicles) on the following roads as a result of construction traffic and/or temporary closures/diversions: • School Hill; • Perry Hill; • Addison Road;

51 Workers commuting trips.

90 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Traffic and transport

• Main Street; • West Street; • Edgcott Road/Gawcott Road; • Country Lane between School End and A421; and • School End.

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

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

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

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

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

12.5.17 Likely residual significant effects in terms of an increase in journey time to vehicle occupants subject to temporary and permanent closures/diversions are likely to occur on the following roads: • School Hill (moderate significant effect); • Perry Hill (minor significant effect); • West Street (minor significant effect);and • School End (minor significant effect).

12.5.18 Likely residual significant effects in terms of delay to vehicle occupants due to increased congestion may occur to users of the following roads subject to more detailed assessment: • Addison Road (level of effect to be determined); • Country Lane through Barton Hartshorn (level of effect to be determined); • Country Lane between School End and A421 (level of effect to be determined); • School End (level of effect to be determined); • School Hill (level of effect to be determined); • Main Street (level of effect to be determined); • Perry Hill (level of effect to be determined); and • West Street (level of effect to be determined).

12.5.19 Users of the 133 and 18 bus services would be likely to experience a minor significant effect in delay as a consequence of the temporary service diversion.

91 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Traffic and transport

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

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

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

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

12.6.2 The following design and demand management measures have been included for the Proposed Scheme and would avoid or reduce impacts on travellers: • The majority of roads crossing the Proposed Scheme would be retained in their current location or very close to their current location resulting in no significant diversions of traffic onto alternative routes except for Perry Hill; • PRoW crossing the Proposed Scheme would be retained with localised diversions kept to a minimum; • Travel plans would be produced for the IMD at Calvert to reduce single occupancy car journeys and encourage use of sustainable modes of transport; and • A strategy would be produced for the IMD at Calvert, including movement of infrastructure by rail to reduce deliveries by road.

12.6.3 Transport related effects of the Proposed Scheme during operation would arise from traffic generated by the permanent closure of Perry Hill and the permanent Infrastructure Maintenance Depot (IMD) at Calvert. This would serve as the base for maintenance of infrastructure associated with the Proposed Scheme, including track, signalling equipment, cuttings and embankments.

12.6.4 Vehicle access to the IMD would be from West Street. Workers commuting to and from the IMD are forecast to generate approximately 270 two-way car trips per day. The IMD would predominantly receive deliveries of materials and equipment by rail, which would take place approximately twice a week. The number of deliveries received by HGVs would be anticipated to be no more than one per day.

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

12.6.6 Significant effects in terms of an increase in journey time to users of roads subject to permanent closures/diversions are likely to occur on the following road: • Perry Hill (minor significant effect).

92 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Traffic and transport

12.6.7 Significant effects in terms of delays to vehicle occupants could potentially occur to users of the following roads due to additional traffic generated by the IMD and/or the permanent diversion arising from the closure of Perry Hill: • School Hill (level of effect to be determined); • Main Street (level of effect to be determined); and • West Street (level of effect to be determined).

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

12.6.9 The assessments undertaken at this stage have indicated that for this area there are no other significant transport related effects during operation of the ProposedScheme. This is because all roads other than Perry Hill that would cross the route would be retained in or very close to their current location. Further mitigation

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

93 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Water resources and flood risk assessment 13 Water resources and flood risk assessment 13.1 Introduction 13.1.1 This section provides a summary of the likely impacts and significant effects on water resources and flood risk as a result of the construction and operation of the ProposedScheme. The assessment considers effects on surface water resources, groundwater resources and flood risk. 13.2 Policy framework 13.2.1 Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan Policy EN14 aims to prevent development in areas of flood risk, whilst Policy EN15 seeks to limit the potential for surface run-off. Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan Policies EN12 and EN13 seek to prevent development that would harm the quality of underground or surface water bodies including river corridors and watercourses and Cherwell Local Plan Saved Policy ENV7 provides similar protection.

13.2.2 Policy ESD 3 of the Cherwell District Council Proposed Submission Local plan seeks to encourage sustainable drainage methods. Policies ESD 6: Sustainable Flood Risk Management and ESD 7: Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) also seek to reduce the flood risk and increase the sustainability of new development. 13.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 13.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the water resources and flood risk assessment are set out in Volume 1.

13.3.2 The assessment of surface water resources and flood risk focuses on the Padbury Brook, its tributaries and their associated catchment areas and floodplains.The Padbury Brook has been modelled as part of the River Great Ouse 2D hydraulic model, provided by the Environment Agency (EA), which has been used in the design of the route crossings.

13.3.3 The groundwater resources assessment focuses on aquifers that are present within bedrock and overlying deposits. Effects on groundwater dependent terrestrial ecosystems GWDTEs)( and groundwater users/receptors (both licensed abstractions and private users) are also considered. 13.4 Environmental baseline 13.4.1 The route would cross the Padbury Brook in three locations: one crossing adjacent to Twyford, and a further two crossings to the north-east of Godington. The Padbury Brook is managed by the Bedford Internal Drainage Board (IDB) under the name of “the Twin Rivers”. The route would also cross tributaries of Padbury Brook adjacent to Twyford and at Barton Hartshorn, seven unnamed tributaries and various small ponds and field drains. Two tributaries of Padbury Brook referred to by the IDB as ‘M23’ and ‘M24’would flow through the proposed Calvert IMD.

13.4.2 The Padbury Brook is classified by the EA under the Water Framework Directive (WFD) as having an overall status of “Moderate” ecological quality and no assessment required of chemical quality52. Predictions for 2015 are the same as current conditions. All other tributaries of the Padbury Brook in the study area have no reported status at the present time.

52 Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy.

94 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

13.4.3 The Proposed Scheme would not cross any sites with statutory water conservation designations. The route would be within a designated surface water Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZ). There is one licensed surface water abstraction from a field drain south of Chetwode.

13.4.4 The bedrock geology underlying the majority of the route in this section is the Ancholme Group consisting of the Oxford Clay Formation, comprising mudstone, and the Kellaways Formation, comprising mudstone, siltstone and sandstone. The northern-most 500m of the route is underlain by the Cornbrash Formation of the Great Oolite Group described as limestone.

13.4.5 The Oxford Clay Formation is an aquitard not classed as groundwater vulnerable, and does not have any WFD classification53. No groundwater is expected to be encountered.

13.4.6 The Kellaways Formation, comprising mudstone, is a Secondary A Aquifer. The limited publicly available borehole records indicate that groundwater levels can be within 1m of the ground surface at Barton Hartshorn. Groundwater flow is expected to be towards the local watercourses.

13.4.7 The Great Oolite is a Principal Aquifer with High Vulnerability at outcrop, but with no vulnerability when overlain by Oxford Clay and Kellaways Formations.

13.4.8 The Cornbrash Formation is designated as a Secondary A Aquifer.

13.4.9 The Great Oolite is classified under the WFD as currently having an overall “Poor” status and being “At Risk”, with the objective to reach “Good” status by 2027.

13.4.10 Drift deposits are absent from the southern third of the route in this area. In central areas they consist of River Alluvium comprising clay, silts, sands and gravels and River Terrace Sands and Gravels generally following the route of Padbury Brook and its tributaries. Drift deposits of River Alluvium and River Terrace Sand and Gravels are both designated Secondary Aquifers. Otherwise the superficial deposits crossed are largely Tills which are designated as non‑aquifers.

13.4.11 Groundwater flow within these deposits is likely to be in continuity with the local watercourses. In the vicinity of Barton Hartshorn, drift deposits consist of Glacial Till, comprising a clay or sand matrix with sand and gravel but also with glaciofluvial sand and gravel deposits outcropping at the surface along the route northwest of School End. Groundwater flow within these deposits is likely to be limited but is expected to be towards the base of the valleys. Springs are marked on Ordnance Survey maps at the base of the drift deposits in the area of Barton Hartshorn. These springs may be supported by the underlying Kellaways Formation.

13.4.12 There are no licensed abstractions from groundwater within 1km of the route and no Source Protection Zones (SPZs) would be crossed. There are no British Geological Survey (BGS) records for water wells within 500m of the route. The EA reports one consented discharge within 2km of the route. There are four unlicensed private abstractions within 2km of the route according to Cherwell District Council.

13.4.13 Information from the Buckinghamshire Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA), Oxfordshire PFRA, Aylesbury Vale Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA), and the Cherwell

53 An aquitard is an area of geology that does not readily transmit water.

95 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

District SFRA has been used as the basis for the assessment of flood risk within the study area54,55,56,57,58.

13.4.14 The route would cross the Padbury Brook and one of its tributaries close to Twyford. Approximately 230m of Flood Zone 2 would be crossed at the main viaduct crossing, with a further approximately 290m of Flood Zone 2 crossed at the tributary. The route crosses the Padbury Brook twice again to the north of Godington, where a total of approximately 610m of Flood Zone 2 is crossed. A further approximately 145m of Flood Zone 2 would be crossed to the north-east of Newton Purcell where the route crosses another tributary of the Padbury Brook.

13.4.15 The EA Flood Map for Surface Water59 shows that there are areas at risk of surface water flooding to depths of over 0.3m during the 1 in 200 year annual probability (0.5%) event and less than 0.3m during the 1 in 30 year annual probability (3.33%) event. The areas at risk are to the south-east of the Calvert IMD where there are culverts below the existing railway, and along the tributaries of the Padbury Brook upstream of the extent of river flooding close to Twyford and Godington.

13.4.16 According to the British Geological Survey there is a “very high” susceptibility to groundwater flooding associated with superficial deposits of the Padbury Brook, where the Proposed Scheme would be on embankment or viaduct, and a “moderate” to “high” susceptibility to groundwater flooding at Chetwode where it would be in cutting. 13.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation

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

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

54 Jacobs (2011) Buckinghamshire Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment; Buckinghamshire County Council. 55 JBA (2011) Oxfordshire Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment; Oxfordshire County Council. 56 Aylesbury Vale District Council (2012) Aylesbury Vale Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, Level 2 Report. 57 Royal Haskoning (2007) Aylesbury Vale Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, Level 1 Report; Aylesbury Vale District Council. 58 Jacobs (2008) Cherwell District Strategic Flood Risk Assessment; Cherwell District Council. 59 Environment Agency (2010) Flood Map for Surface Water.

96 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

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

13.5.4 The Padbury Brook crossings entail construction of viaducts with the potential need for temporary diversion works on the Padbury Brook during construction. Post-construction, the Padbury Brook would be anticipated to revert to its existing alignment. This watercourse is of high value and the construction works could have moderate impacts, but the temporary diversion would be constructed in advance to meet the requirements of the EA in terms of flow capacity, and thus the impact on flow would be minor. There would be short term and temporary impacts on water quality, which would also be minor. Therefore, the impacts of construction on the overall flow and quality would be minor, and therefore would not be significant. HS2 Ltd is still exploring options for the diversion of the Padbury Brook, which may result in a permanent relocation. This will be discussed further in the formal ES.

13.5.5 Realignment of the existing railway infrastructure near Calvert would not affect any water features directly. Further consideration of the permanent realignment and temporary diversion works will be reported within the formal ES.

13.5.6 Generally, between Sheephouse Wood and Chetwode, the route would not penetrate below the clays of the Ancholme Group so the impact on groundwater is likely to be negligible, which would not be significant.

13.5.7 During construction past the Calvert landfill there could be a risk that leachate could be detected. Investigation of the status and risk that this landfill presents is still to be completed and will be considered in line with the requirements of the CoCP. Notwithstanding this, the draft CoCP sets out measures to monitor for and respond to any pollution incidents and unsuspected contamination, in line with best practice. HS2 Ltd would consult with any landowners or operators, as appropriate.

13.5.8 The proposed cutting past Chetwode with a maximum depth of about 10m would pass through the Kellaways Formation, which is overlain by a Till at the surface and potentially a thin layer of Glacial Sand and Gravels beneath the Till. These are not likely to contain any significant groundwater. The cutting, therefore, would be unlikely to affect groundwater in any significant manner. Any drainage from the cutting during construction would be returned either to ground or to the area of the small spring60 about 200m south of the route. This would reduce any adverse impacts during construction, which would continue into operation via the permanent track drainage. HS2 Ltd is continuing to assess the potential for temporary dewatering on groundwater levels, flows and quality during construction, which will be reported in the formal ES.

13.5.9 Nearer to Newton Purcell the Proposed Scheme would cut through the Great Oolite aquifer to a depth of about 2m. There would be the potential that if this encountered groundwater (which would have a high value) there could be a minor impact on shallow groundwater flow, which would not be significant. Drainage during construction from the cutting would be returned to ground or to local watercourses and this impact will continue into operation via permanent track drainage. The works to the Padbury Brook (and its tributaries) near Twyford and Godington would require temporary diversions, scaffolding and temporary piers, which would cause a combined minor adverse impact on river flood risk to local receptors, with an effect which would not be significant. Any flood storage mitigation that would be required would be constructed prior to works in Flood Zones 2 and 3 of Padbury Brook and tributaries (see map CT‑04-12).

60 It is considered that this spring could support the surface abstraction licence in the nearby location.

97 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

13.5.10 The crossing of the Barton Hartshorn tributary would require a temporary diversion due to the construction of an embankment. The impact on river flood risk would be minor adverse and so not a significant effect.

13.5.11 The Calvert IMD would have a larger footprint in the construction phase (due to the railhead) than its final size for the operations phase. During the construction phase this would necessitate temporarily culverting the IDB M23 watercourse for an additional length of approximately 300m, i.e. in addition to a new permanent culvert beneath the smaller footprint of the post construction IMD. The design of the extended temporary culvert is being developed and there would be the potential for an adverse impact on upstream surface water flood risk associated with this watercourse throughout the construction phase.Sufficient capacity through this extended culvert would be required to convey the 1 in 100 year annual probability (1%) flood flows, including an allowance for climate change and for the decreased efficiency as a result of friction and turbulence in the longer culvert.

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

13.5.13 There would be the potential that if there was undetected leachate from Calvert landfill entering construction areas, there could be significant effects on the receiving watercourse where those areas would be discharged. The scale of effect would depend on the quality of the leachate if this was present, and this cannot be predicted. Although unlikely, this will be the subject of further assessment and would also require pre-construction investigations.

13.5.14 Residual effects have been identified in relation to flood risk at the Calvert IMD site where the design of culverting works on the IDB M23 watercourse for the construction phase are still being developed. Further mitigation

13.5.15 Further measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design include: • As a further precaution against the possibility of a future occurrence of leakage, HS2 Ltd will continue to liaise with FCC Environment Ltd on any further measures that might be required to ensure adequate management of potential leachates associated with the Calvert landfill; and • In order to ensure that the temporary culvert of the IDB M23 watercourse does not compromise the permanent condition of the watercourse, monitoring will extend into operation as agreed with the EA, with appropriate remedial action being taken if required. 13.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation

13.6.1 The Proposed Scheme has been designed to control impacts on the water environment through the following: • Drainage has been designed to reduce the rate and volume of run-off from the railway and prevent an increase in flood risk;

98 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

• Sustainable drainage systems (SuDS), where appropriate, have been included to encourage water to soak back into the ground; and where drainage or cuttings intercept groundwater flow; and • SuDS would also provide opportunities to reduce the effect of run-off on water quality by reducing potential contaminants through filtration, vegetation absorption or settlement.

13.6.2 Pollution control guidance would be adopted for maintenance of the Proposed Scheme.

13.6.3 All standard drainage, including drainage from associated access roads and hardstandings, would discharge either to sewer or to SuDS attenuation ponds, prior to subsequent discharge to sewer/watercourses, as reasonably practicable in each case. All discharges to watercourses would be conducted in accordance with EA conditions with respect to quality and flow.

13.6.4 No permanent impacts associated with the watercourse crossings and diversions would be anticipated. In order to ensure that conditions within the watercourses stabilise appropriately following construction, monitoring would extend into operation in agreement with the EA.

13.6.5 There could be an impact to surface water quality within the vicinity of the route adjacent to the Calvert landfill, arising from the potential for the HS2 drainage network to intercept landfill leachate in the event that the landfill leaks. While any such leakage would be the responsibility of the landfill operator to control at source, the new drains may develop a new pathway which could result in increased risk to surface watercourses. The local surface watercourses are considered to be of moderate value and hence the unmitigated effect on surface water is considered to be significant.

13.6.6 At the Calvert IMD, the permanent realignment and instalment of culverts for watercourses IDB M23 and M24 would have the potential to result in moderate effects that extend through the first phases of operation on the flow and quality in the watercourses downstream of the IMD. However, with appropriate SuDS designs the quality effects would be very short term and would be expected to return to neutral without further mitigation as the diverted sections become established. In order to ensure that conditions within the watercourse are not compromised, monitoring to be agreed with the EA will extend into operation, with appropriate remedial action being taken if required. Therefore the overall effect on hydrology of the new alignments for M23 and M24 would not be significant.

13.6.7 The culverts constructed within the unnamed tributary watercourses of the Padbury Brook have the potential to result in slight impacts that extend through the first stages of operation. Effects would be expected to return to neutral without further mitigation as the altered section becomes established. The impacts would be minor on these moderate value receptors and overall the effect would not be significant.

13.6.8 The operational effects of the scheme on groundwater resources would not be significant where it would run on or within Ancholme Group units or Glacial Till, which are aquitards (i.e. there is no significant groundwater to be affected). The impact on groundwater in the Kellaway Beds, Great Oolite Formation and Glacial Sands and Gravels would be localised due to the relatively shallow nature of the cuttings. Railway drainage networks would be designed to ensure groundwater seeping into the cuttings was discharged to ground or into watercourses that would normally receive some groundwater flow. Therefore it is considered the impacts would be minor to negligible and the overall effects would not be significant.

13.6.9 Any loss of floodplain storage would be mitigated by the creation of flood storage capacity upstream of the crossings, on an appropriate basis in consultation with the EA, and will be confirmed as part of the formal ES.

99 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

13.6.10 The viaduct crossing of the Padbury Brook at Twyford would have embankments in the floodplain, which would reduce flood storage. The embankments have the potential to throttle flow in the floodplain at Twyford. A minor permanent diversion of the western of the two channels at the viaduct crossing would be required. Assuming that there are no piers located within the eastern channel at the viaduct crossing of the Padbury Brook, there would be moderate adverse impacts from flood risk on local receptors in the vicinity of these elements of the Proposed Scheme. Although these effects could be of limited upstream extent, this would be a significant effect. This will be confirmed in the formal ES once detailed hydraulic modelling of the Padbury Brook has been completed.

13.6.11 The crossing of Padbury Brook at Godington involves the construction of embankments and two short viaducts to cross the floodplain. Nearby, a small watercourse would have to be placed in a culvert to allow it to pass below the route. The viaduct piers would encroach on the floodplain and remove floodplain storage, as would the embankments required for the route. There would also be reduction in flows through the floodplain as a result of the constriction on available volume for flow to occur, with a resulting moderate adverse impact from flood flows and a significant effect on local receptors. This will be confirmed in the formal ES once detailed hydraulic modelling of the Padbury Brook has been completed.

13.6.12 East of Newton Purcell, an extension to an existing culvert would be required to convey a tributary of the Padbury Brook beneath the route. The culvert would be sized for more than the 1 in 100 year annual probability (1%) flood with allowances for climate change.The embankment would intrude on the watercourse floodplain so there could be a need to provide compensatory storage. Mitigation storage would be provided on an appropriate basis in consultation with the EA, and will be confirmed as part of the formal ES.This would not be a significant effect.

13.6.13 An embankment and associated noise mitigation bunds would extend within the floodplain of the M24 watercourse at the Calvert IMD, causing a reduction in available floodplain storage. This would result in an adverse impact on the risk of flooding on local receptors, which would be significant.

13.6.14 A permanent culvert would be required to convey the IDB M23 watercourse beneath the Calvert IMD. This would be downstream of the existing culvert and would be designed to convey 1 in 100 year annual probability (1%) flood flows with an allowance for climate change. This would result in a neutral effect on the risk of surface water flooding on local receptors, which is not significant.

13.6.15 There could be a loss of floodplain storage at the IDB M24 that would result in a significant effect. HS2 Ltd is continuing to explore options for this watercourse, which will be confirmed as part of the formal ES.

13.6.16 The cutting past Chetwode would cross an area of superficial deposits marked as having a high groundwater flood risk. The cutting would drain these deposits locally, and this would therefore have a minor positive impact on groundwater flood risk in the vicinity, which would not be significant. Effects from other groundwater flooding risks are deemed not significant. Likely residual significant effects

13.6.17 There would be the potential that if there was undetected leachate from Calvert landfill entering the track drainage, there could be significant effects on the watercourse where the drainage would be discharged. The scale of effect would depend on the quality of the leachate if this was present, and this cannot be predicted. This will be the subject of further assessment and would also require pre-construction investigations.

100 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I Water resources and flood risk assessment

13.6.18 There would be a residual significant effect due to the potential loss of floodplain storage at IDB the M24 watercourse at the Calvert IMD.

13.6.19 Viaduct piers for the crossing of Padbury Brook at Godington could cause a reduction in flows through the floodplain and remove floodplain storage, as would the embankments required for the route, resulting in a significant effect.

13.6.20 No further significant residual effects are predicted. Further mitigation

13.6.21 Further measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design include: • As a further precaution against the possibility of a future occurrence of leakage, HS2 Ltd will continue to liaise with FCC Environment Ltd on any further measures that might be required to ensure adequate management of potential leachates associated with the Calvert landfill.

101 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I References 14 References AEA Technology (2009), Air Quality Updating and Screening Assessment for Cherwell District Council.

Appraisal of Sustainability (2011), Section 8.15 Economic Prosperity, Appendix III Chapter 2.

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

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

Aylesbury Vale District Council (2004) Aylesbury Vale Local Plan, Saved Policies.

Aylesbury Vale District Council (2012) Aylesbury Vale Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, Level 2 Report.

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

Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes Biodiversity Partnership (2008) Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes Biodiversity Action Plan 2000 – 2010, Revised 2008.

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

Cherwell District Council (1996) Local Plan, Saved Policies.

Cherwell District Council (2012) Proposed Submission Cherwell Local Plan.

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

Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

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

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

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (2002)The Hedgerows Regulations 1997. A guide to the law and good practice.

Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. Strasbourg, European Parliament and European Council.

Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment.Strasbourg, European Parliament and European Council.

Environment Agency (2010) Flood Map for Surface Water.

High Speed 2 Ltd (2012) Appraisal of Sustainability – Post Consultation Route Refinements.

HS2 Ltd, Community Forms, http://www.hs2.org.uk/have-your-say/forums/community-forums. Accessed April 29 2013.

Jacobs (2008) Cherwell District Strategic Flood Risk Assessment; Cherwell District Council.

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

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

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

102 CFA Report – Calvert, Steeple Claydon, Twyford and Chetwode/No 13 I References

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

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

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

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

Noise Insulation (Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems) Regulations 1996. London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

Office for National Statistics (ONS) (2011),Business Register and Employment Survey 2011.

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

ONS (2011), UK Business: Activity, Size and Location.

ONS (2012), Census 2011.

ONS (2012), Annual Population Survey.

Royal Haskoning (2007) Aylesbury Vale Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, Level 1 Report; Aylesbury Vale District Council.

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

Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011. London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

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

Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (1981, Chapter 69). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

World Health Organization (2009) Night Noise Guidelines for Europe.

103