PHASE ONE
DraFt EnvironmEntal StatEmEnt Community Forum Area Report 15 | Greatworth to Lower Boddington HS2 London-West Midlands May 2013
ENGINE FOR GROWTH DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Community Forum Area Report ENGINE FOR GROWTH 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington 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/26
Printed in Great Britain on paper containing at least 75% recycled fibre. CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Contents Contents
Draft Volume 2: Community Forum Area Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 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: Greatworth to Lower Boddington – overview of the area and description of the Proposed Scheme 10 2 Greatworth to Lower Boddington 11 2.1 Overview of the area 11 2.2 Description of the Proposed Scheme 14 2.3 Construction of the Proposed Scheme 18 2.4 Operation of the Proposed Scheme 27 2.5 Community forum engagement 27 2.6 Route section main alternatives 28 2.7 Proposals for further consideration 32 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 39
1 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Contents
4 Air quality 41 4.1 Introduction 41 4.2 Policy framework 41 4.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 41 4.4 Environmental baseline 41 4.5 Construction 42 4.6 Operation 43 5 Community 44 5.1 Introduction 44 5.2 Policy framework 44 5.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 44 5.4 Environmental baseline 44 5.5 Construction 46 5.6 Operation 47 6 Cultural heritage 48 6.1 Introduction 48 6.2 Policy framework 48 6.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 48 6.4 Environmental baseline 48 6.5 Construction 50 6.6 Operation 52 7 Ecology 53 7.1 Introduction 53 7.2 Policy framework 53 7.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 53 7.4 Environmental baseline 53 7.5 Construction 56 7.6 Operation 59 8 Land quality 60 8.1 Introduction 60 8.2 Policy framework 60 8.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 60 8.4 Environmental baseline 60 8.5 Construction 63 8.6 Operation 64
2 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Contents
9 Landscape and visual assessment 66 9.1 Introduction 66 9.2 Policy framework 66 9.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 66 9.4 Environmental baseline 67 9.5 Construction 68 9.6 Operation 75 10 Socio-economics 83 10.1 Introduction 83 10.2 Policy framework 83 10.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 83 10.4 Environmental baseline 83 10.5 Construction 84 10.6 Operation 85 11 Sound, noise and vibration 86 11.1 Introduction 86 11.2 Policy framework 86 11.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 86 11.4 Environmental baseline 86 11.5 Construction 86 11.6 Operation 87 12 Traffic and transport 90 12.1 Introduction 90 12.2 Policy framework 90 12.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 90 12.4 Environmental baseline 91 12.5 Construction 92 12.6 Operation 95 13 Water resources and flood risk assessment 96 13.1 Introduction 96 13.2 Policy framework 96 13.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 96 13.4 Environmental baseline 96 13.5 Construction 98 13.6 Operation 102 14 References 104
2 3 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Contents
List of figures
Figure 1: HS2 Phase One route and community forum areas 8 Figure 2: Area context map 13 Figure 3: Indicative construction programme for the area 26 Figure 4: Business sector composition in South Northamptonshire and East Midlands 84
List of tables
Table 1: Location of construction site compounds 20 Table 2: Location of temporary worker accommodation sites 20 Table 3: Demolition works 21 Table 4: Footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions 23 Table 5: Holdings affected by the Proposed Scheme 35 Table 6: Preliminary evaluation of likely value of protected and/or notable species occurring within this area 55 Table 7: Significant residual construction effects on ecological receptors within area 58 Table 8: Significant residual operational effects on ecological receptors within this area 59 Table 9: Significant landscape effects during construction 69 Table 10: Significant visual effects during construction 70 Table 11: Significant landscape effects during operation year 1 (2026) 76 Table 12: Significant visual effects during operation year 1 (2026) 77 Table 13: Options for further noise mitigation 89 Table 14: Typical vehicle trip generation for site compounds in this area 93
4 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Contents Draft Volume 2: Community Forum Area Report Greatworth to Lower Boddington/ No 15 Structure of the HS2 draft Environmental Statement The draft ES documentation for the purpose of this consultation comprises: • A non-technical summary (NTS) – providing a summary of the Proposed Scheme, the likely significant effects of the Proposed Scheme, both beneficial and adverse, and the means to avoid or reduce the adverse effects; • A main report – consisting of two volumes: ȃȃ Volume 1: Introduction to the Environmental Statement and Proposed Scheme which provides an introduction to HS2, an overview of the hybrid bill process and the environmental impact assessment (EIA) methodology, an introduction to consultation and engagement, the main strategic and route-wide alternatives considered; and ȃȃ Volume 2: Includes 26 Community Forum Area (CFA) reports, each with a separate corresponding map book, 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 Greatworth to Lower Boddington area, CFA15.
The draft ES has been written using clear and accessible language. 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 23 April 2013.
5 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Contents Part A: Introduction
6 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 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 of the construction and operation of Phase One of HS2 (the Proposed Scheme) that have been identified to date within the area of Greatworth to Lower Boddington (CFA15). It provides a summary of the likely environmental issues and proposed mitigation measures that are being addressed during the design development process within the Greatworth to Lower Boddington 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 – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Introduction
Figure 1: HS2 Phase One route and community forum areas
8 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 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 Greatworth to Lower Boddington 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 Greatworth to Lower Boddington are provided in a separate corresponding document entitled Volume 2: CFA15 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 – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Introduction Part B: Greatworth to Lower Boddington – overview of the area and description of the Proposed Scheme
10 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington 2 Greatworth to Lower Boddington 2.1 Overview of the area 2.1.1 The Greatworth to Lower Boddington CFA covers an approximately 17km section of the Proposed Scheme in the district of South Northamptonshire. It extends from south-east of Halse Copse South, near Radstone, in the south to the Northamptonshire-Warwickshire county boundary in the north. The area includes the wards of Greatworth, Marston St Lawrence, Thorpe Mandeville, Culworth, Chipping Warden and Edgcote, Aston le Walls and Boddington. It extends from the boundary between Radstone and Greatworth parish in the south-east to the intersection of Boddington, Wormleighton and Stoneton parishes in the north-west.
2.1.2 Newton Purcell to Brackley (CFA 14) lies to the south and Ladbroke and Southam (CFA16) lies to the north, as shown in figure 2. Settlement, land use and topography
2.1.3 The area is predominantly rural in character, with agriculture being the main land use. The agricultural land is interspersed with small villages and a scattering of isolated dwellings and farmsteads (see maps CT‑03-34 to CT‑03-40). Ground levels rise from the southern boundary of the area towards the village of Greatworth, which lies approximately 130m east of the Proposed Scheme, before descending at Thorpe Mandeville to cross the floodplain of the River Cherwell, which is approximately 800m east of the settlement of Edgcote. North of the River Cherwell the land rises towards Chipping Warden before descending over a ridge at Aston le Walls into the floodplain of the Highfurlong Brook. North of Highfurlong Brook the land is flat, with higher land towards the east around the villages of Lower andUpper Boddington, which lie approximately 450m and 1.2km away from the Proposed Scheme respectively. Key transport infrastructure
2.1.4 Throughout the area the Proposed Scheme would run parallel with the M1 and the M40, which are located approximately 21km to the east and 7km to the west of the route, respectively. Other main transport routes include the A361, which crosses east-west through the northern section of the area, linking the M40 at Banbury to Daventry in the east via Chipping Warden, where it crosses the Proposed Scheme. In addition, Welsh Road/Banbury Road runs parallel to, and east of, the Proposed Scheme from Culworth northwards. The B4525 runs parallel to the Proposed Scheme from Thorpe Mandeville southwards, crossing the Proposed Scheme at Greatworth.
2.1.5 There are five long distance footpaths that cross the route in this area.The area is also crossed by numerous local access roads and footpaths which provide important links between the scattered rural dwellings and villages throughout the area. Demographic profile
2.1.6 The population within 1km of the route is estimated to be 1,900. Nearly half the population is under the age of 45, and there is also a high proportion of over 60 year olds (28%).
2.1.7 This is an area of low ethnic diversity, with 99% of the population consisting of white ethnic groups (96% white British). The proportion of people of working age in employment is 71%, which is slightly lower than that of South Northamptonshire District (73%). Most of the
11 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
housing stock in the area is owner-occupied (77%), with levels of outright ownership higher than regional and national averages3. Notable community facilities
2.1.8 A number of community facilities exist in the villages of Greatworth and Chipping Warden, with a small number of facilities in the villages of Thorpe Mandeville, Sulgrave, Culworth, Aston le Walls and Lower Boddington. The town of Banbury is located approximately 8km to the west of the Proposed Scheme, and contains a larger range of shops, services and community facilities.
2.1.9 Greatworth has a primary school, sports and social club, two churches, a recreation ground, a public house and a village store and post office. The settlement of Chipping Warden includes Chipping Warden Primary School, a village hall and recreation ground off Culworth Road, the Wesleyan Chapel, a church, allotments and two public houses – the Griffin Inn and the Rose and Crown.
2.1.10 In Thorpe Mandeville, there is St John the Baptist Church and a public house called the Three Cronies. In Sulgrave there is the Church of St James the Less, and the Star Inn public house. St Mary’s Church and Culworth Church of England Primary School are located in Culworth. The village of Aston le Walls has a Primary School, St. Mary’s RC Primary School and three churches. The main community facility in Lower Boddington is a public house called the Carpenters Arms.
3 Office for National Statistics; Census 2011; http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/census/2011/index.html. Accessed: 1 February 2013.
12 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
Figure 2: Area context map
13 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
Recreation, leisure and open space
2.1.11 This is a predominantly rural area, with large areas of open space and woodland, and a small number of recreation grounds in surrounding towns and villages. Calves Close Spinney (woodland) contains derelict buildings, some of which are associated with the nearby former Royal Air Force World War II airfield.
2.1.12 The nature reserve at Glyn Davies Wood is managed by Banbury Ornithological Society. It is accessible to the approximately 120 members of the society throughout the year for bird watching and to record other wildlife, such as butterflies or bats.
2.1.13 There are several trails, Public Rights of Way (PRoW) and bridleways that run through the area. A number of these connect the surrounding settlements. The Macmillan Way, the Battlefields Walk and Battlefields Trail, the Millennium Way and the Jurassic Way are long‑distance walking routes promoted by South Northamptonshire District Council. Planning context and key designations
2.1.14 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 considered in relation to environmental topics.
2.1.15 Planning policies from the South Northamptonshire Local Plan 2007 have been considered in relation to each environmental topic and are addressed in Part C of this report. In some cases, a policy document may not be referred to within a particular technical section, due to the absence of relevant policies4.
2.1.16 Emerging policies are not generally considered within this report, unless a document has been submitted to the Secretary of State for approval, as is the case with the Joint Core Strategy of the West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit (which encompasses South Northamptonshire Council), submitted to the Secretary of State for Examination in December 2012, with adoption set for the summer of 20135,6.
2.1.17 Relevant local planning policies have been taken into account in relation to the technical assessments reported in Sections 3 to 13.There are a number of key planning designations in the area: • The villages of Greatworth, Sulgrave, Culworth and Chipping Warden are designated as conservation areas; • There are a number of listed buildings in the area, the majority concentrated in the settlements of Greatworth, Sulgrave, Culworth, Aston le Walls, Thorpe Mandeville, Chipping Warden and Upper and Lower Boddington; • There are scheduled monuments at Lower Thorpe and Edgcote; and • There is an area of ancient woodland at Halse Copse. 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 Greatworth to Lower Boddington area, including the main environmental mitigation measures.
4 South Northamptonshire District Council (2007) Adopted Local Plan, Saved Policies. 5 The West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit Comprises Councillors from Daventry District Council, Northampton Borough Council, South Northamptonshire Council and Northamptonshire County Council. 6 West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit (2012) Joint Core Strategy.
14 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
2.2.2 Since the January 2012 scheme was announced by the Secretary of State for Transport, route development work has continued, and the Proposed Route now differs in some respects: • The alignment of the green tunnel at Greatworth has been raised by approximately 8m at the southern end and approximately 3m at the northern end to improve tunnel drainage and reduce the volume of material generated by the cutting construction. As a consequence the viaduct at Lower Thorpe has been raised by approximately 2m; • The alignment past Edgcote has been moved 40m horizontally to the east and the viaduct at Edgcote raised by approximately 2m to allow Mill Lane to pass under the viaduct; • The alignment of the green tunnel at Chipping Warden has been raised by approximately 10m at the southern end, approximately 6m at the northern end and 14m at the centre to improve tunnel drainage and reduce the volume of material generated by the cutting construction. As a consequence the viaduct at Highfurlong Brook has been raised by approximately 2m; • Maintenance loops have been introduced to the west of Lower Boddington. This would involve lowering the alignment to the north-west of Boddington Lane, by up to 5m, and raising it between Hill Road and Boddington Lane, by up to 0.5m, to create a suitable flat alignment for the maintenance loops. The alternatives considered are reported in the Ladbroke and Southam area (CFA16); and • The lengths of the viaducts at Lower Thorpe, Edgcote and over the Highfurlong Brook have been reduced.
2.2.3 These changes are discussed in more detail in Section 2.6 below.
2.2.4 Design development continues on this section of route. Any further changes resulting from this would be assessed in the formal ES if accepted into the Proposed Scheme. Overview
2.2.5 The Proposed Scheme through this area would be approximately 17km in length. It would commence just south of Halse Copse South, between the settlements of Radstone and Greatworth, then proceed north-westwards, through the south-west corner of Halse Copse South. It would pass to the north-east of the settlements of Greatworth, Thorpe Mandeville, Edgcote and Chipping Warden, before passing to the south-west of Aston le Walls. Turning slightly northwards it would then pass to the south-west of Lower Boddington before reaching the edge of the Northamptonshire/Warwickshire county boundary, just west of Fox Covert (see maps CT‑06-068 to CT‑06-079). Proposed Scheme – Section by section
2.2.6 The Proposed Scheme would leave CFA14 on a low embankment before passing into a cutting approximately 1.9km in length and up to 10m deep, from just south of Halse Copse South to the crossing of a disused railway on short embankment, east of Greatworth. Key features of this section would include the following (see maps CT‑06-068 to CT‑06-070): • An overbridge adjacent to Halse Copse South, an online replacement of footpath AN227; • An overbridge south of Halse Copse North, an offline replacement of footpaths AN19 and AN28, and bridleway AX37, and associated track diversions; • An overbridge between Halse Copse North and Greatworth Hall, an online replacement of bridleway AN14;
7 Roads and paths that are replaced on their original alignment are referred to as ‘online’; otherwise they are referred to as ‘offline’.
15 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
• Several land highway and railway drainage ponds adjacent to the route, in particular three ponds located adjacent to the former railway line at Greatworth Hall; • A noise barrier approximately 300m in length on the west side of the route located between Greatworth Hall and Greatworth; and • Bunding and planting areas on the east and west sides adjacent to the Proposed Scheme to provide visual screening.
2.2.7 Continuing for approximately 3.1km north-westwards, the Proposed Scheme would descend into a cutting for approximately 250m before entering an approximately 2.1km-long green tunnel at Greatworth. The tunnel would finish just to the west of the current Sulgrave Road alignment, before continuing in deep cutting for approximately 750m to the east of Thorpe Mandeville. Key features of this section would include the following (see maps CT‑06-070 and CT‑06-071): • An auto-transformer station south of Helmdon Road, located on the west side of the Proposed Scheme. It would include a maintenance access point. It would be accessed via a track from Helmdon Road, which would also serve the portal of the green tunnel8; • Green tunnel at Greatworth – southern portal, south of Helmdon Road. Bunding would be provided around the portal and the approach cutting to provide visual and sound screening; • The following roads and footpaths would all be reinstated over the green tunnel: ȃȃ Footpaths – AN13, AN4, AN40 and AN39; and ȃȃ Roads – Helmdon Road, B4525 and Sulgrave Road. • Green tunnel at Greatworth – northern portal, located north of Sulgrave Road. The portal would include a maintenance access point and access track from Sulgrave Road on the west side of the Proposed Scheme; and • An overbridge, for an offline replacement of Banbury Road.
2.2.8 Emerging from cutting, the Proposed Scheme would continue for approximately 4.1km, past Thorpe Mandeville through Lower Thorpe on viaduct before cutting through the valley side to the north-west of Lower Thorpe. It would then continue on low embankment, crossing the River Cherwell near Edgcote on viaduct and entering a cutting on the north side of the river. Key features of this section would include the following (see maps CT‑06-071 to CT‑06-074): • A viaduct through Lower Thorpe, approximately 9m high and 190m in length, with noise barriers along both edges (for information on noise barriers within this CFA, please refer to section 11 of this report and the SV-01 series of maps); • Noise barriers would be provided on the west side of the Proposed Scheme from Banbury Road to a point approximately 240m north of Banbury Lane at Lower Thorpe; • A maintenance access point and access track from Banbury Lane, located on the east side of the railway, north-east of Lower Thorpe; • An overbridge north-east of Lower Thorpe to provide farm access for Culworth Grounds Farm; • A cutting north-east of Lower Thorpe, up to 26m deep, through the valley side; • An overbridge north of Lower Thorpe, an online replacement of bridleway AG9; • An overbridge, an offline replacement of bridleway AG10 south of the River Cherwell, as well as access to drainage ponds west of the railway from Welsh Road;
8 Auto-transformer stations are described in Volume 1.
16 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
• An auto-transformer station, located on the east side of the railway, approximately 750m south of Mill Lane at Trafford Bridge; • A viaduct at Edgcote, approximately 4m high at the northern end to 9m high at the southern end, and 600m long, carrying the Proposed Scheme over the River Cherwell, with noise barriers along both edges; • Planting areas on the east and west sides of, and adjacent to, the Proposed Scheme to integrate the embankments into the landscape and to provide visual screening for Thorpe Mandeville and Culworth; and • Planting to the east and west of the railway to integrate the viaduct at Edgcote into the surrounding landscape.
2.2.9 The next approximately 3.6km of the Proposed Scheme would largely be within a green tunnel to the north of Chipping Warden, starting with a cutting up to 6m deep for nearly 1km followed by an approximately 2.6km-long green tunnel finishing close to the disused railway alignment south of Highfurlong Brook. Key features of this section would include the following (see maps CT‑06-074 to CT‑06-076): • An overbridge, an offline replacement of Culworth Road, and associated access tracks; • A maintenance access point located approximately 600m east of Chipping Warden on the west side of the Proposed Scheme, including associated access from Culworth Road; • A green tunnel at Chipping Warden. The southern portal would be located approximately 600m east of Chipping Warden and the northern portal approximately 750m south-west of Aston le Walls; • The following roads and footpaths would all be reinstated over the green tunnel: Footpaths AA8, AE12, AE17, AE20 and AE21 (AE28 would be consolidated into AE20); the A361 (Byfield Road) and Appletree Lane; and the private access for Appletree Lodge; and • Noise barriers would be provided on the east side of the Proposed Scheme from the north portal of the green tunnel to a point approximately 130m north of the Highfurlong Brook.
2.2.10 After emerging from cutting north of the green tunnel at Chipping Warden, the Proposed Scheme would pass onto embankment and then viaduct to cross the Highfurlong Brook. North of the Highfurlong Brook the next approximately 2.2km of the Proposed Scheme would mainly be at ground level or on shallow embankment. Key features of this section would include the following (see maps CT‑06-076 to CT‑06-079): • An auto-transformer station, maintenance access point and access track located on the east side of the Proposed Scheme approximately 650m west of Aston le Walls; • A viaduct over the Highfurlong Brook up to 9m high and 200m long, with noise barriers along both edges; • An overbridge, an online replacement for Hill Road; • An underbridge to provide farm access for Cedar House Farm from Banbury Road, plus an associated pumping station; • Realignment of Banbury Road, over more than 1km, from Spella House to beyond the boundary of the CFA, to allow the highway to cross over the Proposed Scheme on a shorter span; • Realignment of Leisure Drive towards Lower Boddington through Fox Covert along the north side of the Proposed Scheme to join Banbury Road near to the proposed overbridge crossing for the highway;
17 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
• An overbridge, a combined offline replacement for Boddington Road and Banbury Road; and • A watercourse diversion of approximately 1km, of an unnamed watercourse along the east side of the Proposed Scheme from Fox Covert in the north, to discharge into the Oxford Canal Feeder.
2.2.11 To the north-west of Lower Boddington the route would then enter a cutting, up to 14m deep and running for approximately 1.3km9. Set in this cutting on each side of the railway would be a maintenance loop line approximately 800m in length and associated access roads10. Both the cutting and the loop lines would extend from the Greatworth to Lower Boddington area (CFA15) into the Ladbroke and Southam area (CFA16).
2.2.12 Areas for planting have been identified for locations throughout this section of the route, to provide visual screening and potential habitat corridors/links. Planting areas adjacent to the railway and its associated earthworks throughout this section are illustrated on maps CT‑06‑068 to CT‑06-079. Areas have been identified adjacent to both sides of the Proposed Scheme from Highfurlong Brook to Boddington Road, to provide visual screening for the communities of Aston le Walls, Lower Boddington and Upper Boddington. Land required for the Proposed Scheme
2.2.13 The Proposed Scheme would require land on both a temporary and permanent basis. The land required for construction is shown on the construction maps series C-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 Greatworth to Lower Boddington area and the control measures that are proposed to manage the works. General descriptions of construction works that are relevant to the whole of the Proposed Scheme are provided in Volume 1. Environmental management and Code of Construction Practice
2.3.2 All contractors would be required to comply with the environmental management regime for the Proposed Scheme, which would include: • Code of Construction Practice (CoCP)11; and • Local environmental management plans (LEMPs), which would apply within each CFA.
2.3.3 The CoCP, in conjunction with associated LEMPs, would be the means of controlling the construction works associated with the Proposed Scheme, with the objective of ensuring that the effects of the works upon people and the natural environment are eptk to a practicable minimum. The CoCP will contain generic control measures and standards to be implemented throughout the construction process.
2.3.4 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.
9 The full length of the embankment would be approximately 2km. 10 The full length of the maintenance loop lines would be approximately 1.25km, to allow a train to be parked clear of the HS2 line if necessary. The track corridor in this location would be about 16 metres wider than the two track section, to allow for the additional loop line on either side. The purpose of maintenance loops is described more fully in draft ES Volume 1. 11 Arup/URS (2013) Phase One: Draft Code of Construction Practice. HS2 Ltd, London.
18 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
Construction site operation Working hours
2.3.5 Core working hours would be from 08:00 to 18:00 on weekdays (excluding bank holidays) and from 08:00 to 13:00 on Saturdays. While there would not normally be any construction activity on Sundays, some activities (e.g. 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.
2.3.6 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 work on consecutive nights, including over weekend possessions. Construction site compounds
2.3.7 Main construction site compounds would be used for core project management (engineering, planning and construction delivery), commercial and administrative staff. The main construction compound would be located off the A361 east of Chipping Warden.
2.3.8 Smaller satellite site compounds, providing office accommodation for limited numbers of staff, would provide local storage for plant and materials and limited car parking would be provided for staff and site operatives. Limited welfare facilities would be provided at each site.
2.3.9 The location of all site compounds along with their duration of use and a broad current estimate of the number of workers likely to work at the construction sites is set out in Table 1 and shown in maps CT‑05-068 to CT‑05-079. Construction site details and arrangements are continuing to be refined and will be confirmed in the formal ES. All construction staff would be required to comply with codes of behaviour set out by the CoCP.
Compound Location Typical use Estimated Estimated number of type duration of workers use Average Peak period work day work day
Main Chipping Warden, Main area administration and support; 5.5 years Up to 95 Up to 135 maps CT‑05-075 green tunnel construction. Material and CT‑05-076 storage.
Satellite Greatworth, map Construction of green tunnel, highway 5 years Up to 95 Up to 95 CT‑05-070 and PROW diversions and adjacent earthworks.
Satellite Thorpe Mandeville, Construction of green tunnel, highway 2 years Up to 45 Up to 30 map CT‑05-071 and PRoW diversions and adjacent earthworks.
Satellite Lower Thorpe, map Viaduct construction and adjacent 2 years Up to 80 Up to 135 CT‑05-072 earthworks.
Satellite Edgcote, maps Viaduct construction, highway and 2.5 years Up to 75 Up to 135 CT‑05-073 and footpath diversions and adjacent CT‑05-074 earthworks.
19 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
Compound Location Typical use Estimated Estimated number of type duration of workers use Average Peak period work day work day
Satellite Hill Road, maps Highway diversion, viaduct construction 2 years Up to 80 Up to 125 CT‑05-077 and and adjacent earthworks. CT‑05-078
Satellite Boddington Road, Highway diversion and adjacent 1 year Up to 10 Up to 10 maps CT‑05-078 earthworks. and CT‑05-079
Satellite site* Banbury Road and Road re-alignment and construction of 9 months 40 60 Leisure Drive, map overbridges. CT-05-079
*This site would be proposed to support works in CFA 16 – Ladbroke and Southam for details of impacts arising from these construction activities refer to CFA 16.
Table 1: Location of construction site compounds12
2.3.10 All main site compounds would contain space for the storage of bulk materials (aggregates, structural steel and steel reinforcement), an area for the fabrication of temporary works equipment and finished goods, fuel storage, plant and equipment storage and necessary operational parking. Buildings would generally be temporary modular units and layout would maximise construction space and limit land required. Hard standing areas would be installed at all site compounds.
2.3.11 The adjacent areas would be used for the temporary storage of any topsoil stripped as part of the works. Fencing and lighting
2.3.12 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.
2.3.13 Lighting of site compounds during hours of darkness would seek to reduce light pollution as far as reasonably practicable to the surrounding area, in accordance with the requirements of the CoCP. Temporary worker accommodation sites
2.3.14 One temporary worker accommodation site would be located within this section of the Proposed Scheme as detailed in Table 2. Temporary worker accommodation sites would adhere to the CoCP.
Location Site description Facilities provided Estimated Estimated duration of number of use workers
Chipping Warden Modular temporary living Living accommodation, welfare facilities, 4.75 years 80 to 135 accommodation. car parking.
Table 2: Location of temporary worker accommodation sites
12 The duration for each site compound is currently based on a draft programme, which will be refined for the formal ES.
20 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
Construction traffic and access
2.3.15 The following lorry routes are currently proposed to access each of the site compounds: • The route to the main construction site compound at Chipping Warden would be from the A361, accessed from the M40 in the west; • The route to the satellite site compound at Greatworth would be via the A43 and B4525 from the east and via the M40, A422 and B4525 from the west; • The route to the Thorpe Mandeville satellite site compound would be from Banbury Road via the M40, A422 and B4525 from the west; • The route to the Lower Thorpe satellite site compound would be from Banbury Lane via the M40, A422 and B4525 from the west; • The route to the Edgcote satellite site compound would be from Welsh Road; • The route to the Hill Road satellite site compound would be from Banbury Road via the M40, A361 and Welsh Road/Banbury Road from the east; and • The route to the Boddington Road satellite site compound would be from Banbury Road via the M40, A361 and Welsh Road/Banbury Road from the east. Preparatory and enabling works Demolition works
2.3.16 It is anticipated that the Proposed Scheme would require the demolition of three residential properties and eight commercial buildings in the area. These works are outlined in Table 3.
Description of structure Location
Commercial property (Triple Eight Race Engineering Ltd) Greatworth Park, Greatworth
Dean Barn – agricultural outbuilding (commercial) Between Greatworth and Chipping Warden accessed off Sulgrave Road
Twin Oaks and associated outbuildings (residential) Lower Thorpe
Lower Thorpe Farmhouse (residential) Lower Thorpe
Agricultural buildings at Blackgrounds Farm (commercial) Culworth Road, Edgcote
The Bungalow – agricultural property (commercial) Claves Close Spinney, Chipping Warden
Stone House (residential) Byfield Road, Chipping Warden
Farm outbuilding (commercial) Hill Road, Lower Boddington
Fir Tree Nursery (commercial) Lower Boddington
Farm outbuilding (commercial) Boddington Road, Lower Boddington
Farm outbuilding (commercial) Boddington Road, Lower Boddington
Farm outbuilding and paddock (commercial) Boddington Road, Lower Boddington
Table 3: Demolition works Drainage and culverts
2.3.17 It is anticipated that drainage ponds would be required for both railway track and highway drainage. Indicative locations are shown on maps CT‑06-068 to CT‑06-078.
21 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
Watercourse diversions
2.3.18 The route of the Proposed Scheme and associated highway works require 12 diversions of watercourses, the key ones being: • A dry valley adjacent to Halse Copse South, which would require a diversion of approximately 420m; • A dry valley south of Halse Copse North, which would require a diversion of approximately 1km; • A dry valley adjacent to Helmdon Road, which would require a diversion of approximately 360m; • A drain at Costow House Thorpe Mandeville, which would require a diversion of approximately 760m; • A drain at Manor House Lower Thorpe, which would require a diversion of approximately 325m; • The River Cherwell at Edgcote, which would require diversion at two points of approximately 120m and 80m; • A drain at Aston le Walls, which would require a diversion of approximately 750m; • The canal feeder at Fir Tree Nursery Lower Boddington, which would require a diversion of approximately 200m; • A drain at Fir Tree Nursery Lower Boddington, which would require a diversion of approximately 900m; • A drain at Spella House Lower Boddington, which would require a diversion of approximately 1km; and • An unnamed watercourse at Fox Covert which would require a diversion of approximately 350m.
2.3.19 Indicative diversions are illustrated on maps CT‑06-068 to CT‑06-079. Utility diversions
2.3.20 There are a number of major items of utility infrastructure in proximity to the Proposed Scheme. These include: 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 this area would be: • Diversion of twin water mains from a reservoir on an overbridge north of Halse Copse South; and • Temporary diversion of a 400mm water main adjacent north of the B4525 at Greatworth over the green tunnel.
2.3.21 Discussions with utility providers are underway to confirm whether plant and/or apparatus would need to be realigned away from the area of work; protected from the works by means of a concrete slab or similar; or have sufficient clearance from the work that they would not be affected.
2.3.22 Wherever practicable, temporary connections for construction site compounds would be made to local existing utility services (i.e. electricity, water, data, sewerage and surface water drainage, to reduce the need for generators, storage tanks and associated traffic movements for fuel tankers).
22 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
2.3.23 Some of the impacts of these diversions would be accounted for in the current assessment. However, complete assessments of main utility diversion works will be presented in the formal ES. Highway and road diversions
2.3.24 Proposed highway and road diversions are shown on map CT‑06-068 to CT‑06-079 and include: • Helmdon Road, a permanent offline diversion over the new green tunnel; • Banbury Road, a permanent offline diversion to a new overbridge; • Culworth Road, a permanent offline diversion to a new overbridge; • Hill Road, a permanent online diversion to a new overbridge; • Boddington Road, a permanent offline diversion via Banbury Road; • Banbury Road, a permanent offline diversion to a new overbridge; and • Leisure Drive, a permanent diversion via Banbury Road.
2.3.25 The total duration of works does not necessarily indicate periods of actual closure. The closure of routes would be kept to as short a duration as possible. Diversions show indicative alternative routes available to maintain general access which will be subject to change as part of the development of the design and will be detailed in the formal ES. Footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions
2.3.26 Proposed footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions are shown on map CT‑06-068 to CT‑06‑079 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 length13
AN22 Adjacent to and Online overbridge Negligible (Public footpath) south of Halse Copse South
AN37 South of Halse Offline overbridge 250m (Public Bridleway) Copse North
AN19 South of Halse Offline overbridge Negligible (Public footpath) Copse North
AN28 South of Halse Offline overbridge 400m (Public footpath) Copse North
AN14 Between Halse Online overbridge Negligible (Public Bridleway) Copse North and Greatworth
AN13 Greatworth Diversion via Helmdon Road 200m (Public footpath)
AG9 Lower Thorpe Online overbridge Negligible (Public Bridleway)
23 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
Name Location Permanent reinstatement or diversion
Route Approximate additional journey length13
AG10 Edgcote Offline overbridge Negligible (Public Bridleway)
AE5 Edgcote Permanent diversion under viaduct at Edgcote 200m (Public footpath)
AE28 Chipping Warden Diversion along footpath AE20 600m (Public footpath)
AC2 Lower Permanently diverted over new overbridge at Hill 500m (Public footpath) Boddington Road
Table 4: Footpath, cycleway and bridleway diversions Restricted accesses13
2.3.27 There would be no restricted accesses in the local area. Main construction works – Earthworks
2.3.28 Major earthworks in the area would include: • Cutting between Halse Copse and Greatworth (approximately 2.1km long and up to 10m deep); • Cutting to north of the green tunnel at Greatworth (approximately 750m long and up to 15m deep); • Cutting north of Lower Thorpe (approximately 650m long and up to 26m deep); • Embankment between Lower Thorpe and Edgcote (approximately 900m long and up to 5m high); • Cutting north of the River Cherwell (approximately 1km long and up to 6m deep); • Embankment at Lower Boddington (approximately 1.1km long and up to 5m high); and • Cutting west of Lower Boddington (approximately 2.3km long and up to 12m deep within the CFA).
2.3.29 Works would be carried out in a sequence, taking due consideration of the impacts of road and footpath closures, flows within watercourses and vehicle movements by road.
2.3.30 During design development consideration has been given to the movement of materials. Wherever possible excavated material would be moved directly from the area of excavation to areas of the works where fill material is required. Some processing (e.g. crushing and/or screening) and temporary stockpiling of fill material may be necessary if direct placement into the permanent works is not possible or to render it acceptable for use elsewhere. Where this is not possible due to the material being unsuitable, or the benefits of importing material are outweighed by the impacts of transportation, local sources of material would be identified.
13 Diversions of less than 50m are reported as negligible in this table.
24 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
Main construction works – Structures Construction of green tunnels at Greatworth and Chipping Warden
2.3.31 Based on the current design detail, a simplified construction sequence for the construction of green tunnels at Greatworth and Chipping Warden is proposed to be adopted as follows: • Phase 1: The construction of the green tunnels would be served by the Chipping Warden main construction site compound and various satellite site compounds. The main compound would be established three months prior to commencing construction. The assembly and commissioning would require approximately two months. Site setup works would include ground profiling, erection of workforce temporary buildings and the assembly of specialised construction plant; • Phase 2: Enabling works would be specific to the proposed element and could include road diversions, utility diversions and temporary works. On average the activity would take three months; • Phase 3: The construction of the green tunnels are the longer duration elements, taking approximately 60 months; • Phase 4: After the completion of the last element, the main construction compound would be demobilised and the construction plant cleared. The demobilisation period would take two months and would be followed by land reinstatement; and • Phase 5: Installation and commissioning of new tracks to serve the Proposed Scheme. This would take approximately nine months. Rail infrastructure fit out
2.3.32 The principal elements of rail infrastructure to be constructed are track, overhead line equipment (OLE), communications equipment and power supply. The installation of track in open areas would be of standard ballasted track configuration, comprising principally of ballast, rail and sleepers. Further details are set out in Volume 1. Power supply
2.3.33 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 locations of proposed power supply stations are: • An auto-transformer station and access track, adjacent to the southern portal of the green tunnel at Greatworth; • An auto-transformer station and access track, east of Mill Lane at Edgcote; and • An auto-transformer station and access track, adjacent to the north portal of the green tunnel at Chipping Warden.
2.3.34 The locations are shown on maps CT‑06-070, CT‑06-073 and CT‑06-077. Landscaping and permanent fencing
2.3.35 Landscaping (i.e. earthworks and seeding and planting) would be provided to address visual and noise impacts, as well as to provide screening for intrinsically important ecological habitats and heritage features. Where appropriate, the engineering embankments and/or 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
25 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
Greatworth to Lower Boddington landscape. Opportunities for ecological habitat creation would be considered.
2.3.36 Permanent fencing would be erected and would be shown on plans to accompany the formal ES. Construction programme
2.3.37 A construction programme that illustrates indicative periods for each core construction activity in this area is provided in Figure 3. Light blue indicates works that would take place intermittently across a period.
Figure 3: Indicative construction programme for the area Commissioning
2.3.38 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.
26 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
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, up to 14 trains per hour (tph) would pass in each direction. This would increase to a potential maximum of 18tph in each direction should Phase Two also become fully operational.
2.4.2 The trains would be either 200m (one-unit train) or 400m (two-unit 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).
2.4.3 When required, line inspections and maintenance would be conducted outside those operating hours. The maintenance loops to the south of Risborough Road would be used to park maintenance rail vehicles securely during the day, and allow maintenance work in the area at night. They could also be used in the case that a passenger train were to become so defective that it could not continue unassisted to its destination.
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: • 27 March 2012 at Aston le Walls Village Hall; • 19 June 2012 at Aston le Walls Village Hall; • 18 September 2012 at Aston le Walls Village Hall; • 20 November 2012 at Aston le Walls Village Hall; and • 19 February 2013 at Aston le Walls Village Hall.
2.5.3 In addition to HS2 Ltd representatives, attendees at these community forum meetings typically included: local residents (and residents groups); public representatives; the local MP; representatives of local authorities and parish and district councils; action groups; the National Trust; affected landowners and other interested stakeholders.
2.5.4 The main themes to emerge from these meetings were: • The effect of noise from trains entering and exiting green tunnels or when travelling on a viaduct, together with queries as to how this noise will be mitigated; • The impact on Lower Thorpe and effects on the properties in other local communities; • Disruption to local rights of way/bridleway networks that link the surrounding villages and also the schools at Aston-le-Walls and Chipping Warden; • Impacts on the Edgcote battlefield site and local ancient woodlands; • Queries and concerns regarding the design cycle and design standards that will be adopted and the mitigation which can be provided; • Effects of construction sites and traffic on local farmland and the road network; and • Effects of permanent structures associated with the route such as power substations and maintenance access points.
27 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
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. Green tunnel at Greatworth
2.6.3 The Proposed Scheme would include a green tunnel as the railway passes Greatworth. The depth of the railway through this section has been reduced compared with the route announced by Government in January 2012. A number of alternatives to the Proposed Scheme were considered: • Option A: January 2012 announced route; • Option B: January 2012 announced route with a partial reduction in tunnel depth (up to 6m shallower than Option A); • Option C: A large reduction in tunnel depth (up to 8m shallower than Option A) with reduced length of green tunnel to the north; • Option D: A large reduction in tunnel depth (up to 8m shallower than Option A) with removal of the green tunnel; and • Option E: The Proposed Scheme, consisting of the January 2012 announced route with a large reduction in tunnel depth (up to 8m shallower than Option A) and a full green tunnel.
2.6.4 The January 2012 announced route would be complex to build, resulting in a very deep cutting, the handling of significant volumes of excavated material, a large area of land take during construction, and as a consequence it would take a long time and be costly to construct. To reduce these construction impacts, HS2 Ltd considered the options above to explore whether varying the depth and length of the green tunnel could reduce the environmental effects, costs and impacts on construction programme.At the same time, HS2 Ltd sought to increase the area of land that could be returned to agricultural use following construction and simplify the drainage arrangements for the tunnel. However, as noted below, some options would also result in an increase in the height of the viaduct to the north of the tunnel and/or increase the volume of excavated material that would need to be removed from the area, with consequential impacts for construction traffic.
2.6.5 Option A could return a high proportion of land to agriculture, have less potential for noise and visual effects that Options B, C and D, and not result in a viaduct change. However, it would not provide the necessary drainage gradients and, being the deepest of the options, would have the largest impact in terms of construction footprint and environmental effects, and the longest construction programme. For these reasons, Option A was not adopted.
2.6.6 Option B would provide suitable drainage gradients and a small reduction in the depth of the tunnel. Otherwise, the environmental impact of this option would not be materially different to Option A. For these reasons, Option B was not adopted.
2.6.7 Option C would provide suitable drainage gradients and could potentially reduce costs and construction duration. However, the shorter section of tunnel and longer cutting would result
28 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
in more excavated material to be removed, less agricultural land following construction, and the potential for more noise and visual effects than Options A, B and E. For these reasons Option C was not adopted.
2.6.8 Option D would provide suitable drainage gradients and, by removing the green tunnel completely, could potentially reduce costs and construction duration. However, it would result in more excavated material to be removed, less agricultural land following construction, and a greater potential for noise and visual effects than Options A, B, C and E. For these reasons Option D was not adopted.
2.6.9 As a consequence of the shallower tunnel in Option E, the surface sections to the north and south of the tunnel would be higher, which would increase the potential for noise and visual effects, notably for the viaduct at Lower Thorpe. However, it would provide suitable drainage gradients, and similar noise and visual screening to Option A along the tunnel section. It would result in less excavated material to be removed, a relatively small construction footprint, and a higher proportion of agricultural land reinstatement following construction than Options B, C and D. It would also significantly reduce the cost and construction duration compared to Options A and B. On balance, it was considered that the adoption of noise barriers, landscape earthworks and planting could be used to mitigate the effects of the higher alignment outside the tunnel and therefore Option E was adopted in the Proposed Scheme. Green tunnel at Greatworth – extension past Greatworth Hall
2.6.10 The Proposed Scheme has a green tunnel at Greatworth. The January 2012 announced scheme included a green tunnel at Greatworth; however, the height of the route has been raised in the Proposed Scheme (refer to 2.6.3 above). The southern approach to the tunnel would consist of a series of cuttings and embankments. An option to extend the green tunnel at Greatworth southwards past Greatworth Hall was considered.
2.6.11 Extending the green tunnel could reduce potential noise effects atGreatworth Hall and avoid the need for a new public bridleway overbridge. However, it would also increase the construction footprint, increasing impacts on the disused railway corridor and land take from Halse Copse, an area of ancient woodland. It would also cost more than the Proposed Scheme.
2.6.12 For these reasons an extended tunnel was not adopted in the Proposed Scheme. Enclosed tunnel at Lower Thorpe
2.6.13 The Proposed Scheme exits the cutting at Thorpe Mandeville onto approximately 350m of embankment before moving onto an approximately 190m-long viaduct. The January 2012 announced scheme also included an embankment and viaduct in this location. However, the height of the route has been raised in the Proposed Scheme in order to align with the green tunnel at Greatworth (refer to 2.6.3 above). The community proposed to extend the tunnel at Greatworth by enclosing the railway northwards of the tunnel with earth bunds, as a way of mitigating potential noise and visual effects.
2.6.14 In this location, the route would cross steep, unstable slopes either side of a floodplain.Any earthwork structures would lead to direct loss of floodplain, therefore requiring large and long culverts and large areas of floodplain mitigation to ensure no increase in flood risk.This could contravene the Water Framework Directive (WFD), and would add to long term maintenance and associated costs14. Furthermore, deep cuttings into the hillside would be required to provide the floodplain compensation, which would be visually intrusive and costly. Whilst steeper earthworks slopes could help to reduce the floodplain impact, these would reduce the area of land that could be returned to agriculture and would have a greater visual effect.
14 Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy.
29 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
2.6.15 For these reasons, a closed tunnel to cross Lower Thorpe has not been adopted in the Proposed Scheme. Green tunnel at Chipping Warden
2.6.16 The Proposed Scheme would include a green tunnel as the railway passes Chipping Warden and Aston le Walls. The depth of the railway through this section has been reduced compared with the route announced by Government in January 2012. A number of other alternatives were considered: • Option A: January 2012 announced route; • Option B: A partial reduction in tunnel depth (up to approximately 8m shallower than Option A); • Option C: A large reduction in tunnel depth (up to 12.5m shallower than Option A) and a reduced length of green tunnel to the north; • Option D: A large reduction in tunnel depth (up to 12.5m shallower than Option A) and a reduced length of green tunnel to the south; and • Option E: The Proposed Scheme, with a fully raised tunnel depth (up to 12.5m shallower than Option A).
2.6.17 The January 2012 announced route would be complex to build, resulting in a very deep cutting, the handling of significant volumes of excavated material, a large area of land take during construction, and as a consequence it would take a long time and be costly to construct. To reduce these construction impacts, HS2 Ltd considered the options above to explore whether varying the depth and length of the green tunnel could reduce the environmental effects, costs and impacts on construction programme.At the same time, HS2 Ltd sought to increase the area of land that could be returned to agricultural use following construction and simplify the drainage arrangements for the tunnel. However, as noted below, some options would also result in an increase in the height of the viaduct to the north of the tunnel and/or increase the volume of excavated material that would need to be removed from the area, with consequential impacts for construction traffic.
2.6.18 Option A could return a relatively high proportion of land to agriculture, have less potential for noise and visual effects that Options B, C and D, and not result in changes to railway height north and south of the tunnel. However, it would not provide the necessary drainage gradients and, being the deepest of the options, would have the largest impact in terms of construction footprint and environmental effects, and the longest construction programme. For these reasons, Option A was not adopted.
2.6.19 Option B would provide suitable drainage gradients and a small reduction in the depth of the tunnel. However, it would increase the height of the embankment and viaduct at Highfurlong Brook compared with Option A. Otherwise, the environmental impact of this option would not be materially different to Option A. It would provide a small cost reduction compared to Option A. However, it would have a larger impact in terms of construction footprint and environmental effects and take longer to construct than Option E. Therefore, Option B was not adopted.
2.6.20 Options C and D would provide suitable drainage gradients and could potentially reduce costs and construction duration. However, the shorter sections of tunnel and longer cutting would result in more excavated material to be removed, less agricultural land following construction, and the potential for more noise and visual effects than Options A, B and E. For these reasons, neither Option C nor D was adopted.
30 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
2.6.21 As a consequence of the shallower tunnel under Option E, the surface sections to the north and south of the tunnel would be higher. However, it would provide suitable drainage gradients, and similar noise and visual screening to Option A along the tunnel section. It would result in less excavated material to be removed, a relatively small construction footprint, and a higher proportion of agricultural land reinstatement following construction than Options B, C and D. It would also significantly reduce the cost and construction duration compared to Options A and B. On balance, it was considered that the adoption of noise barriers, landscape earthworks and planting could be used to mitigate the effects of the higher alignment outside the tunnel. Therefore Option E was adopted in the Proposed Scheme. Lowered alignment or extended green tunnel for Boddington
2.6.22 The Proposed Scheme would be within a green tunnel as it passes Aston le Walls and Chipping Warden. The route would emerge from green tunnel beyond Aston le Walls. It would continue on embankment before crossing the Highfurlong Brook on a viaduct structure south-west of Lower Boddington. It would then continue on embankments and in shallow cuttings.
2.6.23 Five alternative options were considered for this section of route: • Option A: January 2012 announced route; • Option B: Lower the alignment past the villages of Lower and Upper Boddington; • Option C: Lower the alignment and extend the green tunnel past the villages of Lower and Upper Boddington; • Option D: Extend the green tunnel past the villages of Lower and Upper Boddington above ground level by creating covered bunds to enclose the railway; and • Option E: The Proposed Scheme, with partially raised alignment adjacent to Lower Boddington (approximately 0.5m higher than Option A) screened with raised earthworks.
2.6.24 The depth of the railway in this area is restricted by the need to achieve sufficient clearance across the floodplain of the Highfurlong Brook. HS2 Ltd also acknowledges that covering the railway or putting it into tunnel could have noise and visual benefits.
2.6.25 Option B would have deeper, wider cuttings at each end of the proposed embankment section at Lower Boddington than Option E. This would increase the construction impacts, costs and duration. For these reasons, Option B has not been adopted in the Proposed Scheme.
2.6.26 Both Options C and D would involve extensive excavations and the construction of at least one vent shaft due to the increased length of the green tunnel. They would both affect the ecology and land around the Highfurlong Brook, which would have to be diverted, managed during tunnel construction, and then reinstated over the top of the tunnel. They would both increase the depth of the railway to the north and south of the tunnel. Overall, both Options C and D would result in higher construction impacts and costs and longer construction duration than Option E.
2.6.27 Whilst Options C and D would provide benefits for operational sound and landscape and visual effects compared to Option E, these potential effects of Option E could be suitably mitigated using raised earthworks, which would be significantly cheaper, simpler and quicker to construct, and would significantly reduce construction phase effects on residential receptors and on the Highfurlong Brook.
2.6.28 For these reasons Option E was adopted in the Proposed Scheme.
31 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington
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: • Culworth Road alignment – consideration is being given to not reinstating Culworth Road across the Proposed Scheme. Instead, traffic could be diverted via Byfield Road and Welsh Road, and an overbridge could be provided to reinstate access for non-vehicular access only along the Culworth Road alignment; 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.
32 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Greatworth to Lower Boddington Part C: Environmental topic assessments
33 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 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 Saved Policy G3 in the South Northamptonshire Local Plan affords policy protection to prevent the irreversible loss of the best and most versatile (BMV) agricultural land.
3.2.2 The submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy, in Policy R2, also seeks to protect the best and most versatile agricultural land. Policy C6, relating to HS2, requires the Proposed Scheme to reduce adverse impacts on the environment and avoid severance of agricultural holdings. 3.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 3.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the farm impacts and agricultural land quality assessments are set out in Volume 1.
3.3.2 There are no are no additional topic specific assumptions or limitations in this area. 3.4 Environmental baseline 3.4.1 The area is undulating or hilly and is located from around 110m to 180m above Ordnance Datum (AOD). Tributaries of the River Tove extend into the southern half of the area from the east. The River Cherwell, Highfurlong Brook and the Oxford Canal run through valleys in the north, incised into the hills that are the prominent feature of this section of the route.
3.4.2 The principal underlying geology in the study area is that of the Lias Group. This includes the Whitby Mudstone Formation, which consists of mudstone and siltstone, and which commonly overlies limestone or ironstone. To the south of the area and around Thorpe Mandeville, the underlying geology is of the Great Oolite Group and includes the Taynton, Northampton, Marlstone and Horsehay Formations, comprising limestone, sandstone and ironstone. The Taynton Limestone Formation is overlain by superficial glacial till deposits.
3.4.3 The Charmouth Mudstone Formation is mapped in line with the course of the River Cherwell. It consists of mudstones and siltstones, overlain by superficial alluvial deposits of clay, silt, sand and gravel.
3.4.4 The National Soil Map shows four soil associations in this area15. Most of the area consists of the Denchworth Association which is typically stoneless, wet and clayey in texture, with poorly drained soils waterlogged for prolonged periods. The extent of the Denchworth soil is consistent with the areas within which the Lias Group mudstones are mapped.
3.4.5 On the slopes around Greatworth and Thorpe Mandeville, and in pockets further north-west where there is limestone geology, Aberford and Banbury Associations are mapped and comprise fine loamy, permeable soils. Through the floodplains of the River Cherwell and Highfurlong Brook, the soils are associated with Wickham 2, Fladbury 1 and Oxpasture Associations and are generally clayey, gleyed and imperfectly to poorly drained.
15 CranfieldUniversity (2001) The National Soil Map of England and Wales 1:250,000 scale, National Soil Resources Institute, Cranfield University, UK.
34 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Agriculture, forestry and soils
3.4.6 Provisional Agricultural Land Classification (ALC) mapping shows this area to be mostly of undifferentiated Grade 3, which is good to moderate quality land, but some with areas of Grades 2 and 416. The intrusions of poor quality Grade 4 land are mapped in the vicinity of the watercourses present within the area, namely the River Cherwell and the Oxford Canal, whilst the very good quality land of Grade 2 is mapped where the ground levels out on hill tops and where the well-drained loamy Banbury soils are found. As a consequence of the extensive areas of Denchworth soils within the study area, the majority of agricultural land falls into Subgrade 3b (76%), with 23% of Subgrade 3a and 1% of Grade 2 quality.
3.4.7 The probable agricultural land quality in the wider area is shown on the Defra ‘Likelihood of best and most versatile agricultural land’ map17. This indicates that the area has a less than 20% likelihood of BMV land. The results of the surveys in the study area are broadly consistent with the land quality indicated for the wider area.
3.4.8 The land use across the area is mostly agricultural. The southern part of the area is mostly in arable uses, with grassland immediately adjacent to Thorpe Mandeville. Arable land then predominates through the central part of the area, but with an area of grassland on the low‑lying land near the River Cherwell. West of Lower Boddington there is some permanent pasture with ridge and furrow, with the northern part of the area being mainly in arable uses. There is a large horticultural glasshouse nursery west of Lower Boddington, and a large equestrian yard at Aston le Walls.
3.4.9 Surveys have identified 29 holdings within the study area, as shown in Table 5. These range in size from 2.5 hectares (ha) to 674ha.
Holding Primary farming activities18
Halse Grange Farm Arable
Falcutt Hall Arable
Greatfield Grange Residential with grazing
Greatworth Field Farm Horticulture
Greatworth Hall Arable
Whitman Farm Arable, sheep
Marston St Lawrence Estate Dairy, arable
Costow Farm Arable
Thorpe Mandeville Manor and Magpies Farm Equestrian grazing let
Lower Thorpe Farm Residential with equestrian grazing
Twin Oaks Residential with equestrian grazing
Park Farm Arable
Culworth Grounds Farm Arable, equestrian
West Mill Farm Arable, sheep
Edgcote Estate Arable, dairy, horses
Warden Farm Arable
Bramble Cottage No data available
Appletree Farm Arable, dairy
Manor Farm Sheep
16 Natural England (2002) Provisional Agricultural Land Classification mapping at 1:250,000 (version date 10/01/2002); 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 – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Agriculture, forestry and soils
Holding Primary farming activities18
Washbrook Farm19 Equestrian
Cleveland Farm No data available
Old House Farm Arable, beef
Cedar House Farm Sheep, beef, arable
Fir Tree Nursery Horticulture
Three Shires Farm Arable
Spella Bungalow Equestrian grazing
Unspecified paddocks 1, Lower Boddington Equestrian grazing
Unspecified paddocks 2, Lower Boddington Small scale horticulture and agriculture
Collins Farm Arable
Table 5: Holdings affected by the Proposed Scheme1819
3.4.10 There are a number of farm diversifications within the study area, including buildings let or used for non-agricultural office and light-industrial uses (Greatworth Hall, Warden Farm), buildings and land let for equestrian purposes (Culworth Grounds Farm), and the installation of renewable energy schemes (including anaerobic digestion). A number of farms operate commercial shoots.
3.4.11 There are a number of blocks of woodland. These are mostly deciduous and are subject to management. Some have been established with grant funding under various Woodland Grant Schemes.
3.4.12 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.
3.4.13 In assessing the impact of the Proposed Scheme on farms it is important to recognise that the ability of the farms to adapt to change depends, in part, upon the size of the holding, its layout and fragmentation (both before and after construction of the Proposed Scheme) and the enterprises operated. Within this local area there are four holdings (dairy, commercial equestrian and horticultural) of high sensitivity. The other units rely less on the spatial relationship and/or the availability of land and buildings and are of medium or low sensitivity. 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 is used temporarily during construction; • Ensuring that each affected farm holding would receive specific and relevant liaison regarding the construction activities that would affect the holding; • Ensuring that agricultural land and corresponding soil quality can be reinstated post construction where this is the agreed end use;
18 Non-commercial holdings are indicated. 19 See Section 5: Community for further information.
36 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Agriculture, forestry and soils
• Ensuring that the impacts on infrastructure and livestock for individual farm holdings would be reduced, as far as reasonably practicable; • Ensuring that there is appropriate access provided to areas of severed land during and post-construction; and • Ensuring the appropriate handling and conservation of soil stockpiles to allow them to be 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 would be required temporarily for construction of the Proposed Scheme, stored soils would be used to reinstate those sites to a pre-construction agricultural condition. Soils removed from the area of permanent works would be utilised, where reasonably practicable, in the construction of the Proposed Scheme. The soils most widely affected would be those of the Denchworth association. These are heavy clay soils that need to be handled carefully during restoration to ensure that any effect is negligible, and therefore not significant. The permeable Aberford and Banbury soils mapped are less susceptible to damage.
3.5.3 Aspects of the Proposed Scheme that would assist to reduce effects on agricultural resources include agricultural underpasses or overbridges to reduce the effects of severance for Halse Grange, Falcutt Hall, Greatworth Hall and the Greatworth Field Farm, Culworth Grounds Farm, West Mill Farm and Cedar House Farm.
3.5.4 The land that would be affected is mostly of Subgrade 3b. However, approximately a quarter of the land would be of BMV quality, mostly Subgrade 3a. As a consequence, the land loss during construction would be a significant effect.
3.5.5 Much of the land would be restored, including over the green tunnels, to agricultural use. Subject to appropriate handling, this would be returned to a quality comparable to that existing before construction. Land that would be engineered to provide flood compensation (including to the north-east of Lower Thorpe and around Trafford Bridge) could lower the quality of agricultural land. However, this area is mostly of subgrade 3b, so there would be no consequent loss of BMV quality. Overall, however, given the relative scarcity of BMV land in the area, the permanent loss of BMV agricultural land would be a significant effect.
3.5.6 Loss of forestry land would be mitigated by replanting in nearby locations. Small fragments of agricultural land that are not accessible as a result of severance would also be planted. The loss of forestry land would remain a significant effect during the construction phase, but would reduce to not significant as planting matures.
3.5.7 At present 29 holdings have been identified that would be affected in this area. Based on the information currently available, it is likely that the following 23 holdings would experience significant effects during construction: • Falcutt Hall, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Greatworth Hall, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed, and severance whilst the green tunnel is constructed; • Whitman Farm, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed and severance whilst the green tunnel was constructed; • Costow Farm, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Thorpe Mandeville Manor and Magpies Farm, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Lower Thorpe Farm, due to residential property demolition and land loss; • Twin Oaks, due to residential property demolition and land loss;
37 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Agriculture, forestry and soils
• Culworth Grounds Farm, due to land loss including a key part of the gallops; • West Mill Farm due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Warden Farm, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed and severance whilst the green tunnel is constructed; • Bramble Cottage, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Appletree Farm, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed, and severance whilst the green tunnel is constructed; • Manor Farm, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Washbrook Farm, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Cleveland Farm, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Old House Farm, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed and severance; • Cedar House Farm, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Fir Tree Nursery, due to property demolition; • Three Shires Farm due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed and severance; • Spella Bungalow, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Unspecified paddocks 1, Lower Boddington, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; • Unspecified paddocks 2, Lower Boddington, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed; and • Collins Farm, due to the proportion of the holding that would be temporarily removed.
3.5.8 In addition, Washbrook Farm provides equestrian training and event facilities that are acknowledged to be of national, possibly international, standard. The construction of the Proposed Scheme across this holding would be likely to result in a cessation of activities at this level. HS2 Ltd is continuing to explore these effects and the potential for mitigation, in consultation with the operator, which will be reported in the formal ES (see Section 5: Community for further information).
3.5.9 There are a number of enterprises potentially sensitive to dust and noise in the vicinity of the Proposed Scheme (horticulture and equestrian included). The effects of noise and dust are considered in Section 4. The emission of dust, noise and vibration during the construction phase would be controlled by implementing best practice as set out in the draft CoCP.
3.5.10 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 195920. Defra has powers to require occupiers of land on which they are growing to take action to prevent their spreading. Application of control measures within the CoCP would regulate this potential effect.
20 Weeds Act 1959 (7 & 8 Eliz II c. 54). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
38 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Agriculture, forestry and soils
Likely residual significant effects
3.5.11 The residual effects (already reported above) within the local area are considered to be: • A significant permanent loss of agricultural land of BMV quality; and • Significant permanent effects on eight agricultural holdings: ȃȃ Lower Thorpe Farm, Twin Oaks and Fir Tree Nursery, which are likely to cease during construction due to residential demolition and land loss; ȃȃ Greatworth Hall, due to the proportion of the holding that would be permanently removed; ȃȃ Culworth Grounds Farm, due to the proportion of the holding that would remain permanently removed, and loss of part of the gallops; ȃȃ West Mill Farm due to the proportion of the holding that would be permanently removed; ȃȃ Manor Farm, due to the proportion of the holding that would remain permanently removed; ȃȃ Washbrook Farm, due to the proportion of the holding that would remain permanently removed; ȃȃ Old House Farm, due to the proportion of the holding that would remain permanently removed; and ȃȃ Three Shires Farm, due to the proportion of the holding that would remain permanently removed. Further mitigation
3.5.12 No further mitigation is currently proposed. 3.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation
3.6.1 All run-off from the operational area would be captured in designated drainage arrangements capable of control prior to discharge to watercourses.
3.6.2 Although there are a number of enterprises that are sensitive to noise and vibration, none is sufficiently close to the track to be significantly affected. However, operational noise may affect the equestrian activities at Washbrook Farm. Many types of livestock, including horses, 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’, such as visiting horses). HS2 Ltd will report in the formal ES on the ongoing assessment of the potential for these effects along the route. Current assessment suggests that the equestrian centre at the farm would be unlikely to be able to operate at its current scale and national status after construction, due primarily to the permanent loss of land and severance effects.
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 potential for the establishment and spread of weeds from the operational area would be addressed through the adoption of an appropriate land management regime by the network
39 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Agriculture, forestry and soils
operator which identifies and remedies areas of weed growth which might threaten adjoining agricultural interests. Likely residual significant effects
3.6.5 There may be an operational effect on Washbrook Farm although, as reported above, this holding is unlikely to be able to operate at its current scale and national status during and following construction (see Section 5: Community for further information). There are not considered to be any other significant residual effects associated with the operation of the Proposed Scheme. Further mitigation
3.6.6 Further work is being undertaken to understand the effects on Washbrook Farm and to identify possible mitigation options.
3.6.7 No other significant residual effects arising from the operation of the ProposedScheme have been identified. Therefore no further mitigation is currently proposed.
40 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 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 dust21. Emissions of these pollutants are typically associated with construction activities and equipment, and road traffic. 4.2 Policy framework 4.2.1 Saved policy G3 of the South Northamptonshire Local Plan seeks to prevent development that is likely to cause problems of air pollution.
4.2.2 The submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Policy BN9 requires development proposals to demonstrate that they provide opportunities to minimise and, where reasonably practicable, reduce pollution, maintaining or improving air quality in accordance with national air quality standards and best practice. Policy C6, relating to the Proposed Scheme, requires the proposal to minimise adverse impacts on the environment and manage the construction to minimise the impact on communities and the environment.
4.2.3 In addition, local and regional guidance relevant to this assessment includes the Northamptonshire Highway Air Quality Strategy 2013 which seeks to influence mode of travel to improve air quality22. 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 No local assumptions have been made for the air quality assessment for 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 in the Greatworth to Lower Boddington area is typical of the generally rural nature of this part of Northamptonshire, with low concentrations of airborne pollutants. There are few roads and low road traffic flows (with their associated emissions).
4.4.2 Estimates of background air quality have been obtained from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (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. All average pollutant concentrations are less than the relevant national air quality objectives.
4.4.3 South Northamptonshire District Council conducts routine diffusion tube monitoring at 32 locations. However, the vast majority of these are at the roadside and in the towns away from the Proposed Scheme.
4.4.4 The available mapping and monitoring data indicate that all parts of the Greatworth to Lower Boddington area currently experience concentrations of NO2, PM10 and PM2.5 that meet limit values and national objectives, as supported by the absence of any Air Quality Management Areas (AQMA) declared for these pollutants.
21 PM2.5 and PM10 describe two size fractions of airborne particles that can be inhaled and therefore are of relevance for human health. The designations refer to particles of size less than 2.5 and 10 microns in diameter. 22 Northamptonshire County Council (2013), Northamptonshire Highway Air Quality Strategy.
41 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Air quality
4.4.5 There are AQMA declared by local authorities for NO2 in the towns of Towcester, Bicester, Banbury and Buckingham. All of these would be too far from the Proposed Scheme to be affected by construction activities and associated traffic.
4.4.6 Potential receptors are primarily those residential properties close to construction activity and alongside roads where traffic flows would change as a consequence of construction activity or realignment of roads. Notable receptors in close proximity to construction activity are residential properties at Greatworth Hall, along Banbury Lane, at Culworth Road Park and the Threshing Barn which would be close to sites of construction activity. Helmdon Disused Railway SSSI, whose calcicolous plant community is sensitive to nitrogen and dust deposition, would be 1.4 km from this part of the Proposed Scheme and may be affected by emissions from construction traffic. 4.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation
4.5.1 Impacts from the construction of the Proposed Scheme could arise from dust generating activities and emissions from construction traffic. As such, the assessment of construction impacts has been undertaken for human receptors sensitive to dust and exposure to NO2 and PM10, as well as ecological receptors sensitive to dust and nitrogen deposition.
4.5.2 Air quality would be controlled and managed during construction through the route-wide implementation of the measures set out in the draft 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 the LPA to assess the effectiveness of the measures taken to prevent dust and air pollutant emissions; • Cleaning (including watering) of haul routes and designated vehicle waiting areas to suppress dust; • Keeping soil stockpiles away from sensitive receptors (including historical features), watercourses and surface drains where reasonably practicable, also taking into account the prevailing wind direction relative to sensitive receptors; • Using enclosures to contain dust emitted from construction activities; and • Undertaking soil spreading, seeding and planting following completion of earthworks.
4.5.3 In the Greatworth to Lower Boddington area dust-generating activities would comprise the construction of a series of cuttings and embankments; the green tunnels at Greatworth and Chipping Warden; the viaducts at Lower Thorpe, Edgcote and over the Highfurlong Brook at Aston le Walls. Activities with a potential to generate dust at these sites include: the demolition of buildings; earthworks required for the preparation of the ground; bulk excavation; processing and stockpiling of fill materials; construction of structural embankments; landscaping; the construction and use of construction compounds; construction of permanent replacement road infrastructure and bridges; and the transfer of dust and mud from vehicles onto local roads.
4.5.4 With the mitigation outlined above, the assessment of impacts arising from dust emissions has concluded that impacts would be minor adverse for the closest residential receptors at Greatworth Hall, on Banbury Lane, on Culworth Road Park and the Threshing Barn and negligible for all others. Impacts would be of negligible magnitude for ecological receptors. None of these impacts would result in a significant effect.
42 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Air quality
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 the following roads met the criteria for further assessment: • B4525; • Helmdon Road; • Banbury Lane; • Welsh Road; • Banbury Road; and • A361.
4.5.6 Subsequent to a more detailed assessment of impacts arising from the additional emissions on these roads, it has been concluded that impacts of increased NO2 and PM10 concentrations at roadside receptors would be negligible and would not, therefore, result in a significant effect. 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 Greatworth to Lower Boddington area have been screened to identify roads that require further assessment and to confirm the likely effect of the change in emissions from vehicles using those roads in 2026. The conclusion was that no roads would meet these criteria and the changes would therefore be too small to influence local air quality or give rise to significant effects. 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.
43 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 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 The South Northamptonshire Local Plan seeks to prevent the loss of existing village services such as local shops and pubs (Policy R4).
5.2.2 The submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Policy RC1 seeks provision of services, facilities and infrastructure in rural areas. Policy C6 seeks to minimise adverse impacts on the environment, the local economy and local communities and to maximise any benefits that arise from the HS2 proposals. It seeks to have the proposals deliver high quality design to protect communities and the environment from noise and visual intrusion; manage the construction to minimise the impact on communities and the environment; minimise adverse social and economic impacts, by maintaining accessibility and avoiding the severance of communities and agricultural holdings and ensure that community and other benefits, such as improved services on the WCML, are fully realised.
5.2.3 There are no housing allocations for sites of more than 0.5ha located within 2km of the route centre line. 5.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 5.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the community assessment are set out in Volume 1.
5.3.2 There are no are no additional topic specific assumptions or limitations in this area. 5.4 Environmental baseline 5.4.1 The study area includes the area of land within the construction boundary (comprising the temporary and permanent land take), as well as a suitable additional area as relevant to inform the respective environmental topics upon which the assessment is based.
5.4.2 The baseline study area and baseline data would be further refined in light of ongoing assessment work as part of the EIA process. Construction compound at Thorpe Mandeville
5.4.3 St John the Baptist’s Church, on Banbury Lane in the village of Thorpe Mandeville, lies outside of the permanent land take and temporary land take but falls within the study area. Auto-transformer station at Hill Farm and construction compound at Edgcote
5.4.4 Both the Battlefields Walk and Battlefields Trail are long-distance walking routes promoted by South Northamptonshire District Council and the Battlefields Trust respectively. Both lie within the temporary and permanent land take for two sections of both walks, firstly near Danes Moor and then at Edgcote. Overbridge and realignment at Culworth Road
5.4.5 The only community facility at Edgcote is St James’s Church, which falls outside the study area.
44 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Community
5.4.6 Both the Macmillan Way and the Chipping Warden Circular walking routes, promoted by Macmillan Cancer Support and South Northamptonshire District Council respectively, run along the Culworth Road and footpath AE/028 within the temporary and permanent land take. The Chipping Warden Circular also lies within the temporary and permanent land take on the return leg of the walk, to the north of Chipping Warden. Green tunnel and main construction compound at Chipping Warden
5.4.7 The settlement of Chipping Warden lies partly in the study area. It includes the following community facilities: Chipping Warden Primary School, a village hall and recreation ground off Culworth Road, the Wesleyan Chapel and a public house and the Griffin Inn. Just outside the study area in Chipping Warden is another public house, the Rose and Crown, as well as a church and allotments.
5.4.8 North-west of Aston-le-Walls the Proposed Scheme would pass directly through land at the Washbrook Farm equestrian centre. The centre has an indoor arena, an all-weather show- jumping arena, an international all-weather dressage arena as well as two grass gallops, a cross country course, schooling fields, turnout paddocks and grooms’ accommodation. It has been operating as an equestrian centre since 1998, hosting a regular programme of day activities and the Aston-le-Walls Horse Trials. The nearest horse-riding centre to Washbrook Farm is the Holistic Equitation Centre in Daventry (approximately 13km from Washbrook Farm), which has an indoor arena and offers riding lessons and dressage clinics but does not have outdoor facilities comparable to those at Washbrook Farm.
5.4.9 A woodland, Calves Close Spinney, lies partly within the temporary and permanent land take. This site contains derelict buildings, some of which are associated with the nearby ex-Royal Air Force World War II airfield. It is used for ‘airsoft’, a sport similar to paintballing.
5.4.10 A long distance walking route, the Jurassic Way promoted by South Northamptonshire District Council, passes through the temporary and permanent land take (on footpaths AE/020 and AE/012). Overbridge and construction compound at Hill Road
5.4.11 The main community facility at Lower Boddington is a public house called the Carpenters Arms, which lies within the study area.
5.4.12 The Boddington to Oxford Canal Route, a walking route promoted by South Northamptonshire District Council, passes through the temporary and permanent land take (on footpath AC/01 and Hill Road). Overbridge and construction compound at Boddington Road and realignment of Banbury Road
5.4.13 Glyn Davies Wood Nature Reserve lies partly within the proposed area of temporary and permanent land take. This nature reserve is managed by Banbury Ornithological Society and is accessible to members of the society (approximately 120) throughout the year for bird watching and for recording of other wildlife such as butterflies or bats.
45 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Community
5.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation Residential property
5.5.1 The Proposed Scheme would require the demolition of three residential properties along the stretch of the route which passes through Greatworth to Lower Boddington. These are described below: • The Proposed Scheme would run on viaduct through Lower Thorpe, crossing a floodplain and Banbury Lane. The construction activities associated with the viaduct and the embankment on the northern side of the viaduct would require the demolition of two dwellings in Lower Thorpe: Lower Thorpe Farm and Twin Oaks (plus outbuildings); and • East of Chipping Warden the Proposed Scheme would run through a green tunnel. This would require the demolition of one dwelling in Chipping Warden: Stone House on Byfield Road.
5.5.2 It is considered, in the context of the community, that the permanent loss of these properties is a minor adverse effect and is, therefore, not considered significant.
5.5.3 The Proposed Scheme would cross some east-to-west roads in the Greatworth to Lower Boddington area, including: Banbury Road and Banbury Lane east of Thorpe Mandeville; Mill Lane between Edgcote and Culworth; and the A361 Byfield Road north of Chipping Warden. These roads provide links between villages and community resources to the east and west of the Proposed Scheme. However, the closures of these roads would be appropriately phased and temporary or permanent diversions would be put in place, as necessary, in order to maintain community accessibility. As such, the effects on community accessibility are negligible and are not considered to be significant. Community infrastructure
5.5.4 The Washbrook Farm equestrian centre would experience both temporary land take and permanent severance impacts. The facilities directly affected by the land take would be the cross country course and schooling fields. Whilst indoor activities would be able to continue as at present, the use of outdoor facilities would be disrupted for over a year. The western side of the facility would be permanently severed from the land and indoor facilities to the east, which could compromise its ongoing use. Given the absence of a comparable local alternative, the effect of these impacts is considered to be major adverse and therefore significant. HS2 Ltd is continuing to explore these effects and the potential for mitigation, in consultation with the operator, which will be reported in the formal ES.
5.5.5 There are not considered to be any other significant adverse effects on community or recreational infrastructure in the Greatworth to Lower Boddington area as a consequence of land take or isolation. 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 in the Greatworth to Lower Boddington area as a consequence of land take or isolation. Amenity
5.5.7 The assessment of effects on amenity will draw upon other technical disciplines e.g.( air quality, noise and vibration, visual, transport and traffic) findings to inform the amenity assessment. The presence of in-combination impacts from these other disciplines could result
46 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Community
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
5.5.8 The residual effect on Washbrook Farm is likely to remain significant.
5.5.9 At this stage no other residual significant effects during the construction phase have been identified.
5.5.10 Multiple (in combination) community effects will be considered and, where significant, reported in the formal ES. Further mitigation
5.5.11 Further work is being undertaken to understand the effects on Washbrook Farm and to identify possible mitigation options.
5.5.12 The development of other specific mitigation measures where required, which could include improvement or provision of community resources as appropriate, will be reported in 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. The assessment will draw upon other technical disciplines (e.g. air quality, noise and vibration, 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 considered and, where significant, reported in the formal ES. Further mitigation
5.6.3 Consultation would inform the development of specific mitigation measures where required, which could include improvement or provision of community resources as appropriate. These mitigation measures would be reported in the formal ES.
47 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 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 South Northamptonshire Local Plan Policies EV9, EV10 and EV11 seek to control development and to enhance conservation areas. Policies EV12 and EV13 seek to protect listed buildings and their setting. Policy EV28 seeks to control development that would affect historic parks, gardens and battlefields.
6.2.2 The submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Policy C6 states that the design and construction of HS2 must minimise adverse impacts on the environment, the local economy and local communities. The policy states that the Proposed Scheme would be expected to deliver high quality design and minimise the impact on communities and the environment. Policy BN5 seeks to preserve and enhance features of the historic environment.
6.2.3 In addition, local and regional guidance relevant to this assessment includes South Northamptonshire Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) Conservation Areas23. 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 data were obtained for an area of 1km from the centre line in Northamptonshire. 6.4 Environmental baseline 6.4.1 The area lies within a watershed between the River Cherwell to the south and west and the Rivers Nene and Great Ouse to the north-east and south-east. North of Lower Boddington, the ground falls away towards the Warwickshire plain and the catchment of the River Itchen. Human activity through all periods in the study area has largely been concentrated in these principal valley systems, specifically within and immediately adjacent to the valley of the River Cherwell.
6.4.2 Within the valley of the River Cherwell and its tributaries there is a potential for waterlogged and other deposits of palaeo-environmental interest. Archaeological deposits may also be relatively deeply buried in these localities by the build-up of alluvium in the valley floors and colluvium on the lower slopes.
6.4.3 A concentration of Mesolithic stone tools has been recovered as surface finds in the watershed between the headwaters of the River Cherwell and River Great Ouse. Neolithic to early Bronze Age activity has been recorded throughout the study area, with settlement from these periods
23 South Northamptonshire District Council (1998) Supplementary Planning Guidance: Conservation Areas.
48 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Cultural heritage
located in the River Cherwell valley or close to the headwaters of streams within the upland watershed between Thorpe Mandeville and Greatworth.
6.4.4 The line of Welsh Lane extends from Lower Boddington through Aston le Walls, across Trafford Bridge and on towards Brackley. Welsh Lane, which may have prehistoric origins, is believed to follow the route of a former Roman road and it is likely that settlement of Roman date is concentrated along it. An example of this is the Scheduled Monument at Edgcote, which although identified as a villa, is likely to be part of a larger roadside settlement.
6.4.5 By the time of the Norman Conquest the present settlement pattern had probably developed, focused on the settlements at Greatworth, Sulgrave, Thorpe Mandeville, Culworth, Edgcote, Chipping Warden, Aston le Walls and Upper and Lower Boddington.
6.4.6 Significant military action occurred in the parish of Edgcote during the Wars of the Roses (AD 1455-AD 1487). The probable location of the battlefield lies at Danesmoor to the south of Trafford Bridge. The battlefield probably contains archaeological remains, such as arrow- heads, discarded equipment and weaponry (mainly metal artefacts). The burial pits may provide further archaeological evidence for the battle.
6.4.7 It is likely that the pattern of settlement established in the medieval period continued throughout the post-medieval period (1539–1900) to the present day.
6.4.8 Within the area of study the following designated and non-designated assets are recorded. Designated assets
6.4.9 Designated assets are represented on maps CT‑01-34 to CT‑01-39.
6.4.10 The following designated assets are located within the permanent and temporary land take boundaries: • Two Grade II listed buildings – Lower Thorpe Farmhouse and Trafford Bridge; and • Halse Copse South ancient woodland.
6.4.11 The following designated assets are located within the draft zone of theoretical visibility (ZTV) (see section 9.3): • Six scheduled monuments, comprising: a bowl barrow at Lower Thorpe; Castle Hill ringwork at Sulgrave; the Castle ringwork at Culworth; the Roman villa at Edgcote; a market cross at Chipping Warden; and Arbury Banks hillfort at Chipping Warden; • Six Grade I listed buildings, comprising: the Church of St Peter and St John the Baptist at Thorpe Mandeville; Sulgrave Manor; Edgcote House; the Church of St James at Edgcote; the Church of St Peter and St Paul at Chipping Warden; and the Church of St Leonard at Aston le Walls; • Four conservation areas comprising Greatworth, Sulgrave, Culworth and Chipping Warden; • Four Grade II* listed buildings including the Church of St Mary at Culworth and its walls and gate piers (separate listing); the manor house at Thorpe Mandeville; and the manor house at Chipping Warden; • Some 170 Grade II listed buildings. The majority of these lie within the historic settlements at Greatworth, Sulgrave, Culworth, Chipping Warden, Aston le Walls, Lower Boddington and Upper Boddington; and • Two Ancient Woodlands – Halse Copse North and Redhill Wood.
49 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Cultural heritage
Non‐designated assets
6.4.12 Within the area of permanent land take and temporary land take the following assets have been identified: • Archaeological remains associated with the Roman villa/settlement at Edgcote; • Prehistoric and later settlement and land divisions near Greatworth and Dean Barn; • Prehistoric and later settlement and land divisions near Costow Park; • Medieval and post-medieval archaeology at Lower Thorpe; • Prehistoric settlement to the west of Culworth Grounds; • Archaeological remains associated with the battlefield of Edgcote; • Medieval and post-medieval archaeology at Trafford Bridge; • Prehistoric and World War II features at Chipping Warden airfield; and • Prehistoric activity to the north of Three Shires.
6.4.13 In addition to these characterised areas of cultural heritage potential, there is a probability that other unidentified buried archaeological remains could also survive within the temporary land take.
6.4.14 The assessment of surviving and historically important hedgerows is ongoing and would be reported in the formal ES. 6.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation
6.5.1 The construction works have the potential to affect heritage assets. Impacts would occur to assets within the construction boundary, as well as the setting of heritage assets within the ZTV.
6.5.2 The draft CoCP sets out the provisions that would be adopted to control effects on cultural heritage assets. The provisions include: • Management measures to control damage to assets that would be retained within the area of temporary land take and the preparation of project wide principles, standards and techniques for works affecting heritage assets; • A programme of archaeological investigation and recording to be undertaken prior to construction works affecting the assets; and • A programme of historic building investigation and recording to be undertaken prior to modification or demolition of the assets.
6.5.3 In addition the following measures have been included as part of the design of the Proposed Scheme and to avoid or reduce impacts on heritage assets: • Minor alignment adjustments to avoid impacts to the Grade II listed Trafford Bridge; and • Earthworks and plantings to reduce impacts to the settings of nearby assets.
6.5.4 Assets that would or might experience a significant physical affect in this area are: • Lower Thorpe Farmhouse, a Grade II listed asset of moderate heritage value that would be demolished;
50 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Cultural heritage
• Removal of potential in situ buried archaeological remains of moderate heritage value at: ȃȃ Edgcote battlefield; ȃȃ Greatworth and Dean Barn; ȃȃ Costow House; ȃȃ Lower Thorpe; ȃȃ Culworth Grounds; ȃȃ Edgcote; ȃȃ Chipping Warden; and ȃȃ North of Three Shires.
6.5.5 The settings of the following specific heritage assets would experience significant effects: • Greatworth Hall, of moderate heritage value, which would be impacted through the introduction of hoardings and construction activities; • The scheduled bowl barrow at Lower Thorpe, an asset of high value, which would have its setting affected through the construction of the viaduct and associated construction activities; • The Church of John the Baptist and Manor House at Thorpe Mandeville, which would have its setting affected through the construction of the viaduct and associated construction activities; • The unregistered battlefield at Edgcote, of moderate value, which would be bisected by the Proposed Scheme and would lose its context24; • The Grade II listed Trafford Bridge, of moderate value, which would have its setting affected through the construction of the viaduct and associated construction activities; • The complex of listed buildings at Edgcote, including Edgcote House, an asset of high value, which would have its setting affected through the construction of the viaduct and associated construction activities; and • The scheduled Roman villa/settlement at Edgcote, an asset of high value, which would have its setting affected through the construction of the viaduct and new overbridge to the north and their associated construction activities.
6.5.6 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
6.5.7 The impacts of the construction phase on the heritage assets through setting changes would be temporary and are therefore not considered to result in residual significant effects.
6.5.8 Although a programme of archaeological investigation and historic building investigation and recording contributes to knowledge gain, such works do not fully mitigate the effect or reduce the impact on heritage assets. The following effects therefore remain: • The demolition of Lower Thorpe Farmhouse; and • Potential effect on buried archaeological remains at the locations described above.
24 The exact location of the battlefield is unknown.
51 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Cultural heritage
Further mitigation
6.5.9 No further mitigation measures have been identified at this time. 6.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation
6.6.1 There would be no effects on known buried archaeological remains arising from operation of the Proposed Scheme.
6.6.2 The introduction of the Proposed Scheme into an area of existing open landscape has the potential to introduce impacts on the setting of heritage assets. The Proposed Scheme includes elevated sections on viaduct and embankment, together with realignment of the existing highway infrastructure and the introduction of road and foot bridges over the Proposed Scheme.
6.6.3 The provision of earthworks and planting, as illustrated on maps CT‑06-068 to CT‑06-079, would reduce the effects of the Proposed Scheme. However, the following effects would remain: • Greatworth Hall which would have its setting changed by the presence of the Proposed Scheme on a large embankment immediately to the south and west of the building; • The listed buildings at Thorpe Mandeville would have their outlook changed by the presence of the viaduct through the valley; • The scheduled bowl barrow at Lower Thorpe would have its outlook changed by the presence of the viaduct through the valley; • Edgcote House and associated listed buildings would have their setting changed by the presence of the Proposed Scheme on viaduct and embankment; • Edgcote battlefield would have its context altered by the presence of the Proposed Scheme through the area; and • The scheduled monument at Edgcote would have its setting changed by the Proposed Scheme on viaduct and at ground level to the north and east of the monument. Likely residual significant effects
6.6.4 The presence of the viaduct at Lower Thorpe would alter the setting of the scheduled bowl barrow and would result in a significant residual effect.
6.6.5 The character and context of the battlefield at Edgcote would be altered by the presence of the Proposed Scheme on embankment through this area, resulting in a significant residual effect.
6.6.6 The presence of the viaduct at Edgcote would alter the setting of the Grade II listed Trafford Bridge and would result in a significant residual effect.
6.6.7 The character and context of the Roman villa/settlement at Edgcote would be compromised by the presence of the Proposed Scheme on embankment through this area, resulting in a significant residual effect. Further mitigation
6.6.8 No further mitigation measures have been identified at this time.
52 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 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 South Northamptonshire Local Plan contains three policies that are relevant to ecology: • Saved Policy G3 seeks to prevent development that would adversely affect sites of nature conservation value; • Saved Policy EV24 provides specific protection for County Wildlife Sites; and • Saved Policy EV25 seeks to prevent development that would adversely affect the nature conservation or value of dismantled railways or waterways.
7.2.2 The submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit’s Joint Core Strategy Policy C6 states that the design and construction of the Proposed Scheme will be expected to deliver high quality design and minimise the impact on the environment. In addition Policies BN1, BN2 and BN3 seek to manage and enhance green infrastructure, biodiversity and woodland areas.
7.2.3 In addition, local and regional guidance relevant to the assessment is provided in the Northamptonshire Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP)25. 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: Northamptonshire County Council; Central Area Anglian Environment Agency; Northamptonshire Bat Group; Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northampton Wildlife Trust, the Banbury Ornithological Society, and Northamptonshire Biodiversity Records Centre.
7.3.3 Field surveys undertaken to date have been limited to locations where landowner permission has been obtained and to areas accessible to the public. They include (but are not limited to): habitat and hedgerow surveys, great crested newt surveys, breeding bird surveys, bat tree and building inspections, bat activity, and emergence surveys.
7.3.4 Surveys will continue during 2013, and will include (but are not limited to) the following, subject to access: badger surveys, reptile surveys, fish surveys, and river corridor surveys and river habitat surveys at the River Cherwell and Highfurlong 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 in Sections 7.5 and 7.6.
25 Northamptonshire Biodiversity Partnership (2008) Northamptonshire Biodiversity Action Plan V1.4
53 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Ecology
7.4.2 Land in and adjacent to the Proposed Scheme consists of arable farmland, pasture fields and numerous intact hedgerows. There are several woods close to the Proposed Scheme and disused railways that cross it. Wetland habitats include the River Cherwell, the Highfurlong Brook, Trafford Bridge Marsh, and a number of ponds at Lower Thorpe and Aston le Walls.
7.4.3 Statutory and non-statutory designated sites are shown on maps CT‑01-34 to CT‑01-39 and CT‑02-14.
7.4.4 There are no statutory designated sites located within 500m of the Proposed Scheme.
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 three sites in this area of the route. Due to the habitats and species present, these sites are considered to be up to county/ metropolitan value. They are: • Halse Copse South LWS – designated for woodland. The northern half is ancient woodland and the rest is an example of lowland deciduous woodland, a habitat of principal importance identified in Section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act (2006)26 and a local BAP habitat. The southern end of the LWS would be within the extent of the Proposed Scheme; • Trafford Bridge Marsh LWS – designated for its fen and woodland, both habitats of principal importance and local BAP habitats. The LWS would be partially within the Proposed Scheme; and • Aston le Walls Railway Line LWS – designated for its species-rich neutral grassland. A central section of this linear site would be within the Proposed Scheme.
7.4.6 Other habitats located outside of the designated sites identified above and which are relevant to the assessment include the following: • Watercourses – the River Cherwell and a tributary, Highfurlong Brook, and several drainage ditches are crossed by the Proposed Scheme. The two main watercourses are considered likely to be a habitat of principal importance and a local BAP habitat. These habitats are considered likely to be district/borough value; • Hedgerows – many are likely to qualify as a habitat of principal importance and a Local BAP habitat. Some also meet the wildlife and landscape criteria specified in the Hedgerows Regulations 199727. Since they could be habitat corridors, the hedgerow network is considered to be of up to district/borough value; • Woodland – in addition to woodland at Halse Copse South LWS and Trafford Bridge Marsh LWS, there are four areas of lowland deciduous woodland (a habitat of principal importance and a local BAP habitat), which would be within or partly within the Proposed Scheme. They are Glyn Davies Wood, Osierbed Spinney, woodland near Lower Thorpe and Calves Close Spinney. As this habitat is uncommon in the area, together they are considered likely to be of district/borough value; • Grassland – areas of semi-improved grassland, pasture and occasional patches of wet grassland are present around Aston le Walls, Trafford Bridge and Thorpe Mandeville. Some are likely to qualify as habitats of principal importance or as local BAP habitat. Together they are considered likely to be of district/borough value; and • Ponds – 20 ponds are located within or partly within the Proposed Scheme; most are near Aston le Walls, Edgcote and Thorpe Mandeville. Few are likely to qualify as a habitat of
26 Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 (Chapter 16). London. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. 27 The Hedgerow Regulations 1997 (1997 No. 1160). London. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
54 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Ecology
principal importance or a local BAP habitat and, from existing data they are considered unlikely to be of more than local/parish value.
7.4.7 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 6.2829
Resource/ Value Rationale Receptor
Otter Up to county/ Otters are listed under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) (WCA) and metropolitan the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (2010, as amended)28,29. Habitat suitable for otter is present along the watercourses and drainage ditches. A single record of otter was recorded at the River Cherwell close to Trafford Bridge Marsh. The river is considered likely to support this species.
Hazel Up to county/ Hazel dormice are listed under the WCA and the Conservation of Habitats and Species dormouse metropolitan Regulations (2010 as amended). Hazel dormice are rare in Northamptonshire, habitat suitable for this species is uncommon and there few records in this area. As such, while suitable habitat is present, dormice are considered unlikely to be present.
Bats Unlikely to All species and their roosts are listed under the WCA and the Conservation of Habitats be more than and Species Regulations (2010 as amended). A large Natterer’s bat roost is present close country/ to, but south of, this area. These bats are likely to forage around woodland and arable metropolitan land east of Greatworth. Foraging habitat is also present along the disused railways, and the river corridors. Bat trees and buildings have been identified with potential for roosting near Halse and Thorpe Mandeville. Records confirm there are at least six species of bat throughout the area. (There are some limited data that barbastelle bats are present in this part of the county, but due to the lack of woodland and lack of connectivity to woodland they are considered unlikely to be present in this area).
Birds Unlikely to be The farmland and woodland edge is suitable for breeding birds. Few records are more than county/ available but data suggests the area may be important for corn bunting and yellow metropolitan wagtail, especially near Halse. Other records include UK BAP and BOCC Red List species, such as skylark, linnet, tree sparrow and yellowhammer in low numbers.
Water vole Up to district/ Water vole are listed under the WCA. Habitat suitable for water vole is present along borough the watercourses and drainage ditches. Few records of water vole were recorded at the River Cherwell close to Trafford Bridge Marsh. The river is considered likely to support this species.
Great crested Unlikely to be Great crested newt are listed under both the WCA and the Conservation of Habitats and newt more than district/ Species Regulations (2010, as amended). A small population has been recorded near the borough northern end of the area and there are numerous records near Lower Boddington. Other suitable habitat is present at Thorpe Mandeville and Edgcote.
Aquatic Unlikely to be Suitable habitat for this species group is abundant (particularly in the water bodies near invertebrates more than district/ Lower Thorpe, the River Cherwell and the Highfurlong Brook), but few records have borough been recorded to date.
Fish Unlikely to be Many species are listed under the WCA. Suitable habitat for this species group is present more than district/ along the River Cherwell, the Highfurlong Brook and their tributaries but few records borough have been recorded to date.
Badger Unlikely to be Habitat suitable for badgers is present along the route in this area. A few records more than local/ confirm the presence of badgers near Halse. parish
Reptiles Unlikely to be Suitable habitat present, particularly at the disused railways and close to the River more than local/ Cherwell and Highfurlong Brook. Records suggest small numbers are present, including parish grass snakes near Lower Boddington.
28 The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. 29 The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (2010 as amended). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
55 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Ecology
Resource/ Value Rationale Receptor
Terrestrial Unlikely to be Woodland edges and the disused railways provide suitable habitat but no large invertebrates more than local/ populations or rare species have been recorded to date. parish
Plants Unlikely to be Corn spurrey, a locally scarce flowering plant, has been recorded close to Halse Copse more than local/ and marsh stitchwort, a species of principal importance, has been recorded at Trafford parish Bridge Marsh.
Table 6: Preliminary evaluation of likely value of protected and/or notable species occurring within this area 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 are provisional, based on the preliminary assessment of baseline value as presented in Section 7.4 of this report.
7.5.2 The following measures have been included as part of the design of the Proposed Scheme and avoid or reduce impacts on features of ecological value: • Raising the vertical alignment of the Proposed Scheme over viaducts at the River Cherwell and Highfurlong Brook, which would help reduce the loss of vegetation from the watercourses and adjacent habitats; • Creating approximately 3ha of grassland near Thorpe Mandeville to replace the nearby species-rich and wet grassland that would be lost; • Planting a green link that incorporates tree and scrub species over the top of the northern portal of the green tunnel at Chipping Warden; and • The planting of hedgerows and linear scrub would connect the fragmented Aston le Walls Railway Line LWS and encourage species such as bats and invertebrates to continue to move along the disused railway.
7.5.3 The assessment assumes implementation of the measures set out within the CoCP, which includes translocation of protected species where appropriate.
7.5.4 Halse Copse South LWS is approximately 13ha of which about 5.5ha is ancient woodland. Construction would cause the loss of about 1.5ha (12%) from the southern and western edges of the LWS, of which about 0.4ha is ancient woodland and therefore irreplaceable. Loss from the western edge would remove the most botanically rich habitat in the LWS. The remaining part of the LWS would be next to an 8m deep cutting. Water could flow towards the cutting from the LWS and change the groundwater conditions of the LWS. This could affect the diversity of the plant communities in the LWS, particularly the boggy areas where plant and invertebrate species requiring damp habitats would be threatened. Habitat loss of this extent and magnitude and associated changes in groundwater levels would result in a permanent adverse effect on site integrity that is significant at the county/metropolitan vel.le
7.5.5 The viaduct at Edgcote would cross the Trafford Bridge Marsh LWS. Eight viaduct piers would be located in the LWS causing the permanent loss of approximately 0.04ha (2%) of wet grassland for which the site is designated. Access to the piers and site compounds could result in the temporary loss of additional land from the LWS. Approximately 25% of the LWS would also be shaded by the proposed viaduct. Habitat loss and shading of this extent would result in a permanent adverse effect on site integrity that is significant at the county/metropolitan level.
56 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Ecology
7.5.6 If surveys find otter to be present then construction activities such as increased light and noise, and the loss of water-margin habitat at the River Cherwell and Highfurlong Brook may result in disturbance, and prevent them from moving along the river. Works would disturb and fragment movement for up to 18 months during construction. Impacts of this magnitude could isolate and sever breeding populations, which would result in an adverse effect on the conservation status of otter that is significant up to the county/metropolitan level.
7.5.7 The permanent removal of vegetation may have impacts on bats. Habitat loss would reduce the availability of foraging sites (for example at Halse Copse wood), and potentially result in the loss of roosts and fragmentation. This could particularly affect breeding populations of Natterer’s bats in the south of the area. Pending results from 2013 surveys it is considered that impacts could result in a permanent adverse effect on conservation status of the bat populations concerned that would be significant at up to county/metropolitan level.
7.5.8 Construction would result in the loss of approximately 1.1ha (33%) of woodland from the western section of Glyn Davies Wood and up to 5ha of other secondary woodland from this section of the route. Remaining habitat would not be fragmented. Habitat loss of this extent would result in a permanent adverse effect on conservation status of secondary woodland that is significant at the district/borough level.
7.5.9 The Proposed Scheme would result in the loss of 1.6ha of grassland from near the River Cherwell at Trafford Bridge and approximately 0.3ha of grassland from near Thorpe Mandeville. The proposed mitigation planting of approximately 3ha of grassland to be provided at Thorpe Mandeville would mitigate for the habitat that would be removed, reducing the overall effect to a temporary adverse effect (likely to be several years until maturation) that would be significant district/borough level. The soils and plants would be translocated in-line with the CoCP where practicable to do so, and after maturation the impacts relating to the loss of notable grassland would reduce to a level that is not significant.
7.5.10 The Proposed Scheme would cross approximately 150 hedgerows that are located throughout the area. This would fragment the hedgerow network and cause hedgerow losses of up to 40km (worst case i.e. assuming complete loss within and at the boundary of the Proposed Scheme). These impacts would result in a permanent adverse effect on conservation status of the hedgerow network that is significant at up to the district/borough level.
7.5.11 The Proposed Scheme would isolate at least eight potential great crested newt breeding ponds and fragment suitable terrestrial habitat near Lower Boddington. Construction would result in the loss of at least three additional potential breeding ponds and some habitat suitable for great crested newts. Fragmentation and isolation of habitat of this magnitude would result in a permanent adverse effect on conservation status that is likely to be significant at up to the district/borough level.
7.5.12 The Proposed Scheme would cross the Aston le Walls Railway Line LWS at grade where the route exits the green tunnel at Chipping Warden, approximately half way along the 4km (7.11ha) long LWS. About 0.8ha (12%) of the LWS would be lost. The removal of grass and scrub habitat (at least 150m wide and the width of the linear feature at the crossing point), as part of construction, could fragment the LWS. However, the proposed planted mitigation link at Aston le Walls Railway Line LWS would maintain connectivity from east to west. Until the planting is established and line-side vegetation either side of the proposed route is removed (to avoid encouraging species towards the Proposed Scheme) there would still be a loss of connectivity along the LWS. However, following incorporation and establishment of this mitigation, the effect is likely to reduce to a level that is not significant.
7.5.13 Dormice are considered unlikely to be present and therefore no effects on this species are anticipated.
57 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Ecology
7.5.14 A summary of likely residual significant effects is provided in Table 7. Local/parish effects, which in combination may be significant, will be described in the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects 7.5.15 Taking into account mitigation proposed in the design of the Proposed Scheme set out above, anticipated significant residual ecological effects during construction are detailed inT able 7.
Resource/Receptor Residual effect Level at which the effect would be significant
Halse Copse South LWS Permanent adverse effect on site integrity due to loss of County/metropolitan approximately 1.5ha (12%) of which 0.4ha is ancient woodland, and changes in groundwater conditions.
Trafford Bridge Marsh LWS Permanent adverse effect on site integrity due to loss of 0.4ha County/metropolitan (6%) and shading of approximately 25% of the LWS.
Otter Potential temporary adverse effect (up to 18 months) due to Up to county/metropolitan. fragmentation of river habitat and isolation of populations.
Bats Potential permanent adverse effect on conservation status due Up to county/metropolitan. to loss of roosts, foraging habitat and fragmentation.
Woodland Permanent adverse effect on conservation status due to loss of at District/borough least 6ha of notable habitat.
Grassland Temporary adverse effect due to temporary reduction in habitat District/borough extent.
Hedgerows Permanent adverse effect on conservation status of hedgerow Up to district/borough network due to loss of up to 40km of hedgerows.
Great crested newt Potential permanent adverse effect on conservation status due Up to district/borough to loss, isolation and fragmentation of breeding ponds.
Table 7: Significant residual construction effects on ecological receptors within area Further mitigation 7.5.16 Further measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design include: • Provision of additional woodland planting or management of existing woodland to compensate for losses of non-ancient woodland at Halse Copse South. This could include measures to enhance connectivity between remaining woodland. The ancient woodland cannot be replaced; • HS2 Ltd would explore the options of monitoring groundwater levels near Halse Copse South LWS before and during construction to determine baseline conditions and any changes. The monitoring results would inform the design of any additional mitigation, if required; • Provision of measures to facilitate the passage of species across the route where significant foraging or commuting routes would be disturbed; • Options to translocate fen from Trafford Bridge Marsh LWS to a receptor site which supports a similar water regime would be explored; • Use of temporary fencing or retention of existing habitat links to minimise disturbance of otters during construction; • Provision of replacement hedgerow planting using appropriate native species to restore connectivity of the network; • Provision of new ponds, terrestrial habitat and habitat links for great crested newts, as required based on results from 2013 surveys; and • Provision of alternative roosting habitat for bats, as required based on results from 2013 surveys.
58 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Ecology
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 Within this section of the Proposed Scheme there are no design measures which avoid or reduce impacts on features of ecological value.
7.6.3 Barn owls are at risk of colliding with trains, particularly near Decoypond Wood and Sheephouse Wood, where there is suitable woodland and grassland habitat. The Greatworth Green Tunnel and Chipping Warden Green Tunnel and associated habitat linkages would provide corridors for barn owl to cross the route. However, the vegetation (grassland) that will grow along the embankments of the Proposed Scheme 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 that would also be significant at up to district/ borough level.
7.6.4 Bats, particularly Natterer’s, in the south of the route are at risk of being struck by trains or possibly harmed by turbulence. The positioning of the route in cutting in this area would reduce the risk to bats. Pending further survey result, it is currently anticipated that train strike in this section of the route would be unlikely to result in more than the loss of occasional individual bats. Loss of individual bats through train strike represents a potential permanent adverse effect on conservation status of the bat species concerned that would be significant at up to the local/parish level.
7.6.5 Further work will be carried out for the formal ES to assess the impacts of the Proposed Scheme on bats.
7.6.6 Effects significant at the local/parish level will be described in full in the formal ES, including consideration of the potential cumulative effect. Likely residual significant effects
7.6.7 Taking into account mitigation included as part of the Proposed Scheme design, and the assumption that further mitigation would be developed, the anticipated significant residual ecological effects during operation are detailed in Table 8.
Resource/Receptor Residual effect Level at which the effect would be significant
Barn owl Potential permanent adverse effect on conservation status due Up to district/borough to train strike.
Table 8: Significant residual operational effects on ecological receptors within this area Further mitigation
7.6.8 Another further measure currently being considered but which is not yet part of the design includes: • Management to ensure a short sward is maintained either side of the Proposed Scheme. 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.
59 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 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: geological sites of special scientific interest (SSSI), local geological sites (LGS), 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 CS7 of Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework Core Strategy (2010) states that new built development could seek to utilise the efficient use of resources in both its construction and its operation30.
8.2.2 The South Northamptonshire Local Plan Policy G3 seeks to ensure land quality is taken into account in development proposals.
8.2.3 The submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Policy C6 states that the design and construction of the High Speed 2 rail link must minimise adverse impacts on the environment. In addition, Policy BN9 seeks to ensure the remediation of contaminated land so as not to pose a risk to health and the environment and Policy BN10 seeks to ensure ground stability is taken into account in the design of development proposals. 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 There has been engagement with South Northamptonshire District Council regarding land contamination and Northamptonshire County Council with regards to mineral policy. 8.4 Environmental baseline Geology
8.4.1 Although not specifically indicated to be present on the geological map, a cover of made ground may be present in built up areas of the study area as a result of previous cycles of development both on and off-site.
30 Northamptonshire County Council (2010), Minerals and Waste Development Framework Core Strategy.
60 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Land quality
8.4.2 Superficial deposits across the southern section of the route consist of glacial till.They are absent from the majority of the remainder of the route with the exception of localised alluvium associated with the River Cherwell and Highfurlong Brook.
8.4.3 From Greatworth to Lower Boddington the route is underlain by strata of the following formations, which outcrop progressively along the route from south to north: • Blisworth Limestone Formation, described as limestone of the Great Oolite Group; • Rutland Formation, described as mudstone of the Great Oolite Group; • Taynton Limestone Formation, described as ooidal limestone of the Great Oolite Group; • Horsehay Sand Formation, described as sandstone of the Great Oolite Group; • Northampton Sand Formation, described as sandstone, limestone and ironstone of the Inferior Oolite Group; • Whitby Mudstone Formation, described as mudstone of the Lias Group; • Marlstone Rock Formation, described as ferruginous limestone and ironstone of the Lias Group; • Dyrham Formation, described as interbedded siltstone and mudstone of the Lias Group; and • Charmouth Mudstone Formation, described as mudstone of the Lias Group. Groundwater and surface water
8.4.4 In this route section, two limestone formations have been designated as Principal Aquifers (Blisworth Limestone and Taynton Limestone Formations). The remaining limestone, sandstone (Horsehay Sand, Northampton Sand and Marlstone Rock Formations) and alluvium aquifers have been designated as Secondary A Aquifers. The Rutland Formation has been designated as Secondary B and the Dyrham Formation has been designated as Secondary (undifferentiated). The Whitby and Charmouth Mudstones and glacial till have been designated as unproductive.
8.4.5 A search for groundwater and surface water abstractions confirmed that there are no public or private licensed abstractions within 1km of the route and no Source Protection Zones (SPZs) are traversed (see map CT‑04-14). The Environment Agency reports ten licensed abstractions and seven unlicensed abstractions within the area.
8.4.6 The route crosses the River Cherwell at Trafford Bridge, and Highfurlong Brook to the west of Aston le Walls. There is one surface water abstraction from the River Cherwell 200m west of the route, to the east of Edgcote.
8.4.7 Groundwater and surface water resources are discussed in more detail in Section 13. Current and historical land use
8.4.8 The higher risk sites (both historical and current land uses) identified by the assessment are shown on maps CT‑03-34 to CT‑03-4031.
8.4.9 There are a number of potential contamination sources which may have impacted soils or groundwater (at least locally) within the limits of the scope of assessment. These include activities associated with historical quarrying in the area of Lower Thorpe, Trafford Bridge and Culworth Road; former military land; tanks at Blackgrounds Cottage Farm; sewage works and filter beds at Chipping Warden; a sewage works west of Lower Boddington; and disused
31 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.
61 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Land quality
railway land west of Greatworth Hall32. Contaminants commonly associated with these uses could include metals, semi-metals, organic and inorganic chemicals and radiological substances associated with military uses.
8.4.10 In the rural areas of the route where land use is primarily agricultural, and has not changed significantly over the years, historical activities that might give rise to potential land contamination are likely to be very localised and largely unrecorded. Mining/mineral resources
8.4.11 There are four mineral safeguarding areas within 250m of this route section as designated by Northamptonshire County Council which are all for sand and gravel resources. These are located at the southern end of the route section, north of Radstone, south-east of Halse Copse, in the vicinity of Trafford Bridge and south of Chipping Warden.
8.4.12 Five Britpit (British Pits) locations have been identified by BGS and are likely to have been used historically for abstraction of minerals – namely, Greatworth, Culworth Grounds, Danesmoor Spinney, Culworth Mill and Jobs Hill Sand Pit. No other mining or quarrying activities have been identified in the area. All the pits are classified by BGS as having ‘pit status C’ (a site which, at date of entry, has ceased to extract minerals) (see maps CT‑03-34 to CT‑03‑40).
8.4.13 The BGS has identified the presence of deep coal resources north ofGreatworth and Thorpe Mandeville that are between approximately 200m and 600m deep from the surface increasing northwards.
8.4.14 There are no sites in this part of the route that are currently being worked or that have planning permission. Geo-conservation resources
8.4.15 There are no geological conservation resources identified within the study area. Receptors
8.4.16 Contaminated land has the potential to affect a range of receptors if exposure to the contaminants occurs. The following potential receptors within the study area have been identified: • People living or working on or adjacent to the route of the Proposed Scheme; • Principal and Secondary A, Secondary B and Secondary (undifferentiated) aquifers; • River Cherwell and Highfurlong Brook; • Sand and gravel resources; • Nearby farmland or ecological resources; and • The built environment (such as listed buildings/structures, housing, foundations to structures).
32 The former RAF Chipping Warden Airfield, immediately north of Chipping Warden and former RAF Greatworth Wireless Transmission Station, Greatworth Park.
62 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Land quality
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. The CoCP would require 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.
8.5.2 This section of the route would include cuttings and green tunnels, including works through some disused railway land.
8.5.3 The route alignment in this study area is very varied and includes tunnels, cuttings, embankments and viaducts. At the historical quarry near Trafford Bridge, Blackgrounds Farm and the sewage works and filter beds near Chipping Warden the potential contaminants would be removed during construction by virtue of excavation and/or treatment of materials. This could result in a minor beneficial effect.
8.5.4 For the remaining sites the construction phase would be expected to have no significant effect.
8.5.5 In accordance with measures set out in the draft CoCP, contaminated soils excavated from the route would be treated as necessary to remove or render any contamination inactive, and where reasonably practicable reused within the Proposed Scheme. Techniques would be likely to include stabilisation methods, soil washing and bio-remediation to remove oil contaminants. Contaminated soil disposed off-site would be taken to a soil treatment facility, another construction site (for treatment, as necessary, and reuse) or an appropriately permitted landfill site.
8.5.6 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 CoCP, thus minimising the impacts of contamination from these sources.
8.5.7 If 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. If any remediation of contaminated soils or groundwater was necessary there could be a beneficial effect for the environment in the long term with respect to contamination, but it would be unlikely to be significant in the context of this assessment.
8.5.8 It is considered unlikely that additional remediation works would be required over and above the mitigation measures contained as standard within the CoCP. Likely residual significant effects
8.5.9 The assessment shows that, through the application of measures described in the draft CoCP during the construction phase, there would generally be no significant effect from current baseline to post-construction conditions.
63 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Land quality
Mining/mineral resources Assessment of impacts and mitigation
8.5.10 In this route section there are four areas of sand and gravel resources within 250m of the route that have been identified by Northamptonshire County Council as mineral safeguarded areas, although these resources are not currently being worked in this area (see maps CT‑03-34 and CT‑03-37).The first of these would underlie the route at the southern end of the study area (CT‑03-34, GR C5), and if the resource is not exploited before construction, and hence sterilised, a significant negative residual effect would occur. The Proposed Scheme would be located at the edge of the three remaining safeguarding areas and therefore any impact on these resources would not be significant. Likely residual significant effects
8.5.11 If no extraction takes place prior to or during the implementation of the Proposed Scheme, part of the identified mineral resource would be sterilised below the route footprint. However, this would only be considered significant for the safeguarding area at the southern end of the Proposed Scheme. Further mitigation
8.5.12 If the resource were to be excavated before construction begins, no significant residual effects would be identified and no further mitigation would be required. If the resource was sterilised, then no further mitigation would be practicable. Geo-conservation resources Assessment of impacts and mitigation
8.5.13 There are no geological conservation resources identified within the study area. Likely residual significant effects
8.5.14 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 Auto-transformer stations are proposed at three locations: east of Greatworth; Hill Farm, south-east of Edgcote; and west of Aston le Walls.
8.6.3 An auto-transformer station could, in principle, be a source of contamination through accidental discharge or leaks. However, the proposed auto-transformer station, in common with other modern substations, would use secondary containment thereby minimising the likelihood of future contamination.
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.
64 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Land quality
8.6.5 Where contamination remediation works have been carried out during the construction period, there may be a requirement to undertake post-remediation monitoring of, for example, groundwater. 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. Likely residual significant effects
8.6.6 Residual pollution risk associated with the operation of the Proposed Scheme is not considered to be significant.
65 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 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 South Northamptonshire Local Plan contains overarching policy G3 which seeks to reduce impacts of development. This includes seeking to ensure that development is compatible in terms of type, scale, siting, design and materials with the existing character of the locality. The policy also seeks to secure suitable landscape treatment as an integral part of the development.
9.2.2 In addition Policies EV7, EV2 and EV1 seek to prevent detrimental impact on the character and appearance of Special Landscape Areas, or limit these through design, materials, siting and the use of the land (Saved Local Plan Policy EV7). Outside of Special Landscape Areas, policies seek to prevent development in the open countryside (Policy EV2) and ensure that development pays particular attention to landscape features (Policy EV1).
9.2.3 There are a number of policies that seek to protect features within the landscape, such as: the loss of trees, hedgerow and ponds (Policy EV21), and prevent adverse effects to the landscape value of dismantled railways or waterways and watercourses (Policy EV25).
9.2.4 The submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Policy C6 states that the design and construction of the HS2 must minimise adverse impacts on the environment and local communities. The Proposed Scheme would deliver high quality design and seek to reduce the impact on communities and the environment. In addition Policy BN1 seeks the provision of green infrastructure and policy BN3 seeks woodland enhancement through development. 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 The extent of the landscape and visual study area, the distribution of visual receptor viewpoints and the location of verifiable photomontages has been discussed with Northamptonshire County Council, Cherwell District Council, South Northamptonshire DC, River Nene Regional Park and Natural England. Field surveys were undertaken from May to July 2012 and from December 2012 to March 2013, including photographic studies of LCAs and visual assessment of viewpoints. Further surveys will be undertaken during 2013 and reported in the formal ES.
9.3.3 The study area has been informed by early drafts of the zone of theoretical visibility (ZTV), which is being prepared for inclusion in the formal ES. LCAs and visual receptors within approximately 1km of the Proposed Scheme have been assessed. Long-distance views of up to 1.8km have been considered at locations such as Upper Boddington, Marston St Lawrence and rural roads and PRoW. The study area extends beyond all land required for the Proposed Scheme.
66 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Landscape and visual assessment
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-11-34 to LV-11-40 show the location of landscape character areas and visual receptor viewpoints.
9.4.2 The landscape is predominantly rural, with a mix of arable fields and pastures.The Tove Catchment Undulating Claylands LCA and Middleton Cheney and Woodford Halse Undulating Hills and Valleys LCA are largely arable and pastoral landscapes with some woodland blocks. Eldon Ironstone Hills LCA is predominantly an arable landscape; Boddington Broad Unwooded Vale LCA is a broad, flat landscape characterised by a combination of arable and pastoral land. Boddington Low Pastoral Hills LCA is a largely hilly pastoral landscape. Settlements are typically small scale and widely dispersed. Large-scale commercial development is limited to Greatworth Park in the south of the CFA and the former airfield at Chipping Warden in the north of the CFA.
9.4.3 The topography is gently undulating, but includes notable valley features at Lower Thorpe and Trafford Bridge. Fields are typically medium to large scale, though smaller around villages. Hedgerows are abundant, while woodland cover is limited to small copses, shelterbelts, disused railway corridors and watercourses, which combine to give a wooded appearance to some areas of the landscape.
9.4.4 The Greatworth to Lower Boddington area is crossed by local access roads and footpaths, which provide important links between the scattered dwellings and the local villages, and include the route of the A361 through Chipping Warden. A network of local PRoW coincides with the mid to southern extents of the area, including the Jurassic Way, Battlefields Trail and Macmillan Way long-distance trails. Dismantled railway lines cross the route at Greatworth, Lower Thorpe and Aston le Walls. Landscape character assessment
9.4.5 Landscape character areas (LCAs) are defined as areas with broadly homogenous characteristics and are influenced by national and district published character assessments. The Proposed Scheme in this area is located within national character area (NCA) 95: Northamptonshire Uplands and NCA 91: Yardley-Whittlewood Ridge, as defined by the Character of England mapping and Natural England33. For the purposes of this assessment the study area has been sub-divided into six discrete LCAs, five of which are most likely to be affected: the Tove Catchment Undulating Claylands LCA, an undulating landscape of broad valleys, fields and woodland; Middleton Cheney and Woodford Halse Undulating Hills and Valleys LCA and Eydon Ironstone Hills LCA, characterised by large to medium scale arable and pasture; Boddington Broad Unwooded vale LCA, a broad, flat landscape of arable and pastoral land; and the Boddington Low Pastoral Hills LCA, a landscape of elevated small scale pasture and agricultural fields. All of these LCAs have a medium sensitivity. Visual baseline
9.4.6 Viewpoints, split into residential, recreational, transport and employment have been selected to represent different groups of receptors within this area. Viewpoints have been agreed with the relevant local authorities. Residential receptors (i.e. residents) have a high sensitivity to change and are concentrated on the villages of Radstone, Halse, Greatworth, Marston St Lawrence, Thorpe Mandeville, Culworth, Chipping Warden, Aston le Walls, Lower Boddington and Upper Boddington. Recreational receptors also have a high sensitivity to change, and are concentrated along PRoW throughout the area, including the Battlefields
33 Natural England (1996); The Character of England 1996; http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/publications/nca/default.aspx. Accessed 8 January 2013.
67 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Landscape and visual assessment
Trail, the Macmillan Way and the Jurassic Way and various farm access tracks. Transport receptors (i.e. users of private or public transport) on scenic road routes have a medium sensitivity and those located on trunk roads have a low sensitivity to change, including the A361 at Chipping Warden. Potential employment receptors have a low sensitivity to change and include business parks at Greatworth and Chipping Warden and a smaller establishment at Greatworth Hall. There are no known protected views located within the study area. 9.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and mitigation
9.5.1 Due to the scale of the construction activities, works would be highly visible in many locations and would have the potential to give rise to significant effects which cannot be mitigated.This is commonplace with construction of major infrastructure projects, but it should be noted that these effects would be temporary in nature and relate to the peak construction phase. Effects during other phases of works are likely to be less due to less construction equipment being required at the time and a reduced intensity of construction activity.
9.5.2 Measures that have been incorporated into the draft CoCP to avoid or reduce landscape and visual effects during construction include: • Maximising the retention and protection of existing trees and vegetation where reasonably practicable; • Use of well-maintained hoardings and fencing; • Replacement of any trees intended to be retained which may be accidentally felled or die as a consequence of construction works; • Early implementation of planting and other landscape measures where there is no conflict with construction activities or other requirements of the Proposed Scheme; and • Appropriate maintenance of planting and seeding works and implementation of management measures, to continue through the construction period as landscape works are completed.
9.5.3 These measures have been taken account of in the assessment of the construction effects in this section. Landscape assessment
9.5.4 The most apparent changes during construction would relate to the removal of existing landscape elements, disruption to landform and the presence of construction plant. Concentrated construction effects would associate with the extents of green tunnel construction at Greatworth and Chipping Warden, with viaduct construction sites at Lower Thorpe, Edgcote and Aston le Walls and with an extensive area of earthworks modification west of Lower Boddington. There would be construction activities associated with the demolition of properties at Greatworth Business Park, Dean Barn, Twin Oaks, Lower Thorpe Farmhouse, an outbuilding associated with a dwelling on Banbury Road, two large barns at Blackgrounds Farm, The Bungalow, Stone House on Byfield Road and Fir Tree Nursery. There would be a loss of vegetation most notably associated with woodland plantations at Halse Copse (ancient woodland) and Lower Thorpe, vegetation within the River Cherwell valley at Edgcote, lines of mature poplars at Chipping Warden and the dismantled railway lines at Lower Thorpe and Aston le Walls. The presence of construction plant, coupled with the open nature of the landscape would result in changes to landscape character during construction.
9.5.5 Table 9 summarises the LCAs that would be significantly affected during construction of the Proposed Scheme.
68 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Landscape and visual assessment
LCA Sensitivity of Magnitude of Level of effect to LCA change LCA
The Tove Catchment Undulating Claylands LCA Medium Medium Moderate adverse Construction resulting in loss of woodland and hedgerows, severance of agricultural land, demolition of properties and activity associated with large‑scale earthworks.
Middleton Cheney and Woodford Halse Undulating Medium Medium Moderate adverse Hills and Valleys LCA Construction resulting in loss of woodland and hedgerows, severance of agricultural land and activity associated with viaduct construction and large‑scale earthworks.
Eydon Ironstone Hills LCA Medium Medium Moderate adverse Construction resulting in visual effects on the setting of the LCA associated with loss of vegetation and large‑scale earthworks.
Boddington Broad Unwooded Vale LCA Medium Medium Moderate adverse Construction resulting in loss of hedgerows, severance of agricultural land and large-scale earthworks.
Boddington Low Pastoral Hills LCA Medium Medium Moderate adverse Construction resulting in visual effects on the setting of the LCA associated with loss of vegetation and large‑scale earthworks.
Table 9: Significant landscape effects during construction Visual assessment
9.5.6 The most apparent changes to views during construction would relate to loss of existing vegetation, the presence of construction plant and substantial disruptive earthworks. Such effects would be particularly apparent within the extent of influence of green tunnel construction at Greatworth and Chipping Warden, at viaduct satellite construction sites at Lower Thorpe, Edgcote and Aston le Walls and across extensive areas of earthworks modification west of Lower Boddington. The height of construction plant and viaducts and the close proximity of construction activities to viewpoints, coupled with the absence of intervening screening (apart from site hoardings) would result in significant visual effects during construction. The topography in certain locations and the retention of hedges and trees would partially screen low level construction activity.
9.5.7 The greatest changes to views would be for residential receptors in Greatworth, Thorpe Mandeville, Chipping Warden, Aston le Walls and Lower and Upper Boddington. Scattered properties east of Greatworth, including Greatworth Hall, and properties between Edgcote and Chipping Warden and west of Lower Boddington and at Lower Thorpe would also experience changes to views during construction.
9.5.8 Recreational users of PRoW would experience changes to views throughout the area, though typically limited to short sections of more extensive routes. Of the long distance trails within the area, the Battlefields Trail would experience the longest duration of effect and close proximity to the construction of the Proposed Scheme.
9.5.9 Transport users would be most affected where main highways run alongside or across the Proposed Scheme. The highways experiencing most change would be those between Greatworth and Thorpe Mandeville, Trafford Bridge and Chipping Warden and Lower
69 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Landscape and visual assessment
Boddington and Wormleighton. The most prominent highway route affected in terms of the number of users would be the A361 at Chipping Warden.
9.5.10 An assessment of effects arising from lighting during construction where( required) would be prepared and included as part of 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-11-34 to LV-11-40. 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 east, north-east from Halse Copse Farm (193.2.002) High High Major adverse Visibility of overbridge construction, raised earthworks and soil stockpiling, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View south-west from property (The Bungalow) to east of Greatworth High High Major adverse Hall and Greatworth Hall (194.2.001 and 196.2.001) Open views of overbridge construction and raised earthworks.
View north-east from properties on eastern edge of Greatworth High High Major adverse (195.2.001) Visibility of overbridge construction, soil stockpiling and raised earthworks, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View north-east from Banbury Lane towards Lower Thorpe (201.2.001 High High Major adverse and 201.2.002) Visibility of viaduct and embankment construction at Lower Thorpe and construction of overbridges and cutting earthworks north of Lower Thorpe, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View east from Hill Farm, north-west of Thorpe Mandeville (203.2.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of construction of overbridges and cutting earthworks north of Lower Thorpe, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View west from Culworth Grounds Farm (204.2.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of construction of access overbridge, embankment earthworks and high level crane activity associated with viaduct construction, largely obscured by intervening tree cover.
View west from properties on western and southern edge of Culworth High High Major adverse (204.2.002 and 204.2.003) Visibility of high level viaduct crane construction activity and embankment earthworks, largely obscured by intervening landform and tree cover.
View east from Edgcote Lodge Farm and Trafford Bridge Farm High High Major adverse (205.2.001 and 207.2.002) Visibility of viaduct at Edgcote and bridleway overbridge construction, cutting earthworks and soil stockpiling, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows and tree cover.
View west from Culworth Mill at Trafford Bridge (208.2.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of vegetation removal at Trafford Bridge and viaduct construction, partially obscured by intervening tree cover.
70 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Landscape and visual assessment
Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect to of visual of change visual receptors receptors
View east from Edgcote House (209.2.003) High High Major adverse Visibility of construction of the viaduct at Edgcote, largely obscured by intervening tree cover.
View south-west from property on Culworth Road, east of Chipping High High Major adverse Warden (210.2.001) Open views of extensive cutting and green tunnel earthworks and construction of Culworth Road overbridge.
View north-east from properties on northern edge of Chipping Warden High High Major adverse (211.2.001 and 211.2.002) Open views of loss of hedgerow cover and green tunnel excavation and soil stockpiling.
View south-west from properties on the south-western edge of Aston High Medium Moderate adverse le Walls (214.2.001) Visibility of green tunnel excavation and soil stockpiling, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View north-east from Hilltop Cottage and Field Farm, north-east of High Medium Moderate adverse Appletree (215.2.001) Visibility of raised earthworks, soil stockpiling, construction of overbridges and construction of viaduct, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View west from properties on western edge of Aston le Walls High High Major adverse (216.2.001) Visibility of raised earthworks and part of the green tunnel earthworks, soil stockpiling, construction of Hill Road overbridge and construction of the viaduct over the Highfurlong Brook, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows and tree cover.
View south-west from properties on the south-western edge of Lower High High Major adverse Boddington (218.2.001) Visibility of raised earthworks and construction of Hill Road overbridge, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View north-east from Cedar’s Farm, west of Lower Boddington High High Major adverse (219.2.001) Visibility of raised earthworks and soil stockpiling, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View south-west from Hill Farm and Spella House, west of Lower High High Major adverse Boddington (222.2.001 and 222.2.002) Open views of raised earthworks, soil stockpiling, highways diversions and construction of Banbury Road overbridge.
Recreational receptors
View north-east from the PRoW network south-east of Halse Copse High Medium Moderate adverse (189.3.001) Visibility of overbridge construction, raised earthworks and soil stockpiling, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View west from the PRoW network south of Halse Copse (192.3.001) High High Major adverse Open views of overbridge construction, raised earthworks and soil stockpiling.
View south-west from the PRoW network south of B4525 road High Medium Moderate adverse (192.3.002) Visibility of overbridge construction, raised earthworks and soil stockpiling, largely obscured by intervening tree cover.
71 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Landscape and visual assessment
Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect to of visual of change visual receptors receptors
View north, north-east from PRoW north-west of property at High High Major adverse Greatworth Fields (193.3.001) Visibility of overbridge construction, raised earthworks and soil stockpiling, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View west from the PRoW network between Halse Copse and High Medium Moderate adverse Greatworth (193.3.002 and 195.3.001) Visibility of overbridge construction, raised earthworks and soil stockpiling, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View south, south-west from PRoW north-east of Greatworth High High Major adverse (196.3.001) Open views of green tunnel worksite, green tunnel excavation, raised earthworks, soil stockpiling and overbridge construction.
View north-east from PRoW east of Marston St Lawrence (197.3.002) High High Major adverse Open views of loss of hedgerows, green tunnel excavation and soil stockpiling.
View west from PRoW west of Sulgrave (198.3.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of green tunnel excavation and soil stockpiling, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View west from PRoW west of Sulgrave (200.3.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of green tunnel excavation and soil stockpiling, cutting earthworks and construction of Banbury Road overbridge, along with more extensive views of general construction operations northwards along the route of the Proposed Scheme, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows and tree cover.
View north-east to east from the PRoW network north of Thorpe High High Major adverse Mandeville (201.3.002 and 203. 3.003) Visibility of construction of overbridges and cutting earthworks north of Lower Thorpe and construction of viaduct, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View south-west from PRoW north-east of Lower Thorpe (202.3.001 High High Major adverse and 202.3.002) Visibility of green tunnel excavation and soil stockpiling, cutting earthworks and construction of Banbury Road overbridge and construction of viaduct, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View east from PRoW south-west of Culworth (204.3.001) High High Major adverse Open views of construction of overbridges, soil stockpiling and cutting earthworks north of Lower Thorpe.
View west from PRoW east of Trafford Bridge (206.3.001, 208.3.001 and High Medium Moderate adverse 208.3.002) Visibility of Edgcote viaduct construction, largely obscured by intervening tree cover.
View west from PRoW south of Edgcote (207.3.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of Edgcote viaduct construction, cutting earthworks and soil stockpiling, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View west from the Battlefields Way PRoW, east of Trafford Bridge High High Major adverse (208.3.003) Open views of Edgcote viaduct construction, Edgcote battlefield cutting worksite, soil stockpiling, overbridge and cutting earthworks.
72 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Landscape and visual assessment
Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect to of visual of change visual receptors receptors
View east from Battlefields Trail PRoW, north-east of Edgcote House High High Major adverse (209.3.003) Visibility of Edgcote viaduct construction, cutting earthworks, soil stockpiling and loss of trees, partially obscured by intervening tree cover.
View south-west from PRoW south of Wardenhill Farm (210.3.003) High High Major adverse Visibility of green tunnel excavation, Edgcote viaduct construction, cutting earthworks, soil stockpiling and loss of hedgerows, partially obscured by intervening tree cover.
View north-east from Jurassic Way PRoW, south of Chipping Warden High Medium Moderate adverse (211.3.002) Visibility of soil stockpiling and surface operations associated with cutting excavation, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View north-east from Macmillan Way PRoW, south-west of Appletree High Medium Moderate adverse (215.3.001) Visibility of raised earthworks, soil stockpiling, construction of overbridges and construction of viaduct, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows and tree cover.
View north-west from the PRoW network north-east of Springfield High High Major adverse House (217.3.002) Visibility of raised earthworks and soil stockpiling and construction of Hill Road overbridge, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View south-west from PRoW network on the southern edge of Upper High High Major adverse Boddington (220.3.001) Visibility of raised earthworks, soil stockpiling and construction of overbridges, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows and tree cover.
Transport receptors
View west from B4525, north of Greatworth (196.4.001) Medium High Major adverse Open views of green tunnel excavation and soil stockpiling.
View east from Sulgrave Road, east of Thorpe Mandeville (199.4.002) Medium High Major adverse Open views of green tunnel excavation and soil stockpiling, cutting earthworks and construction of Banbury Road overbridge.
View east from Sulgrave Road, south of Thorpe Mandeville (201.4.002) Medium High Major adverse Visibility of cutting earthworks and construction of Banbury Road overbridge, partially obscured by intervening tree and hedgerow cover.
View south-west from Banbury Lane, east of Lower Thorpe (202.4.001) Medium Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of construction of high level crane activity associated with viaduct construction and embankment and cutting earthworks, largely obscured by intervening landform and hedgerows.
View south-east from Warrington Road/Mill Lane, west of Trafford Medium High Major adverse Bridge (207.4.001) Visibility of construction of viaduct at Edgcote and loss of trees, partially obscured by intervening tree cover and hedgerows.
View west from Welsh Road, in the vicinity of Trafford Bridge Medium High Major adverse (208.4.001, 208.4.002 and 210.4.001) Sequential view along Welsh Road including visibility of Edgcote Satellite Compound, Edgcote viaduct construction and cutting earthworks, partially obscured by intervening tree cover and hedgerows.
73 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Landscape and visual assessment
Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect to of visual of change visual receptors receptors
View north-east from Culworth Road, east of Chipping Warden Medium High Major adverse (211.4.002) Visibility of green tunnel earthworks, cutting and soil storage and construction of Culworth Road overbridge, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View south-west from road leading to West Farndon (212.4.001) Medium High Major adverse Visibility of green tunnel excavation, soil stockpiling and loss of hedgerows, partially obscured by intervening tree cover.
View towards the Proposed Scheme from Appletree Lane south-west Medium High Major adverse of Aston le Walls (213.4.002 and 214.4.001) Visibility of green tunnel excavation, soil stockpiling and loss of hedgerows, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View west from the crossroads of the A361 and Welsh Road, south-east Low Medium Moderate adverse of Aston le Walls (214.4.002) Visibility of green tunnel excavation, soil stockpiling and loss of hedgerows, partially obscured by intervening tree and hedgerow cover.
View north-east from Hill Road east of Lower Boddington (217.4.001) Medium High Major adverse Visibility of raised earthworks and soil stockpiling, and construction of the viaduct over the Highfurlong Brook, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View south-west from Banbury Road, to the south and west of Lower Medium High Major adverse Boddington (218.4.001 and 220.4.001) Sequential view along Banbury Road including visibility of the viaduct over the Highfurlong Brook construction and raised earthworks, partially obscured by intervening tree cover and hedgerows.
View north-east from minor road east of Lower Boddington (221.4.001) Medium High Major adverse Visibility of raised earthworks and soil stockpiling, highways diversion and construction of overbridge, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
Employment receptors
View north-east from Greatworth Business Park (197.6.002) Low High Moderate adverse Open views of green tunnel excavation and soil stockpiling.
View north-east from Appleton Industrial Estate (213.6.001) Low High Moderate adverse Open views of green tunnel excavation and soil stockpiling.
Table 10: Significant visual effects during construction 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 Table 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, demolitions and vegetation removal from residential receptors, PRoW and travellers on scenic roads in the study area.
74 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Landscape and visual assessment
9.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation
9.6.1 The operational assessment of impacts and mitigation measures is based on the first year of opening of the Proposed Scheme (2026). A process of iterative design and assessment has been employed to avoid or reduce adverse effects during the operation of the Proposed Scheme. Measures that have been incorporated into the design of the Proposed Scheme include: • Reinstatement of severed lengths of hedge/enclosure of fields; • Replacement planting for lost vegetation/woodland, where appropriate; • Introduction of screening through new planting where this fits into the existing landscape pattern; • Integration of embankment landforms into the natural topography; • Creation of raised embankments on both sides of the route to screen the Proposed Scheme; and • Placement of noise barriers close to the track within cuttings – avoiding the top of the cut slope.
9.6.2 These measures have been taken account of in the assessment of the operational effects. Landscape assessment
9.6.3 The potential significant effects on the landscape in 2026 (i.e. the assumed year of opening) occur within the same LCAs experiencing effects during construction. Effects on LCAs would arise from new engineered landforms cutting across the existing landscape; the introduction of overhead line equipment (OLE); the introduction of new viaducts up to approximately 10m high with associated infrastructure; the introduction of noise barriers that would create a manmade linear feature; permanent severance of land; the introduction of highway infrastructure into the rural environment, including road bridges; and the introduction of regular high speed trains.
9.6.4 Table 11 summarises the LCAs that would be significantly affected by the Proposed Scheme in year one of operation (2026).
75 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Landscape and visual assessment
LCA Sensitivity of Magnitude of Level of effect to LCA change LCA34
The Tove Catchment Undulating Claylands LCA Medium Medium Moderate adverse Presence of the Proposed Scheme, largely in cutting and raised earthworks and including numerous farm access and PROW overbridges.
Middleton Cheney and Woodford Halse Undulating Hills and Medium Medium Moderate adverse Valleys LCA Presence of the Proposed Scheme, including viaducts at Lower Thorpe and Edgcote, green tunnel portals and substantial cutting landform.
Eydon Ironstone Hills LCA Medium Medium Moderate adverse Presence of the Proposed Scheme, including the viaduct over the Highfurlong Brook and green tunnel portals resulting in visual effects on the setting of the LCA associated with views of and along the track, trains and infrastructure.
Boddington Broad Unwooded Vale LCA Medium Medium Moderate adverse Presence of the Proposed Scheme, largely within extensive raised earthworks landform, but including the viaduct over the Highfurlong Brook at Aston le Walls and highway overbridges.
Boddington Low Pastoral Hills LCA Medium Medium Moderate adverse Presence of the Proposed Scheme, resulting in visual effects on the setting of the LCA associated with views of and along the track, trains and infrastructure.
Table 11: Significant landscape effects during operation year 1 (2026) Visual assessment
9.6.5 The potential significant effects on views in 2026 (i.e. the assumed year of opening) are applicable to fewer viewpoints than those considered to be affected during construction on account of the difference in nature of effects presented by operation.
9.6.6 The most apparent changes to views would be from viewpoints where modification to landform or visibility of infrastructure or trains would be most prominent. This would include the viaduct structures at Lower Thorpe, Edgcote and Aston le Walls, the large cutting north of Lower Thorpe, and along with multiple pedestrian and highway overbridge structures along the length of the Proposed Scheme.
9.6.7 At a number of locations, views of the Proposed Scheme would be obscured by the rising landform, retention of intervening hedgerows and trees and the route of the Proposed Scheme within a cutting.
9.6.8 The greatest concentration of residential receptors affected would include those settlements where the operational outlook included components of engineered landform, structures, track, trains or OLE. This would be most apparent from the settlements of Greatworth, Thorpe Mandeville, Aston le Walls and Lower and Upper Boddington, with all potentially experiencing significant adverse effects on settlement outlook and setting. Greatworth would have extensive views southwards along the line of the Proposed Scheme whilst Thorpe Mandeville’s elevated position would afford extensive views north along the line of the Proposed Scheme. The view from Aston le Walls would be more filtered by intervening vegetation, but potentially inclusive of a more elevated aspect north along the line of the Proposed Scheme. The view from Lower Boddington would benefit from the screening effect of mitigation landform, but
34 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.
76 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Landscape and visual assessment
with a potentially fragmented appearance to the landscape prior to reestablishment of field boundaries. The elevated location of Upper Boddington would afford an extensive view both north and south along the line of the Proposed Scheme.
9.6.9 Scattered properties east of Greatworth, including Greatworth Hall, and properties between Edgcote and Chipping Warden and west of Lower Boddington would experience changes to views. Such effects would be locally accentuated in proximity to elevated overbridge structures and where the extent of Proposed Scheme would result in loss of existing vegetation cover, presenting a more open outlook.
9.6.10 Recreational users of PRoW would also experience changes to views throughout the area, particularly apparent where elevated on an overbridge crossing, though typically limited to short sections of more extensive routes. Of the long distance trails within the area, the Battlefields Trail would be in close proximity to the Proposed Scheme over an extended distance.
9.6.11 Transport users would be most affected where main highways run alongside or across the Proposed Scheme. The most affected coincident highways affected would be those between Greatworth and Thorpe Mandeville, Trafford Bridge and Chipping Warden, and Lower Boddington and Wormleighton (see maps LV-11-34 to LV-11-40 for locations of visual receptors).
9.6.12 Photomontages have been produced illustrating the view of the Proposed Scheme during operation year 1 from viewpoints 195-2-001 from Greatworth (figure LV-12-43), 212-4-001 from the road leading to West Farndon (figure LV-12-44) and 220-3-001 from PRoW on the edge of Upper Boddington (figure LV-12-45). The view from the road leading to West Farndon (212-4-001) would not be significantly affected during operation year 1 due to the integration of the Proposed Scheme into the landscape.
9.6.13 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-11-34 to LV-11-40.
Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect to of visual of change visual receptors35 receptors
Residential receptors
View east, north-east from Halse Copse Farm (193.2.002) High High Major adverse Visibility of trains, OLE and noise barriers and footpath and bridleway overbridges. Cutting and raised earthworks combine with intervening hedgerows to partially obscure views.
View south-west from property (The Bungalow) to east of Greatworth High High Major adverse and Greatworth Hall (194.2.001 and 196.2.001) Visibility of track, trains, OLE and noise barriers and footpath and bridleway overbridges. Cutting and raised earthworks partially obscure views.
View north-east from properties on eastern edge of Greatworth High High Major adverse (195.2.001) Visibility of trains, OLE and noise barriers and footpath and bridleway overbridges. Cutting and raised earthworks combine with intervening hedgerows to partially obscure views.
View north-east from Banbury Lane towards Lower Thorpe (201.2.001 High High Major adverse and 201.2.002) Visibility of trains, OLE and noise barriers and prominent viaduct structure. Intervening hedgerows partially obscure views.
77 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Landscape and visual assessment
Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect to of visual of change visual receptors35 receptors
View east from Hill Farm, north-west of Thorpe Mandeville (203.2.001) High High Major adverse Visibility of trains, OLE and noise barriers and overbridge structures north of Lower Thorpe. Engineered landform cutting in contrast with profile of hillside. Intervening hedgerows partially obscure views.
View west from Culworth Grounds Farm (204.2.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of trains, OLE and access overbridge structure. Intervening tree cover largely obscures views.
View west from properties on western edge of Culworth (204.2.002 and High Medium Moderate adverse 204.2.003) Visibility of trains and Culworth Grounds private access overbridge, largely obscured by intervening landform and tree cover.
View east from Edgcote Lodge Farm and Trafford Bridge Farm High High Major adverse (205.2.001 and 207.2.002) Visibility of bridleway overbridge structures, glimpsed visibility of the viaduct at Edgcote, trains, noise barriers and OLE, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows and tree cover.
View west from Culworth Mill at Trafford Bridge (208.2.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of viaduct, noise barriers, trains and OLE, partially obscured by intervening tree cover.
View east from Edgcote House (209.2.003) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of upper components of viaduct including noise barriers, trains and OLE, largely obscured by intervening tree cover.
View south-west from property on Culworth Road, east of Chipping High High Major adverse Warden (210.2.001) Open views into cutting onto the track trains and OLE, views of Culworth Road overbridge and views of the green tunnel portal.
View west from properties on western edge of Aston le Walls High Medium Moderate adverse (216.2.001) Visibility of Hill Road overbridge and viaduct over the Highfurlong Brook and trains and OLE, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows and tree cover.
View south-west from properties on the south-western edge of Lower High Medium Moderate adverse Boddington (218.02.001) Visibility of Hill Road overbridge and upper level components of noise barriers, trains and OLE, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View north-east from Cedar’s Farm, west of Lower Boddington High High Major adverse (219.2.001) Open views of upper level components of noise barriers, trains and OLE, the engineered profile of Lower Boddington embankment and the Cedar House private access underbridge.
View south-west from Hill Farm and Spella House, west of Lower High High Major adverse Boddington (222.2.001 and 222.2.002) Open views of upper level components of noise barriers, trains and OLE, the engineered profile of the cutting accommodating rail sidings to the north and the structure of Banbury Road overbridge.
78 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Landscape and visual assessment
Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect to of visual of change visual receptors35 receptors
Recreational receptors
View north-east from the PRoW network south-east of Halse Copse High Medium Moderate adverse (189.3.001) Visibility of overbridge structures and upper elements of trains, OLE and noise barriers, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View west from the PRoW network south of Halse Copse (192.3.001) High High Major adverse Open views of overbridge structure, track, trains, OLE and noise barriers.
View south-west from the PRoW network south of B4525 road High Medium Moderate adverse (192.3.002) Visibility of overbridge structure, trains, OLE and noise barriers, largely obscured by intervening tree cover.
View north, north-east from PRoW north-west of property at High High Major adverse Greatworth Fields (193.3.001) Visibility of overbridge structures and upper elements of trains, OLE and noise barriers, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View west from the PRoW network between Halse Copse and High Medium Moderate adverse Greatworth (193.03.002 and 195.3.001) Visibility of overbridge structures and upper elements of trains, OLE and noise barriers, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View south, south-west from PRoW north-east of Greatworth High High Major adverse (196.3.001) Open views southwards along the route of the Proposed Scheme, including overbridge structures, track, noise barriers, trains and OLE.
View north-east from PRoW east of Marston St Lawrence (197.3.002) High Medium Moderate adverse Open views across the reinstated surface of the green tunnel, but with an apparent fragmented appearance prior to reinstatement of field boundary hedgerows.
View west from PRoW west of Sulgrave (200.3.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of cutting landform in proximity to the green tunnel portal and the structure of Banbury Road overbridge, including longer distance views northwards along the line of the Proposed Scheme with apparent modifications to landform and visibility of track and trains, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows and tree cover.
View north-east to east from the PRoW network north of Thorpe High Medium Moderate adverse Mandeville (201.3.002 and 203.3.003) Visibility of overbridges and cutting landform north of Lower Thorpe, and trains and OLE, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View south-west from PRoW north-east of Lower Thorpe (202.3.001 High High Major adverse and 202.3.002) Visibility of cutting landform and structure of Banbury Road overbridge and viaduct at Lower Thorpe, trains and OLE, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View east from PRoW south-west of Culworth (204.3.001) High High Major adverse Open views of overbridge structures, track, trains and OLE north of Lower Thorpe.
View west from PRoW east of Trafford Bridge (206.3.001, 208.3.001 and High Medium Moderate adverse 208.3.002) Visibility of the viaduct at Edgcote, trains and OLE, largely obscured by intervening tree cover.
79 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Landscape and visual assessment
Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect to of visual of change visual receptors35 receptors
View west from PRoW south of Edgcote (207.3.001) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of upper elements of trains, noise barriers and OLE, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View west from the Battlefields Way PRoW, east of Trafford Bridge High High Major adverse (208.3.003) Open views of the viaduct at Edgcote, a bridleway overbridge structure and upper elements of trains and OLE.
View east from Battlefields Trail PRoW, north-east of Edgcote House High High Major adverse (209.3.003) Visibility of the viaduct at Edgcote, cutting landform, OLE and trains, partially obscured by intervening tree cover.
View south-west from PRoW south of Wardenhill Farm (210.3.003) High Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of cutting landform and Culworth Road overbridge in the vicinity of the southern green tunnel portal, partially obscured by intervening tree cover. Green tunnel cover reinstated but apparent fragmentation of field patterns prior to reinstatement of hedgerows.
View north-east from Macmillan Way PRoW, south-west of Appletree High Medium Moderate adverse (215.3.001) Visibility of overbridge structures, viaduct over the Highfurlong Brook and trains and OLE, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows and tree cover.
View north-west from the PRoW network north-east of Springfield High Medium Moderate adverse House (217.3.002) Visibility of upper elements of trains and OLE and the structure of Hill Road overbridge, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View south-west from PRoW network on the southern edge of Upper High Medium Moderate adverse Boddington (220.3.001) (figure LV-12-45) Visibility of overbridges, track, trains, OLE and noise barriers, though set within an expansive context and partially obscured by intervening hedgerows and tree cover.
Transport receptors
View east from Sulgrave Road, east of Thorpe Mandeville (199.4.002) Medium High Major adverse Visibility of cutting landform and structure of Banbury Road overbridge in proximity to the northern green tunnel portal, along with views northwards of trains and OLE along the line of the Proposed Scheme, partially screened by intervening landform.
View east from Sulgrave Road, south of Thorpe Mandeville (201.4.002) Medium Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of cutting landform and structure of Banbury Road overbridge in proximity to the northern green tunnel portal, partially obscured by intervening tree and hedgerow cover.
View south-west from Banbury Lane, east of Lower Thorpe (202.4.001) Medium Medium Moderate adverse Visibility of upper elements of trains and OLE, largely obscured by intervening landform and hedgerows.
View south-east from Warrington Road/Mill Lane, west of Trafford Medium High Major adverse Bridge (207.4.001) Visibility of the viaduct at Edgcote, trains and OLE, partially obscured by intervening tree cover and hedgerows.
View west from Welsh Road, north of Trafford Bridge (208.4.001) Medium High Major adverse Visibility of the viaduct at Edgcote, trains and OLE, partially obscured by intervening tree cover and hedgerows.
80 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Landscape and visual assessment
Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Level of effect to of visual of change visual receptors35 receptors
View west from Welsh Road, in the vicinity of Trafford Bridge Medium Medium Moderate adverse (208.4.002, 210.4.001) Visibility of upper elements of trains and OLE, partially obscured by intervening tree cover and hedgerows.
View north-east from Culworth Road, east of Chipping Warden Medium Medium Moderate adverse (211.4.002) Visibility of upper level of cutting landform and the structure of Culworth Road overbridge, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
View south-west from Banbury Road, to the south and west of Lower Medium Medium Moderate adverse Boddington (218.4.001 and 220.4.001) Sequential view along Banbury Road including visibility of the viaduct over the Highfurlong Brook and upper elements of trains and OLE, partially obscured by intervening tree cover and hedgerows.
View north-east from Boddington Road, north of Three Shires Farm Medium Medium Moderate adverse (221.4.001) Visibility of Banbury Road overbridge, structure and highway diversion and upper elements of trains and OLE, partially obscured by intervening hedgerows.
Employment receptors
View north-east from Greatworth Business Park (197.6.002) Low High Moderate adverse Open views across the reinstated surface of the green tunnel, but with an apparent fragmented appearance prior to reinstatement of field boundary hedgerows.
View north-east from Appleton Industrial Estate (213.6.001) Low Medium Moderate adverse Open views across the reinstated surface of the green tunnel, but with an apparent fragmented appearance prior to reinstatement of field boundary hedgerows.
Table 12: Significant visual effects during operation year 1 (2026)
9.6.14 Where planting has been proposed, effects in year 15 (2041) and 60 (2086) of operation would be reduced compared to year one (2026), due to the increased height and maturity of trees. An assessment of effects for these assessment years would be prepared and presented within the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects
9.6.15 Due to the sensitive nature of the landscape and visible nature of the Proposed Scheme significant residual effects would remain as set out in Table 11 and Table 12 above.
9.6.16 Although sections of the Proposed Scheme would be in tunnel, the residual effects would arise from a change in character associated with the fragmentation of existing landscape features and the introduction of built infrastructure. In addition, the residual effects would arise from the visibility of the proposed structures and trains from residential receptors, PRoW and travellers on rural roads within the study area.
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.
81 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Landscape and visual assessment
Further mitigation
9.6.17 Further measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design include: • All new earthwork features of the Proposed Scheme, including road and public footpath overbridges, to be successfully integrated into the landscape; • Planting to both sides of the track and within the extent of earthworks associated with the footpath overbridge adjacent to Halse Copse South, to re-define the severed edge of Halse Copse South and integrate the overbridge into its setting; • Intermittent planting to both sides of the track between Halse Copse and Greatworth to screen views from Greatworth, to filter views from the wider surrounding landscape and to integrate overbridge structures into the setting; • Dispersed trees between properties at Greatworth Hall and the track to break up line of sight onto the Proposed Scheme boundary from Greatworth Hall; • Planting around the portals of the green tunnels; • Earthworks and planting located intermittently to either side of the track to the north and south of Lower Thorpe to screen views from Upper Thorpe, Lower Thorpe and Culworth; • Planting to both sides of track north of Lower Thorpe to integrate engineered cutting into surrounding landform; • Planting to both sides of the track south of Trafford Bridge (immediately adjacent to public bridleway AG10 overbridge) to integrate overbridge into setting; • Tree planting to both sides of the track immediately adjacent to the Hill Road overbridge to integrate the overbridge into its setting; • Planting on the north side of the track to screen views of the Proposed Scheme from Fir Tree House nursery west of Lower Boddington; and • Tree planting to both sides of the track west of Spella house, to integrate the Boddington Road highway realignment and overbridge into the setting and screen views from Spella.
82 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Socio-economics 10 Socio-economics 10.1 Introduction 10.1.1 This section provides a summary of the environmental baseline and likely significant economic and employment effects during construction and operation of the ProposedScheme.
10.1.2 The need generally for a socio-economic assessment results from the potential for the Proposed Scheme to affect: • Existing businesses and community organisations and thus the amount of local employment; • Local economies, including employment; and • Planned growth and development.
10.1.3 The beneficial and adverse socio economic effects of the ProposedScheme are reported at two different levels: route-wide and CFA. Effects on levels of employment are reported at a route-wide level within Report 27 (Route-wide effects). Localised effects on businesses and observations on potential local economic effects are described within eachCF A report. 10.2 Policy framework 10.2.1 The planning policy documents (and their status) applicable to the area are described in Section 2.1. 10.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 10.3.1 The assessment scope and key assumptions for the socio-economic assessment are set out in Volume 1. 10.4 Environmental baseline 10.4.1 Section 2.1 provides a general overview of the area which includes data of specific relevance to socio-economics, notably demographic and employment data. The following provides a brief overview in terms of employment, economic structure and labour market within the area.
10.4.2 The Greatworth to Lower Boddington CFA is located entirely within the District of South Northamptonshire.
10.4.3 In 2011, 28,000 people worked in South Northamptonshire36. The employment rate within the district in 2011 was 73%, higher than those recorded for both the East Midlands (64%) and England (65%)37. As of September 2012 the unemployment rate for South Northamptonshire stood at 5%, which was below the England average of 8%38. In 2011 31% of South Northamptonshire residents aged 16 and over were qualified to NationalV ocational Qualification Level 4 (NVQ4) compared with 24% in the East Midlands and 27% in England. 17% of residents had no qualifications, which was lower than that recorded both for the East Midlands (25%) and England (23%).
10.4.4 Within South Northamptonshire the professional, scientific and technical services sector accounts for the largest proportion of businesses (18%), with the construction (13%) and agriculture, forestry and fishing (10%) sectors also accounting for large proportions of
36 Office for National Statistics (ONS) (2011), Business Register and Employment Survey 2011. 37 The proportion of working age residents (16-74 years old) in employment. 38 ONS (2012), Annual Population Survey.
83 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Socio-economics
businesses within the borough39. This is shown in Figure 440. For comparison within the East Midlands region the professional, scientific and technical services sector also accounts for the largest number of businesses (11%), with construction (11%), retail (11%) and production (8%) sectors also accounting for relatively large numbers of businesses within the region.
Professional, scientific & technical
Construction
Agriculture, forestry & fishing
Business administration and support services
Arts, entertainment, recreation and other services
Production
Information & communication
Retail
Accommodation & food services
South Northants Other East Midlands 0% 5% 10%15% 20%25% 30%35%
Figure 4: Business sector composition in South Northamptonshire and East Midlands
Source: Office for National Statistics (2011), UK Business: Activity, Size and Location41
10.4.5 Total stock of industrial/warehousing floorspace within South Northamptonshire as estimated by the Valuation Office Agency (VOA) in 2012, stood at 518,000m42. Although no recent data has been published on vacancy rates within South Northamptonshire, in the neighbouring district of Cherwell, as of February 2012, vacancy rates for industrial floorspace were estimated to be 5-10%, indicative of a healthy balance of supply and demand43. 10.5 Construction Assessment of impacts and effects
10.5.1 Businesses directly affected, i.e. those that lie within land which would be acquired for the construction of the Proposed Scheme, are reported in groups where possible to form defined resources, based on their location and operational characteristics. A group could contain either one or a number of businesses.
10.5.2 Construction of the Proposed Scheme would require the demolition of a commercial property at Greatworth Park. Given the specialist nature of the business operating there (Triple Eight Race Engineering Ltd) the design and skill requirements associated with this business could make their relocation difficult.
39 ONS (2012), UK Business: Activity, Size and Location. 40 Figure 6 presents the proportion of businesses within each business sector in the borough but not the proportion of employment by sector. 41 ‘Other’ includes; Wholesale; Motor Trades; Transport and Storage; Finance and Insurance; Property; Public administration and defence; Education; and Health sectors. 42 Valuation Office Agency (2012),Business Floorspace (Experimental Statistics), Available at http://www.voa.gov.uk/corporate/ statisticalReleases/120517_CRLFloorspace.html. Accessed 27 February 2012. 43 URS (2012), Cherwell Employment Land Review Update (February 2012)
84 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Socio-economics
10.5.3 It is estimated that the Proposed Scheme would result in the displacement or possible loss of a total of 91 jobs within this CFA44. Taking into account total employment within the area the impact on the local economy from the displacement or possible loss of jobs is considered to be relatively modest compared to the scale of economic activity and opportunity in the area.
10.5.4 There are plans to locate construction compounds for the Proposed Scheme in this area at the following locations: • Chipping Warden main construction site compound; • Greatworth satellite site compound; • Thorpe Mandeville satellite site compound; • Lower Thorpe satellite site compound; • Edgcote satellite site compound; • Hill Road satellite site compound; and • Boddington Road satellite site compound.
10.5.5 The use of these sites could result in the creation of up to 1,600 person years of construction employment that, depending on skill levels required and the skills of local people, are potentially accessible to residents in the locality and to others living further afield45. It could also lead to opportunities for local businesses to supply the project or to benefit from expenditure of construction workers. Quantification of direct and indirect construction employment effects are captured at a route-wide level (see Report 27 on route-wide effects).
10.5.6 It is intended that discretionary enhancement measures, such as business support, supply chain engagement and local construction skills development initiatives to enhance local business performance will be included as appropriate in the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects
10.5.7 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 would create direct and wider operational employment opportunities at locations along the route including stations, train crew facilities and infrastructure/ maintenance depots. Although no plans exist to locate these facilities within this area it is considered possible that wider operational employment opportunities could be accessed by residents of the area. 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.
44 Employment within businesses has been estimated through a combination of sources, for example, surveys of businesses, the Experian employment dataset, employment floor space and the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) Employment Density Guide (2010). This estimate is calculated using standard employment density ratios and estimates of floor areas and may vary significantly from actual employment at the sites. 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.
85 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Sound, noise and vibration 11 Sound, noise and vibration 11.1 Introduction 11.1.1 This chapter provides a summary of the likely noise and vibration significant effects associated with the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme for the Greatworth to Lower Boddington area. This chapter should be read in conjunction with Volume 1. 11.2 Policy framework 11.2.1 The policy framework for sound, noise and vibration are 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 related 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 The engineering design of tunnels, their portals and vent shafts, would ensure passenger comfort in tunnels. This design would also avoid any significant airborne noise effects caused by the tunnel portals. 11.4 Environmental baseline 11.4.1 The baseline sound environment for this area is typically low, consistent with the rural area. Local roads are regularly used, being the only means of local transport, increasing the sound levels near these sources. The A361 (Banbury Road) is a busy road, increasing daytime and night-time ambient sound levels considerably around it in Chipping Warden. The B4525 (Banbury Road) is a consistent sound source for properties in Greatworth. Sound levels are influenced regularly by aircraft, although aircraft are not the dominant source of existing sound levels anywhere in this area.
11.4.2 It is likely that the majority of receptors adjacent to the line of route are not currently subject to appreciable vibration. 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.
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 The Greatworth and Chipping Warden green tunnels are proposed to be constructed using cut and cover method and therefore have been assessed as part of the assessment of airborne construction noise and vibration.
86 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Sound, noise and vibration
11.5.4 Potential construction noise or vibration effects could occur on the receptors closest to the construction areas in the following communities: • Greatworth, arising from construction activities such as construction of the green tunnel (refer to Section 2.2/2.3 and to map series CT‑05: Construction Phase); • Chipping Warden, arising from construction activities such as construction of the green tunnel (refer to Section 2.2/2.3 and to map series CT‑05: Construction Phase); and • Lower Thorpe and Thorpe Mandeville, arising from construction activities such as alignment (earthworks, substructure and superstructure) works (refer to Section 2.2/2.3 and to map series CT‑05: Construction Phase).
11.5.5 Track laying, power system and signalling installation works along the line of route are unlikely to result in significant construction noise effects, given the short duration close to any communities and the presence of the permanent noise barriers. Likely residual significant effects
11.5.6 Further work is being undertaken to confirm significant construction noise and vibration effects, including any temporary effects from construction traffic. Non-residential receptors identified at this stage as potentially subject to construction noise or vibration effects will be further considered, where necessary, on a receptor-by-receptor basis. Any further assessment will be reported in the formal ES. Further mitigation
11.5.7 Further work is being undertaken 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 Proposed 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 map series SV-01.
11.6.3 The Operational Sound Contour and Potential Significant Effect map series 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 5 dB steps from 50dB to 70dB. With the train flows described in Section 2.4, the night-time sound level
(defined as the equivalent continuous sound level from 23:00 to 07:00 or pAeq,nightL ) from the Proposed Scheme would be approximately 10 dB lower than the daytime sound level. The 50dB contour therefore indicates the distance from the Proposed Scheme at which the night- time sound level would be 40dB. This contour represents where the lowest observed community noise effects would be expected to occur during the day (with respect to annoyance) and night (with respect to sleep disturbance). It is generally unlikely that there
87 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Sound, noise and vibration
would be any adverse noise effects outside of this contour. With regard to sleep disturbance the assessment has also taken account the maximum sound levels generated by each train pass by.
11.6.4 Residential receptors within the daytime 65dB contour, and therefore the night-time 55dB contour, have been identified as being likely to experience a significant adverse effect from HS2 noise alone. This is in line with the daytime threshold for in the Noise Insulation Regulations 1996 and the interim target defined in the World Health Organization’s Night Noise Guidelines46,47.
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. The further significance criteria set out in Volume 1, 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): • Greatworth Hall (Artis Projects) (identified by SV15-N01 on maps SV-01).
11.6.8 PROW 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 at the PROW would vary as the right of way is closer to and further away from the Proposed Scheme. Noise effects would generally be reduced by the landscape earthworks envisaged to reduce visual impact of the Proposed Scheme and envisaged noise mitigation to protect other receptors. No significant noise effects have therefore been identified on public rights of way within this CFA.
11.6.9 No potentially significant noise or vibration effects arising from changes to existing roads are anticipated at this stage. This will be confirmed in the formal ES.
11.6.10 A number of potential minor ground-borne noise and vibration impacts have been forecast at a small number of properties very close to the alignment/tunnels. Taking account of the number and minor magnitude of the impacts, and the experience of HS1, no significant effects have been identified. Further assessment will be undertaken for the formal ES to confirm whether the impacts currently forecast are likely to occur. Vibration from the operation of the Proposed Scheme will present no risk of any building damage. Likely residual significant effects
11.6.11 The envisaged mitigation (especially landscape earthworks and noise barriers) described in this chapter would substantially reduce the potential airborne sound impacts and noise effects that would otherwise arise from the Proposed Scheme. Nonetheless, potential significant adverse airborne noise effects have been identified for residential receptors in the following communities: • The northern edge of Thorpe Mandeville in the general vicinity of Banbury Lane (identified by SV15-C01 on maps SV-01);
46 Noise Insulation (Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems) Regulations 1996. London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. 47 World Health Organization (2009) Night Noise Guidelines for Europe.
88 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Sound, noise and vibration
• The southern part of Lower Boddington in the general vicinity of Lower Boddington Road, Hill Lane, Banbury Road and The Green (identified by SV15-C02 on maps SV-01); and • Approximately three individual receptors that are closest to the Proposed Scheme (identified by SV15-D01 to SV15-D03 on maps SV-01). 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.
11.6.12 Further assessment work is being undertaken to confirm operational sound and vibration significant effects, including those at non-residential receptors and quiet areas (as necessary on a receptor-by-receptor basis). This will be reported in the formal ES which will present baseline levels, forecasts for the Proposed Scheme and the change in sound levels brought about by the Proposed Scheme both as impact plans and tables. Further mitigation
11.6.13 Improvements in the performance of mitigation that may further reduce or avoid the potential significant airborne noise effects are being considered for the formal ES.otential P options are included in Table 13.
Potential significant effect Further mitigation option
Thorpe Mandeville Increase noise barrier heights to be equivalent to a 4m fence barrier, or equivalent landscape (SV15-C01) earthworks including use of larger parapet noise barrier on viaduct.
Lower Boddington Increase noise barrier heights to be equivalent to a 4m fence barrier, or equivalent landscape (SV15-C02) earthworks.
Table 13: Options for further noise mitigation
11.6.14 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,18hour. It is estimated that three dwellings – marked as SV15-D01 to SV15-D03 on map SV-01 – would potentially experience noise levels higher than the insulation trigger level.
89 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Traffic and transport 12 Traffic and transport 12.1 Introduction 12.1.1 This traffic and transport section describes the likely impacts and effects arising from the construction and operation of the Proposed Scheme through the Greatworth to Lower Boddington 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 (LTP) for Northamptonshire County Council and Oxfordshire County Council.
12.2.2 The Northamptonshire Transportation Plan (2012) replaces the interim LTP3 and is the overarching strategy that sets out the strategic aims and goals for Transport in Northamptonshire48. The vision is supported by six objectives based around providing a transport system to support growth, sustainable communities and travel choice, whilst minimising the effect on the environment and providing best value for money. In terms of new development, Northamptonshire County Council’s strategic aim is to minimise the adverse impacts of development on the transport network and to provide opportunities for creating more sustainable travel options.
12.2.3 The LTP3 for Oxfordshire County Council sets out its transport policy and strategy for the next 20 years and focuses on attracting and supporting economic investment and growth, delivering transport infrastructure, tackling congestion and improving quality of life. The Oxfordshire Local Investment Plan identifies a number of strategic transport schemes to support development in the county including the East-West Rail and Evergreen 3 Rail projects. Their policy on new development is that it must contribute to reducing the impact of travel on the county’s environment through minimising the need to travel, promoting sustainable travel and safely and efficiently accommodating the traffic on the network. 12.3 Assessment scope and key assumptions 12.3.1 The scope and methodology of the traffic and transport assessment are set out inVolume 1.
12.3.2 The scope of the assessment was discussed with relevant local highway authorities including Oxfordshire County Council on 26 September 2012 and Northamptonshire County Council on 2 October 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 The baseline forecast traffic flows for the future years of assessment have been derived using Department for Transport’s traffic forecasting tool, Trip End Model Presentation Program (TEMPRO).
12.3.5 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.
48 Northamptonshire County Council (2012), Northamptonshire Transportation Plan Fit for Purpose by Northamptonshire County Council, Local Transport Plan.
90 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Traffic and transport
12.3.6 The following key limitations exist in the reporting of significant effects: • The capacity of junctions that would be affected by the ProposedScheme has not yet been assessed in detail. A more detailed assessment will be carried out for the formal ES where necessary; • Forecast future year traffic flows with and without the Proposed Scheme are based on an approach that does not take account of wider effects, e.g. redistribution and reassignment of traffic, modal shift and peak spreading. As a consequence, local transport effects may be over-estimated; • The forecast construction traffic flows, temporary diversions, traffic management arrangements and phasing of construction interventions are based on initial Proposed 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 (see maps CT‑05-068 to CT‑05-079): ȃȃ Helmdon Road via B4525 & A43 and B4525 Banbury Lane & A422, providing access to Greatworth satellite site compound; ȃȃ Banbury Road via B4525 & A43 and B4525 Banbury Lane & A422, providing access to Thorpe Mandeville satellite site compound; ȃȃ Banbury Lane via Banbury Road, B4525 & A43 and Banbury Road, B4525 Banbury Lane & A422, providing access to Lower Thorpe satellite site compound; ȃȃ Welsh Road via A361 Byfield Road, A45 Stefen Way & M40, providing access to Edgcote satellite site compound; ȃȃ A361 Byfield Road via A45 Stefen Way & M40, providing access to Chipping Warden main construction site compound; ȃȃ Hill Road via Banbury Road, Welsh Road, A361 Byfield Road, A45 Stefen Way & M40, providing access to Hill Road satellite site compound; and ȃȃ Banbury Road via Welsh Road, A361 Byfield Road, A45 Stefen Road & M40, providing access to Boddington Road 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 A45 Stefen Way, A422, A361, B4525 Banbury Lane, Helmdon Road, Welsh Road, Hill Road, Boddington Road, Banbury Road, Appletree Lane, Appletree Road, Marston Road, Culworth Road and Country Lane (Trafford Bridge).
12.4.3 Bus services currently operate along the following roads within close vicinity of the Proposed Scheme: • A361; • B4252;
91 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Traffic and transport
• Banbury Road; and • Helmdon Road 12.4.4 There are several public footpaths, bridleways and cycleways that would cross the route of the Proposed Scheme. All PRoW which would be intersected by the Proposed Scheme have been surveyed, taking account of the nature of the PRoW and their levels of utilisation. 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 50 people per day walking, cycling or riding with the exception of one being used by approximately 140 users per day.
12.4.5 Relevant accident data has been obtained from Northampton County Council and Oxfordshire County Council for the three year period of 2009 to 2011, for the road network subject to assessment.
12.4.6 There are no navigable canals or waterways that cross the Proposed Scheme in this area.
12.4.7 The future baseline traffic volumes have been calculated by applying growth factors derived from TEMPRO for the future years of 2021, 2026 and extrapolation to 2041. The factors have been derived for the individual road types and relevant wards. No other changes to the traffic and transport baseline are anticipated in the Greatworth to Lower Boddington 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 effects resulting from construction of the Proposed Scheme. 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 Proposed Scheme and would avoid or reduce impacts on travellers: • Construction materials and equipment would be transported along haul roads 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 minimal significant diversions of traffic onto alternative routes; • Surplus excavated material would be reused wherever reasonably practicable 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 Transport related effects of the Proposed Scheme during construction would arise from traffic generated by construction activities as well as temporary diversions of roads and PRoW.
12.5.4 Construction activities would result in the following temporary road closures and associated diversions lasting for a month or more as shown in maps CT‑05-070 to CT‑05-078: • Temporary closure of Helmdon Road requiring a temporary diversion via Marston Road and the B4525;
92 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Traffic and transport
• Temporary closure of Appletree Lane requiring a temporary diversion via Appletree Road, A361 and Welsh Road; and • Temporary closure of Hill Road requiring a temporary diversion via Hill Road, Boddington Road and Banbury Road.
12.5.5 The temporary closure of Helmdon Road would result in the temporary diversion of the 499 bus service.
12.5.6 Seven 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‑05-068 to CT‑05-079.
12.5.7 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.
12.5.8 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
LGVs49 HGVs
Chipping Warden, maps CT‑05-075 and CT‑05- A361 5.5 years 60-70 70-80 076
Greatworth, map CT‑05-070 B4525 5 years 80-130 60-70
Thorpe Mandeville, map CT‑05-071 Banbury Road (Thorpe 2 years 20-40 Up to 10 Mandeville)
Lower Thorpe, map CT‑05-072 Banbury Lane 2 years 70-120 Up to 20
Edgcote, maps CT‑05-073 and CT‑05-074 Welsh Road 2.5 years 80-140 20-40
Hill Road, maps CT‑05-077 and CT‑05-078 Hill Road 2 years 50-80 Up to 20
Boddington Road, maps CT‑05-078 and CT‑05- Banbury Road (Lower 1 year 10-40 Up to 10 079 Boddington)
*Banbury Road and Leisure Drive compound is considered in CFA 16 Ladbroke and Southam.
Table 14: Typical vehicle trip generation for site compounds in this area49
12.5.9 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:
• A361; • B4525; • Helmdon Road; • Marston Road; • Banbury Road (Thorpe Mandeville); • Banbury Lane; • Culworth Road; • Welsh Road;
49 Workers commuting trips
93 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Traffic and transport
• Hill Road; • Banbury Road (Lower Boddington); and • Boddington Road.
12.5.10 The CoCP would seek to reduce deliveries of construction materials and equipment as far as reasonably practicable, thus minimising construction lorry trip generation, especially during peak traffic periods. The CoCP would include HGV management and control measures.
12.5.11 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.
12.5.12 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.
12.5.13 Several PRoW crossing the Proposed Scheme would be temporarily diverted during construction, potentially resulting in impacts on user delay and/or severance.
12.5.14 Construction of the Proposed Scheme is not anticipated to result in any other significant impacts at this stage. Likely residual significant effects
12.5.15 Likely residual significant effects in terms of an increase in journey time to vehicle occupants subject to temporary closures/diversions are likely to occur on the following roads: • Helmdon Road (minor significant effect); • Appletree Lane (minor significant effect); and • Hill Road (minor significant effect).
12.5.16 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: • Banbury Lane (level of effect to be determined); • Marston Road (level of effect to be determined); • Welsh Road (level of effect to be determined); • Culworth Road (level of effect to be determined); • Boddington Road (level of effect to be determined); • Helmdon Road (level of effect to be determined); and • Hill Road (level of effect to be determined).
12.5.17 Users of the 499 bus service are likely to experience a minor significant effect in delay as a consequence of the temporary service diversion.
12.5.18 Significant effects are identified in relation to some of the temporaryoW PR diversions. A full assessment of significant effects during construction will be presented as part of the formal ES.
12.5.19 Construction of the Proposed Scheme is not anticipated at this stage to result in any other significant effects.
94 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Traffic and transport
Further mitigation
12.5.20 Further mitigation measures will be considered based on the outcomes of the ongoing assessment and will be reported in the formal ES. 12.6 Operation Assessment of impacts and mitigation
12.6.1 The following section considers the impacts on traffic and transport and the consequential environmental effects resulting from operation of the Proposed Scheme (as described in Section 2.2 and 2.4 of this report). The information set out in this section is subject to review in the formal ES.
12.6.2 The following design and demand management measures have been included for the Proposed Scheme and would avoid or reduce impacts on travellers: • The majority of roads crossing the Proposed Scheme retained in their current location or very close to their current location resulting in no significant diversions of traffic onto alternative routes; and • PRoW crossing the Proposed Scheme retained with localised diversions kept to a minimum.
12.6.3 Several PRoW crossing the Proposed Scheme would be permanently diverted during operation, potentially resulting in impacts on user delay and/0r severance. Likely residual significant effects
12.6.4 Significant effects are identified in relation to some of the PRoW diversions. A full assessment of significant operational effects will be presented as part of the formal ES.
12.6.5 The assessments undertaken at this stage have indicated that for this area there are no other significant transport related effects during the operation of the ProposedScheme. This is because: • There would be no stations or depots that would generate any additional traffic; and • The majority of roads that would cross the route would be retained in or very close to their current location. Further mitigation
12.6.6 Further mitigation measures will be considered based on the outcomes of the ongoing assessment and will be reported in the formal ES.
95 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 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 The South Northamptonshire Local Plan (Policy G3) seeks to prevent development unless it provides for satisfactory foul and surface water drainage.
13.2.2 The submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Policy C6 states that the design and construction of the High Speed 2 rail link must minimise adverse impacts on the environment, the local economy and local communities. The policy states that the Proposed Scheme would be expected to deliver high quality design and minimise the impact on communities and the environment. In addition policies BN7a and BN7 seek to ensure adequate sustainable drainage infrastructure is provided and an appropriate flood risk assessment is undertaken with 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 upper reaches of the River Cherwell, the Highfurlong Brook, the Boddington Feeder (a non-navigable watercourse feeding into the Oxford Canal) and their tributaries and associated catchment areas and floodplains.
13.3.3 The groundwater resources assessment focuses on aquifers that are present within bedrock and overlying deposits. Effects on groundwater dependent terrestrial ecosystems GWD( TEs) and groundwater users/receptors (both licensed abstractions and private users) are also considered. 13.4 Environmental baseline 13.4.1 The length of Proposed Scheme through the area (approximately 17km) consists of a combination of cuttings, embankments, three viaducts and two green tunnels (see maps CT‑06-068 to CT‑06-079).
13.4.2 The route would cross Radstone Brook (on the boundary with Newton Purcell to Brackley (CFA14) – and addressed in that CFA report), the River Cherwell at Edgcote, Highfurlong Brook and the Boddington Feeder (for the Oxford Canal) at Fir Tree House.
13.4.3 In addition to this the route would cross a number of small ponds, minor drains and watercourses. There are more than 30 small ponds within one kilometre of the route.
13.4.4 The EA predicts the ecological quality under the Water Framework Directive of the River Cherwell by 2015 to be the same as current conditions (“moderate potential”). The chemical status of the river is listed as not requiring assessment. The predicted 2015 ecological and chemical quality of the River Cherwell have not been assessed. The ecological quality of the
96 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Water resources and flood risk assessment
Highfurlong Brook is predicted to be the same as current conditions (“good status”) in 2015. The chemical status of the Brook is listed as not requiring assessment. The Boddington Feeder (Oxford Canal) is an “artificial” watercourse of “good” ecological potential. This is predicted to remain good in 2015. The chemical status of the watercourse is listed as not requiring assessment.
13.4.5 The route would not cross any statutory conservation designations and there are no licensed surface water abstractions within the study area. However, the EA reports that there are 17 current consented surface water discharges within 1km of the route in the study area.
13.4.6 The route is within a designated surface water Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZ).
13.4.7 Superficial geological deposits across the southern section of the route consist of glacial till. They are absent from the majority of the remainder of the route with the exception of localised river alluvium associated with the River Cherwell and Highfurlong Brook.
13.4.8 From Greatworth to Lower Boddington the route is underlain by strata of the following formations, which outcrop progressively along the route from south to north: • Blisworth Limestone Formation, described as limestone of the Great Oolite Group; • Rutland Formation, described as mudstone of the Great Oolite Group; • Taynton Limestone Formation, described as ooidal limestone of the Great Oolite Group; • Horsehay Sand Formation, described as sandstone of the Great Oolite Group; • Northampton Sand Formation, described as sandstone, limestone and ironstone of the Inferior Oolite Group; • Whitby Mudstone Formation, described as mudstone of the Lias Group; • Marlstone Rock Formation, described as ferruginous limestone and ironstone of the Lias Group; • Dyrham Formation, described as interbedded siltstone and mudstone of the Lias Group; and • Charmouth Mudstone Formation, described as mudstone of the Lias Group.
13.4.9 The bedrock in this area comprises the Great Oolite Group, Inferior Oolite Group and Lias Group, which are largely limestones and sandstones. Within the Great Oolite Group, the Principal Aquifers include the Blisworth Limestone Formation and Taynton Limestone Formation and the Secondary Aquifers comprise the Rutland Formation (Secondary B) and Horsehay Sand Formation (Secondary A). The Inferior Oolite Group includes the Northampton Sand Formation, which is classed as a Secondary A Aquifer. Within the Lias Group the Whitby and Charmouth Mudstone Formations are considered unproductive, while the Marlestone Rock Member is a Secondary A aquifer and the Dyrham Formation is Secondary Undifferentiated.
13.4.10 The Lias Group formations crossed are either unproductive units (Whitby Mudstone Formation and the Charmouth Mudstone Formation) or Secondary Aquifers (Marlstone Rock Formation and the Dyrham Formation – both of which outcrop in the River Cherwell valley and near Aston le Walls).
13.4.11 Groundwater levels within the Principal and Secondary Aquifers, are unknown but are considered likely to be influenced by topography, in general, with flow towards rivers.
13.4.12 The groundwater in the study area is part of the Banbury Jurassic water body which is classified as ‘not at risk’, with ‘good status’ under the WFD.
97 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Water resources and flood risk assessment
13.4.13 The EA reports that there are ten licensed groundwater abstractions and seven unlicensed groundwater abstractions within the study area. There are no Source Protection Zones associated with the abstractions in this study area. The EA reports that there are 15 current consented discharges to groundwater within 1km of the Proposed Scheme in the study area.
13.4.14 The West Northamptonshire Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) 50 does not indicate any records of significant historical flooding in the area. A tributary of the River Cherwell is crossed at Lower Thorpe where approximately 200m of Flood Zones 2 and 3 would be crossed by the Proposed Scheme. The catchment at this point is approximately 3km2. Downstream, the River Cherwell and two further tributaries would be crossed by the route close to Edgcote. At this point the Proposed Scheme would cross approximately 800m of Flood Zones 2 and 3 associated with the River Cherwell and its tributaries. There is a 330m length of the River Cherwell channel and a 380m length of a tributary channel within 50m of the route (see map CT‑04-14).
13.4.15 The Highfurlong Brook has a catchment size of approximately 23km2 where the route crosses to the west of Aston le Walls. At this location approximately 170m of Flood Zone 3 and 180m of Flood Zone 2 would be crossed. Due to meanders in the river course there are approximately 120m of the river channel within 50m of the route centre line.
13.4.16 Several dry valleys in the area are recorded as having risk of flooding from surface water sources for any rainfall event greater than 1 in 30 (3%) annual probability.
13.4.17 There is a risk of groundwater flooding associated with the superficial deposits in the River Cherwell and the Highfurlong Brook valleys and particularly near Halse Copse where the BGS reports that the susceptibility to groundwater flooding is very high. 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, watercourse diversions and installation of culverts.
13.5.2 The draft CoCP includes the following provisions: • Implementing, in consultation with the Environment Agency and other relevant bodies as appropriate (i.e. Canal and River Trust), a surface water and/or groundwater monitoring plan as required, particularly in relation to works which may affect groundwater sensitive areas; • Undertaking risk assessments associated with excavation work and impacts on surface water; groundwater; abstractions; aquifers and private water supplies; • Preparing further 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 or oils and chemicals and to mitigate against accidental spillages in the CoCP; and
50 West Northamptonshire District Council (2009), West Northamptonshire Strategic Flood Risk Assessment.
98 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Water resources and flood risk assessment
• Undertaking, as required, further site-specific pre-construction monitoring to establish baseline water quality conditions for watercourses; groundwater and during construction works. This would enable the effectiveness of those mitigation measures introduced to limit pollution risk to be monitored and any pollution incidents to be identified.
13.5.3 Measures defined in the CoCP, including detailed method statements, would ensure that there would be no effect on surface water quality or flows associated with construction.The following example illustrates how the CoCP would reduce potential effects to levels that would not be significant: • Construction of the viaduct crossing of Highfurlong Brook, a high value receptor, could have moderate potential impacts on water quality, but the measures included in the CoCP to control the release of potential pollutants would reduce these to minor. There would be no significant effect during construction as a result.
13.5.4 The River Cherwell would be crossed on a viaduct at Edgcote. The construction of the viaduct would require diversion of the river which has a meandering course at this location. The River Cherwell is a high value receptor, but the diversion channel would be constructed to meet the requirements of the EA in terms of flow capacity, and thus the impact on flow would be minor. Through the application of best practice guidance for working in and close to water, potential impacts to water quality can be effectively controlled, and impacts to flow would be negligible. As a result no significant effects would occur.
13.5.5 All permanent diversions of watercourses would be expected to stabilise in terms of flow and water quality without further mitigation as the diverted section becomes established. In order to ensure that conditions within the watercourse would not be compromised, the EA would be consulted over any need for monitoring into the operational phase or mitigation.
13.5.6 The Boddington Feeder crossing would require a diversion of the watercourse and some installation of culverts under roads. As in the case of River Cherwell at Edgcote, the watercourse is of high value but by preparing the diversion in advance to meet EA requirements the impact on flow would be minor. Minor short term and temporary impacts on water quality would also have a slight/moderate effect. Overall the impacts of construction on the Boddington Feeder flow and quality would not be significant.
13.5.7 At Lower Thorpe, the Proposed Scheme would cross a tributary of the River Cherwell which has an online ornamental pond. The crossing would be on embankment and the stream would be culverted. Construction of the embankment would result in a loss of approximately 30% of the existing pond; a receptor of moderate value. Through the application of best practice guidance for working in and close to water, potential impacts to water quality can be effectively controlled, and impacts to flow would be negligible. As a result no significant effects would occur.
13.5.8 Further consideration of the crossings, diversion works and pond alteration will be reported within the formal ES.
13.5.9 The cutting and green tunnel from Greatworth to Lower Thorpe may affect groundwater fed springs and spring fed watercourses either side of the route (to the north east and south west), from 780m to the north and north west of Greatworth and within the vicinity of Thorpe Mandeville. In this area: • These springs are generally along the outcrop of the underlying Whitby Mudstone and will be fed by rain percolating through the more permeable layers above this layer. The route in this area would be along a small ridgeline so the areas supplying the springs are small;
99 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Water resources and flood risk assessment
• In general, groundwater flow is likely to be flowing from the line of the route towards the springs and watercourses. As such, constructing the cutting could result in impacts to groundwater flows, thereby influencing springs and spring fed watercourses (generally of moderate value), resulting in a significant effect. However, the slope of the cutting would naturally drain towards Lower Thorpe so the tributary of the River Cherwell should not be significantly affected as drainage water would be discharged near the local springs.The effect in this area specifically would not be significant as a result; and • The range of effects to springs would vary from not significant to significant, depending on locally specific conditions and the proximity of the springs to the proposed route. 13.5.10 Springs on the eastern side of the green tunnel at Greatworth are at the very top of the catchment of the River Tove (flowing eastwards past Helmdon). A few springs could be affected as the cutting for the green tunnel extends below the elevation of the springs. In this area: • The effect on individual springs where flow would be interrupted would be moderate, although, due to the relatively small area of aquifer affected, the overall effect on groundwater flow in the aquifer is considered to be slight and not significant; • Furthermore, the effect on groundwater supplying local watercourses is likely to be minor and not significant; and • There are two groundwater abstractions within 1km of the cuttings and green tunnel at Greatworth. One of the abstractions is 600m to the north of the route between Greatworth and Sulgrave and is unlikely to be significantly impacted due to the direction of groundwater flow within the Great Oolite aquifer. The other is located east of Greatworth near Halse Copse, 250m north of the route and whilst localised changes to groundwater flow could have a slight impact on groundwater flow to this abstraction, the overall impact is unlikely to be significant.
13.5.11 The cutting north of the River Cherwell and the green tunnel at Chipping Warden would cut through various formations of the Lias Group. These are either Secondary Aquifers or unproductive strata, and so will have limited groundwater contained within them. In this area: • There are a number of small springs to the south of the route from Chipping Warden to Blackgrounds which could be affected due to the possible interception of groundwater flows. These springs are currently considered to be low to moderate value receptors, and the overall impact would therefore be slight to moderate, depending on their proximity to the route. The effect therefore could be potentially significant, particularly on some individual springs close to the route; • The springs are considered to feed local streams and watercourses either side of the route (to the north and south west/west). However, it is likely that the groundwater entering the cutting would be discharged back into the Highfurlong Brook and River Cherwell, which would reduce the impact of reduced springs flows entering these rivers to not significant; • There are two private groundwater abstractions at approximately 850m and 895m south of the route, within the vicinity of the cutting north of Lower Thorpe. These are assumed to abstract from the Northampton Sand Formation. As these abstractions are small and not within close proximity to the route, the impact to these resources is considered to be slight with no significant effect; • The effects of the cutting north of the River Cherwell and the green tunnel at Chipping Warden may also impact on local licensed abstraction boreholes. Groundwater in the Marlstone Rock Formation and Dyrham Formation are Secondary A Aquifers of moderate value. As such, the potential impact on groundwater flows and quality is considered to be moderate with a significant effect; and
100 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Water resources and flood risk assessment
• There could be a minor impact on two abstractions about 1.1km north-east of the route, in the area of the Chipping Warden green tunnel, and a moderate impact on four abstractions between 300m and 1.2km to the west of the route at Appletree, due to construction of the proposed route in cutting. The effects would not be significant for the abstractions to the north east but could be significant to those at Appletree, depending on the depth which the boreholes abstract water in relation to the depth of the cutting.
13.5.12 The partial loss of the pond at Lower Thorpe, and the effects of one possible permanent pier and a number of temporary piers in the floodplain of the River Cherwell and tributaries and on the Highfurlong Brook floodplain would be likely to lead to some loss in flood storage capacity and restriction on flows during the construction period. All of these works would have a flood risk to receptors in the nearby upstream areas, which is largely farm land but includes a small number of properties. As a result minor adverse impacts are possible, which are not significant.
13.5.13 A number of construction areas could be located within areas at risk of flooding. During the construction stage there may be a potential to temporarily increase offsite flooding as a result of obstructions to flood flow routes. Any potential for a temporary increase in ‐off site flood risks would be managed appropriately by measures defined in the draftCoCP and reported in the Flood Risk Assessment and the formal ES. Likely residual significant effects
13.5.14 Significant effects to groundwater flows and quality have been identified associated with the cutting north of the River Cherwell and the green tunnel at Chipping Warden. There would be some significant effects on local groundwater flow in the proximity of the route, which would lead to significant effects on individual springs depending on how many of the springs were supplied by aquifers affected during construction.
13.5.15 As set out above, some private abstractions for water supply could be affected where these are in close proximity to proposed cuttings and the green tunnel at Greatworth, Lower Thorpe and Chipping Warden, due to direct impacts to groundwater flows. Further mitigation
13.5.16 Further measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design are set out below: • The designs for works in the watercourses including the Lower Thorpe pond are being refined and will be assessed and reported with the formal ES; and • Monitoring would be used to quantify any actual impact during the construction phase on the aquifer, spring flows and local abstractions. Appropriate trigger levels for flow and quality would be required to underpin prompt decision-making in relation to a hierarchy of further mitigation. Consultations on the monitoring, flow and groundwater quality trigger levels, whether these need to extend into the operational phase, and mitigation plans are on-going with interested parties, which include the EA and private water abstractors. 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;
101 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Water resources and flood risk assessment
• Sustainable drainage systems, where appropriate, have been included to encourage water to soak back into the ground; and where drainage or cuttings intercept groundwater flow; and • Sustainable drainage systems would also provide opportunities to reduce effects on water quality by reducing potential contaminants through filtration, vegetation adsorption or settlement.
13.6.2 Best practice pollution control guidance would be adopted where reasonably practicable for maintenance of the Proposed Scheme.
13.6.3 All standard drainage including drainage from associated access roads and hard standings, would discharge either, under agreement, to sewer or to Sustainable Drainage System (SuDS) attenuation ponds, prior to subsequent discharge to sewer/watercourses as appropriate. All discharges to watercourses would be conducted in line with advice from the EA or Local Lead Flood Authority with respect to quality and flow, as appropriate.
13.6.4 The impacts and resulting effects to the pond at Lower Thorpe would be dependent upon the mitigation options for the pond.
13.6.5 Nevertheless, the crossings of the River Cherwell, Highfurlong Brook, and minor tributaries of the River Cherwell, together with the alterations to the pond at Lower Thorpe would have the potential to result in moderate to major adverse impacts that may extend beyond construction until the water environment stabilises. However, all new stretches of watercourse would be designed to ensure no significant change in the overall hydrology or water quality of these watercourses, and within a few years any new stretches would naturalise and stabilise so that no permanent adverse effects are anticipated and so no significant effects would be caused. These effects would be confirmed and reported in the formal ES.
13.6.6 HS2 Ltd is continuing to explore the potential overall effect of diversion and installation of a culvert on the Boddington Feeder, but anticipates that a design will be found to ensure no significant change to the hydrology of the feeder. These effects will be confirmed and reported in the formal ES.
13.6.7 The springs close to Chipping Warden and Blackgrounds Farm are located where cuttings associated with the Chipping Warden green tunnel could drain shallow groundwater that might supply these springs. These springs, receiving watercourses and local abstractions are considered to have high value locally. Where reasonably practicable the track drainage could be discharged near to existing springs. The overall operation of the Proposed Scheme in these areas would have permanent effects on some individual springs as groundwater was diverted or intercepted by the cutting, the potential significance of which is still being assessed and will be reported in the formal ES.
13.6.8 The operational impacts of the cuttings and green tunnel, from Greatworth to Lower Thorpe Mandeville, would continue from construction into the operational phase. Groundwater flow around the cutting and green tunnel at Greatworth could potentially experience moderate to major impacts through the drainage of the cutting/tunnel, which could result in significant effects on springs in the area. The range of potential effects would vary from not significant to significant, depending on locally specific conditions and the proximity of the springs to the proposed route. In addition, there are spring-fed watercourses of moderate value, and the potential impacts to some of these springs could potentially affect the flow to watercourses, which could extend from construction through operation.
102 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I Water resources and flood risk assessment
13.6.9 The earthworks for the embankments and viaduct at Lower Thorpe and near Edgcote would cross a tributary of the River Cherwell, and would require channel diversions and the placement of viaduct piers in the floodplain. This would result in a loss of floodplain storage and some constriction in flow. There would be a resulting moderate impact on the risk of flooding in this area. Reductions in flood storage are being assessed through modelling and will be reported in the flood risk assessment and in the formal ES.
13.6.10 At Highfurlong Brook the embankments and viaduct piers would be less intrusive and the value of the watercourse is less than the River Cherwell. This would have a slight effect on flood risk which would not be significant.
13.6.11 The route would include culverts for other watercourse crossings, or where dry valleys exist, which would be adequately sized to convey the 1 in 100 year annual probability (1%) plus climate change rainfall event. No significant effects would be anticipated.
13.6.12 All the watercourse crossings where there is an adverse effect on flood risk will be assessed in more detail, and design changes made where possible. Appropriate floodplain compensation storage will be designed in to mitigate any loss of floodplain storage.The impact on flood risk will be reduced to less than moderate, therefore the likely residual effect is not significant. Likely residual significant effects
13.6.13 Significant effects have been identified to local groundwater flow, springs and spring fed watercourses. Otherwise, the long term effects on water resources are deemed not significant. Further mitigation
13.6.14 Further measures currently being considered but which are not yet part of the design are set out below: • Application of suitable track drainage which discharges to the same areas where the springs discharge is being considered and will be reported in the formal ES; and • Monitoring of springs, watercourses and water bodies could be adopted to determine whether there would be a need for any further mitigation, which is considered to be unlikely at this stage. Consultations on the monitoring, flow and quality trigger levels and mitigation plans with interested parties, including the EA and private water abstractors, would determine the duration of the monitoring regime and any follow-up mitigation if required.
103 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I References 14 References Arup/URS (2012) Phase One: Draft Code of Construction Practice. HS2 Ltd, London.
Cranfield University (2001),The National Soil Map of England and Wales 1:250,000 scale. National Soil Resources Institute, Cranfield University, UK.
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) (2005), Likelihood of Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land.
Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy.
HS2 Ltd, Community forums, http://www.hs2.org.uk/have-your-say/forums/community-forums. Accessed: 11 April 2013.
Natural England (1996), The Character of England 1996. Available at: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ publications/nca/default.aspx. Accessed 8 January 2013.
Natural England (2002), Provisional Agricultural Land Classification mapping at 1:250,000 (version date 10/01/2002). Available at: http://www.gis.naturalengland.org.uk/pubs/gis/gis_register.asp. Accessed 18 February 2013.
Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 (Chapter 16). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
Noise Insulation (Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems) Regulations 1996. London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
Northamptonshire Biodiversity Partnership (2008), Biodiversity Action Plan V1.4.
Northamptonshire County Council (2010), Minerals and Waste Development Framework Core Strategy.
Northamptonshire County Council (2012), Northamptonshire Transportation Plan Fit for Purpose by Northamptonshire County Council, Local Transport Plan.
Northamptonshire County Council (2013), Northamptonshire Highway Air Quality Strategy.
Office for National Statistics (2011), Business Register and Employment Survey 2011.
Office for National Statistics (2012),Census 2011.
Office for National Statistics (2012),UK Business: Activity, Size and Location.
South Northamptonshire District Council (2007), Adopted Local Plan, Saved Policies.
South Northamptonshire District Council (1998), Supplementary Planning Guidance: Conservation Areas.
Standing Order 27A of the Standing Orders of the House of Commons relating to private business (environmental assessment), House of Commons.
The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (2010 as amended) (No. 490). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
The Hedgerows Regulations 1997 (No. 1160). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
URS (2012), Cherwell Employment Land Review Update (February 2012).
104 CFA Report – Greatworth to Lower Boddington/No 15 I References
Valuation Office Agency (2012),Business Floorspace (Experimental Statistics). Available at: http://www.voa. gov.uk/corporate/statisticalReleases/120517_CRLFloorspace.html. Accessed 27 February 2012.
Weeds Act 1959 (7 & 8 Eliz II c. 54). London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit (2012), Joint Core Strategy.
West Northamptonshire District Council (2009), West Northamptonshire Strategic Flood Risk Assessment.
World Health Organization (2009), Night Noise Guidelines for Europe.
105