Public Session

PUBLIC SESSION

MINUTES OF ORAL EVIDENCE

taken before

HIGH SPEED RAIL COMMITTEE

On the

HIGH SPEED RAIL (LONDON – WEST MIDLANDS) BILL

Tuesday, 8 September 2015 (Morning)

In Committee Room 5

PRESENT:

Mr Robert Syms (Chair) Sir Peter Bottomley Mr Henry Bellingham Geoffrey Clifton-Brown Mr David Crausby Mr Mark Hendrick ______

IN ATTENDANCE

Mr James Strachan QC, Counsel, Department for Transport Mr Richard Turney, Counsel, Department for Transport Ms Jacqueline Lean, Counsel, Department for Transport

WITNESSES

Mr Tony Fish, Governor, Wendover Junior School Dr John Savin, Governor, John Colet School Mr Philip Wallis, local resident Mr Kim Wharton, local resident Mr Andrew Band, local resident Mr David Johnson, Chartered Civil Engineer and Hydro-Geological Consultant Mr Brian Thompson, local resident Mrs Nicole Alcock, local resident Mr Ian Barnes, local resident Mr Lewis

______

IN PUBLIC SESSION

INDEX

Subject Page

Update by Mr Strachan 3

Wendover Junior School and John Colet School Submissions by Mr Fish and Dr Savin 3 Submissions by Mr Turney 10 Submissions by Mr Strachan 14

John Savin Submissions by Dr Savin 16 Submissions by Mr Turney 19

Philip and Marian Wallis Submissions by Mr Wallis 20 Submissions by Mr Turney 23

Anna Ellershaw Submissions by Mr Wallis 26

Kim and Gillian Wharton Submissions by Mr Wharton 29 Submissions by Mr Turney 32

Thompson, Band et al. Submissions by Mr Band 34 Submissions by Mr Johnson 35 Submissions by Mr Thompson 39 Further submissions by Mr Band and Mr Johnson 43 Response from Mr Strachan 48

Andrew Band Submissions by Mr Band 53 Response from Mr Strachan 54

Nicole Alcock Submissions by Mrs Alcock 57 Submissions by Ms Lean 68

Ian Barnes Submissions by Mr Barnes 71 Response from Ms Lean 72

Eifion Lewis Submissions by Mr Lewis 73 Response from Ms Lean 77

(At 09.46)

1. CHAIR: Order, order. Welcome to the HS2 Committee. Sorry to delay you coming in. We start off with Wendover Church of England Junior School, John Colet School and Dr John Savin. Welcome.

2. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Just before we start, can I just update the committee on two things arising out of yesterday? The first is, I was asked by Mr Hendrick about the modelling of the Terrick roundabout and I said I’d come back to him about it. That modelling was carried out in the normal way and we’re in consultation with Buckinghamshire County Council on roundabout modelling. We’re going to carry out a sensitivity test in relation to any carriageway restrictions caused by on-street parking, which is what I think the petitioners were concerned about. So we will carry out that sensitivity test. As I understand it, the modelling doesn’t specifically deal with on-street parking, so we will carry out that sensitivity test.

3. The second matter is that I said yesterday in relation to the question about control of enforcement of the various measures that are in the Code of Construction Practice – and I referred to the fact that we had produced an Information Paper, I didn’t give the identification of it, but it is E1 of the Information Papers which are available. That sets out in far more detail than I did yesterday the various measures to control the Code of Construction Practice, amongst other things, and the environmental minimum requirements. I’m not going to read it out now, but it has the detail, which I was unable to express yesterday in the time. Those are the only two things I just wanted to update you on.

4. CHAIR: Thank you. Sorry for the delay Mr Savin.

Wendover Junior School and John Colet School

5. MR FISH: I’m Tony Fish I’m the Chair of Governors at Wendover Junior School. This is actually a joint presentation on two separate petitions, the Junior School and John Colet School. So, John and I will share the presentation today. The items at A1299 to look at? So if we could straight into page 2? So, really as a summary of our concerns. The reason that we’ve joined together in this presentation is that they are fundamentally the same thing, and the lens at which we look at this is through the health

and safety of the local children of Wendover and surrounding villages, and the proximity of the works and the operation of the train line. We have seven concerns there that we will talk about in a bit more detail as we go through the presentation and then finish on the specific mitigations that we’re seeking against those concerns.

6. In summary, the seven concerns there: one, at the top – and this will be our primary request that we want to talk about – is around construction traffic in the neighbouring area. We’ll explain why that’s such a concern in a village for Wendover where a lot of the children and parents and staff go to school on foot and by bicycle. We also want to talk about health and safety relating to mud and debris and other spoil from vehicles coming in and out of the site and the local area. The noise, both in terms of the construction works and the traffic coming through, and also into the operation of the line as well. Air quality and dust mitigation, things like that, and what that could do for the local area, particularly into the school site which we will show you some maps on shortly. Hydro-geology, which we’re not going to cover in detail but I know you will be looking at in other petitions later today, which will cover that in a lot more detail. The working hours that the site will operate on, and particularly concerned around the travel times for children in and out of school and how that relates and what we can do on that. And the Code of Construction Practice, and some things that we are looking for in mitigation, so that that is a really firm commitment. So if I hand over to John now, who will just take you through the next couple of slides, which have some of the positions of the schools?

7. MR SAVIN: Thank you, I’m John Savin, I’m a Governor at the John Colet School, which is a secondary school on the campus site. The slide here shows the main routes that the children are using to school, so if we can highlight this?

8. MR BELLINGHAM: Can I just seek some clarification? When we had the meeting in the church, we had a very good presentation by your headmaster was it?

9. MR FISH: It was Wendover House School, which is a different site.

10. MR BELLINGHAM: Got it, so that was one nearer the church was it? And you are up here in this circle here?

11. MR SAVIN: In the white circle.

12. MR BELLINGHAM: Thank you very much, sorry about that.

13. CHAIR: I know the school, when some of the petitioners said yesterday that people travel not only from Wendover but some even from Aylesbury?

14. MR SAVIN: Yes. This is the point, because if we illustrate on the map? The main route is from Aylesbury, Weston Turville, Aston Clinton – these are local villages. We take quite a good catchment from these areas, particularly the south side of Aylesbury. John Colet currently has a waiting list, for example, of 40 children, typically from that area for Year 7.

15. A number of children also come down the road from Holton Village and also from Aston Clinton area, Aston Clinton being quite a spread-out village. We have fewer children coming in from Aylesbury-Princes Risborough but we do have a number and fewer still from the south because there is a secondary school in Great Missenden. But there are some from Wendover Dean for example, and local small villages down to the south of Wendover.

16. The HS2 track is approximately shown here, and the construction route traffic illustrated by HS2 uses the bypass. So in theory, there should be no construction traffic whatsoever through Wendover and we are perfectly happy with that arrangement. Our main ask is that that is enforced. We’ll explain why: the school’s area, as you can see, is in white; it’s quite a big area with a significant amount of playing fields. Colet is in this area; the Church of England School is at the top; and the infant school is to the side. There are also a number of preschools on the site.

17. Next slide please? This is a detail of the previous map, just to illustrate the specific points. So coming down the road from Aylesbury, and anybody cycling down from Weston Turville, as a number of children do, we have a cycle lane for part of that route, and then it stops and we’ll show you some pictures in the next slides. We then have quite a significant danger zone, a mini roundabout here – or a circle just painted on the road to be quite frank – which gets extremely congested due to traffic trying to get down Wharf Road, to the school area. The main site entrance is here and there is a secondary entrance to the John Colet only here. We do have good cycle access down this hill, from the Holton Road.

18. So our main concern is that traffic from HS2 would use this road in particular, over to Holton, and the A41 as a rat run. The A41 is a dual carriageway; it connects very efficiently to the M25, and the M1 at Hemel Hempstead. So that’s an excellent route to move over if you don’t want to take your heavy goods vehicles through Princes Risborough which itself will get very congested.

19. So these are the particular concerns that we have. What I’d like to see is a cycle path extension into this danger zone area, and along Wharf Road so we have a complete set of cycle routes and wider paths. This starts to alleviate traffic problems and safety for children. Most of our children do walk to school from the Colet; and a lot of mothers obviously take infants and junior children, possibly with younger children with prams and so on, scooters. It gets extremely congested, as we will illustrate later.

20. Next slide please?

21. MR FISH: So these are just a few of the photos for those areas you’ve just looked at; they’re from Google Maps, so they don’t represent rush hour by any stretch of the imagination as you would normally expect to see traffic backed up here. Some of the current issues that we have are that, as you can see there, there’s a cycle path along Aylesbury Road, which is the top-left image, along Aylesbury Road, which is one of the roads John was just talking about, which just stops. So children cycling to school then have to either go on the footpath or on the road. We have generally, narrow footpaths around the school area, which is the middle photo at the top. There are some quite tricky junctions in the area; it’s quite a rat run already for commuters trying to get from the A41 across to the A413, so those junctions all back up and are busy in the morning. That goes also for the image on the bottom left, which is one of the main junctions turning towards the school campus site. And fundamentally, that’s our concern: in an already overcrowded set of roads, it could be made worse and these roads aren’t ready for it.

22. In terms of statistics from the local highways authority, we’ve had 16 reported road traffic accidents in the last five years, not all of those have included children and parents from the school, some of them have –

23. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Those are injury accidents?

24. MR FISH: Yes. So just in terms of numbers, if we move onto the next slide? You remember seeing the site there are a minute ago; that’s the total number of children that are going in and out on a daily basis; so we have three schools there, we’ve got children right through from 4-18. You can see the number there: 1,700 students. There’s also other uses for that site; there’s a children’s centre, there’s a youth centre, there’s a swimming pool. So there is a large number going in and out, which we estimate to be about 4,500-5,000 people per day. So it is a very busy area that any additional traffic on there is only going to make the situation worse.

25. If we turn onto the next slide.

26. MR SAVIN: This partly uses the survey data we did at the school just to find out when children are moving about. So typically, not a lot of activity before 8.00. The John Colet students will be arriving between 8.15, typically, 8.15-8.30, when they are meant to be in school. We do phase things so that the two – the junior school and the infant school will be moving in between 8.30 and 9.00. So we have a phasing already, just to cope with the situation.

27. This illustrates the window in which we are particularly concerned with HS2 traffic, particularly rogue HS2 traffic that shouldn’t be there that is moving through the area. Also, contractors, personal vans, coaches, whatever. Leaving – for some reason, the John Colet students are very keen to get out of school and tend to vanish quite quickly and we let them out about three o’clock and they tend to be vanished by about 3.15. If they stay on, they going to clubs, those finish about four o’clock and the other two schools will be finishing after the Colet, again, to avoid congestion. Then, of course, we have staff and other students leaving. So there are two big peaks quite prolonged each day during the school term periods.

28. This leads onto our main ask: what we don’t want to see is children damaged, hurt, even killed, by rogue construction traffic that shouldn’t be there in the first place; or by extra congestion due to contractor private vehicles – small vans, things like that. We’d prefer that HS2 route no traffic at all through the village and I think the Parish Council dealt with some of these issues yesterday. We’d like a complete ban on any HS2 traffic at any time along Wharf Road and Manor Road. These are the two suburban roads that go past the school site. HS2 don’t want to use them, that’s fine; we can all

agree on that. And we’d like a specific ban on HS2 traffic of any kind in the peak times – this is between 8.00 and 9.30; and 2.45 to 4.30 on all school days. Those are advertised in advance, it shouldn’t be a big problem for HS2.

29. MR FISH: So the last two slides that we have, if we can move onto the next one, are just some specific requests from each of the schools. We’ve talked about construction traffic; there are some more actions that we are seeking to manage the construction traffic. We’ve talked about prohibiting traffic through. We’re looking for binding commitments from HS2, ones that can be monitored independently and enforced by Environment Health officers from the appropriate local authority. We’re looking for risk assessments to be conducted which are made public, and we’re also looking for funding commitment to repair any highway degradation caused by the construction.

30. Wheel washing, we think is an important one: when we showed you the picture, the map earlier, like most of the UK, we had a south-westerly wind there. So where the green tunnel will be constructed, the wind flow goes straight across the village and straight across the school campus sites. So any dust is going to directly impact, if it carries through to the school site. So, the number one there is wheel washing for traffic coming in and out to manage the risk of that spreading across local highways and up into the air.

31. There are more points in here, in detail, but I’m conscious of time, and I suspect you may have heard these from other people. One particular one I would like to raise is around clause 35 and schedule 25 from the Bill which as we read it, allows the Secretary of State not to be subject to the full constraints we would like, if they see an overwhelming need for something so that they don’t have to take their mitigations that we’re seeking. So we are asking for that to be removed from the Bill.

32. Air quality, I think I have already talked about. Then, in terms of Code of Construction Practice, I know that was covered yesterday, and other people will cover it. There are a number of specific requests in there we are seeking: so adding the Code of Construction Practice to the Bill, replace ‘reasonable’ with ‘best practical means’, to have a construction management plan for the operation of the camps themselves; and have some clear and easy enforcement mechanisms in the Bill. So those are the

additional specific requests from Wendover Junior School.

33. MR SAVIN: John Colet has a very similar set of specific requests. We don’t know what the dust level will be during construction but we do have good playing fields as I have indicated; we do encourage the children to take an active part in sports; and we certainly don’t want to see health problems arising from that. We all know that asthma is a big problem these days with children.

34. Noise – don’t want to say anything about this, but we don’t know what the noise levels are during construction and the school has a particular issue around exam periods. You’ll remember from your own days, the delightful episodes in May and June when you sat your exams. We have – if we have coop students up in a sealed hall for those periods of time, we would like to have proper air handling and any noise mitigation that’s needed. We already have double-glazing, quite modern buildings, but we made need air handling in the summer periods. We don’t want to damage children’s exam prospects by loud noises coming from a construction site. In operation, the proposals of six metre high barriers may well deal with that issue, I can’t assess that.

35. Hydro-geology: I know this is on the menu later today. The Wendover Arm Canal and some of the springs flow directly by the school site. So, on the picture on the bottom left, you can see the spring coming through, just on Wharf Road – it’s called Wharf Road because that’s where the old canal wharf was. And on the right-hand picture, the banking on the side here is school land. This is actually shared between the infant school and the John Colet. We don’t know what the impact of any hydro-geology would be on the water table and building stability either. But I’m not going to deal more with that; it will be dealt with later. Thank you very much.

36. CHAIR: Thank you, finished?

37. MR FISH: Yes, thank you.

38. CHAIR: Mr Strachan, do you want to pick up those points?

39. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Mr Turney?

40. MR TURNEY (DfT): Good morning sir, just a couple of points if I may? First of all, could we see P8135? In terms of construction traffic, I think the petitioner has

correctly identified, we’re not proposing to put any construction traffic through the middle of Wendover. It is all is on the A413 as it goes past Wendover. I think the concern was the risk of people wanting to get through the A41, but that in itself is not a construction traffic route either. Can we give a commitment to that? Well, the position is, as the committee know, is that the construction traffic routing is a matter to be agreed with the highway authority. So we can’t give that commitment because we identify the routes we propose to use, but ultimately it’s in the gift of Buckinghamshire County Council to decide – or to approve – our construction traffic routing. So, we can’t give any further commitment at this stage, but it seems highly unlikely that the highway authority would seek to require us to put construction traffic through Wendover, which is bypassed and we have no need to go through it. So I think that’s probably as far as we can take the road access point. Obviously the County Council are in, in October on the point.

41. In terms of noise –

42. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Just like to remind us that the heavy vehicles will have trackers on them?

43. MR TURNEY (DfT): That’s right. The construction – the CSEP refers to both the traffic management plan and also control of construction vehicles generally. The specific measures, obviously, will be decided in due course. But I think you heard from Mr Smart some time ago when we were up in North Warwickshire that the standard practice now would be to have GPS trackers on vehicles so that the nominated undertaker or the contractor knows where the vehicles are at any particular time.

44. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Will that have a history? Will you be able to go back and say – a complaint comes in, will you be able to say, ‘Where was that vehicle a week ago?’

45. MR TURNEY (DfT): I think for a limited time, is the answer from Mr Smart. It is possible to track it. I think, hopefully when the committee looks at this exhibit, it’s clear that actually traffic through Wendover is unlikely to be a desire line, in any event. There’s a good bypass for Wendover which is about 10 years old, and that’s the route that we would propose to use. So I think all of that is captured under the traffic management plans and the CSEP.

46. On noise, could we just look at P7573(4) please? What I am going to show you is an exhibit which shows noise contours. This is pre-enhanced mitigation package that we talked about yesterday, and –

47. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Construction noise or operational noise?

48. MR TURNEY (DfT): This is operational noise. You see the school is up here. I think it’s worth just pointing out that the dashed line is the edge of the study area, so the school site has actually been scoped out of the operational airborne noise study area, because as is clear from this, it’s quite a long way from where we anticipate any noise effects, any significant noise effects for the ES purposes. So, that’s operational noise.

49. Construction noise, I think the specific request related to schedule 25, which is noise at construction sites, specifically. The committee will recall that there’s still a process of Section 61 consents with the local authority in respect to construction sites; there’s a range of measures in the COCP and certainly in the Environmental Statement, we don’t identify any significant effect on the school by way of construction noise, or indeed, by way of dust arising from the construction process. So, effectively we say those are controlled by the COCP and by the approvals process with the local authority in respect of the construction site itself.

50. Dust and debris on the highway; again, a matter in the COCP. I think the committee has heard before there are requirements there about ensuring that we don’t get mud onto the highway from our construction vehicles.

51. CHAIR: Is it going to be normal practice where you have a construction site, have a wash place for wheels of trucks and vehicles.

52. MR TURNEY (DfT): As I understand it, that is normal practice, but beyond that the COCP would require us to clean the road if we do make a mess of it. But again, we’re some way here, from where we are going to be routing heavy goods vehicles, so I think the schools can be reassured on both bases there.

53. Hydro-geology, I think we have a petitioner later who’s calling an expert on that, so I will leave that for the moment, if the committee are content with that. I think that’s our short answers to the various points. Certainly we don’t propose to put construction

traffic anywhere near these schools, and I think that’s the headline point.

54. MR HENDRICK: There are road drivers who choose to go off the recommended routes that you’re making provision for. Sir Peter mentioned the GPS, but realistically, nobody is going to police the GPS systems on that traffic, and if they do – it sounds to me like you’re leaving the onus of enforcement to the highways authority rather than trying to manage the things yourself.

55. MR TURNEY (DfT): Well it would be the normal complaints procedure, so if someone sees a HGV from the HS2 construction project going through the centre of Wendover they will presumably raise the matter with the nominated undertaker, the Complaints Commissioner if necessary or the highway authority, and that will get back to us. But clearly, the existence of GPS allows us to know where the vehicles are so we can check whether the allegation is

56. MR HENDRICK: So you’re saying that if someone gives a registration number and a description of the vehicle within a day or two before that information expires, you can check which vehicle it was, then would you take action or would the highways agency take action – sorry, the highways authority?

57. MR TURNEY (DfT): The nominated undertaker would take action against their driver, and I think one of the key points to note is that the mass haul trucks will have clear identification as being HS2 trucks and the committee may have seen around London, Crossrail identified trucks. So, certainly I think it’s fair to say it would be pretty surprising if someone saw a mass haul truck in the middle of Wendover –

58. MR HENDRICK: More likely to be white van man or something –

59. MR TURNEY (DfT): And I am sure the school and others would pick up the phone pretty quickly and I am sure that that driver would be appropriately dealt with by the person who is hiring him. But, there is of course to what can be done. That has be recognised. If the driver takes the wrong route or goes off on a frolic of his own, there will be a complaint, I’m sure, and then that will then have to be dealt with. But in terms of the proposal, it is to keep traffic away from the centre of Wendover and on the A413 which is consistent, as we understand it, with what the County Council want to so.

60. CHAIR: Well, what we’ve heard going all down the route is, essentially, the local authority highway authority are pretty important players in determining the final plans for a particular area. Of course, there are – often what we here isn’t just HS2 – but there are other developments, so you may get a housing development, you may get a factory, that goes in between now and when the project actually starts to build. So a lot of authority will be with Bucks County Council and how they intend to manage the situation and I would agree they can be much more sensitive to what’s going on because that’s their job.

61. MR SAVIN: I think we would be a lot more reassured if HS2 were seen to take this issue seriously and, actively put it into their management processes. At the moment it all seems quite laissez-faire – let’s see if anybody does it, and we’ll give a slap over the wrist. What we are concerned about is events happening – and if events happen, they happen very quickly and they happen in the wrong place at the wrong time, and somebody gets seriously hurt or injured. So we really want HS2 to take this very seriously indeed.

62. MR BARNES: I think it is being taken seriously –

63. CHAIR: What we’ve heard in the past is – and the experience of HS1 – is that if something is going wrong, what most people want is for it to be put right that day or the following day, if somebody is using the wrong route. Therefore, quickness of response is sometimes much more important than getting somebody saying, ‘You were right and HS2 were wrong’. Because if somebody is parking in the wrong place or going down the wrong road or doing something wrong, and it’s impacting on your community you want it solved. If that isn’t solved, you can escalate the complaint all the way up. The key test would be, actually, how the nominated undertakers or their subcontractors deal with local people. Clearly, if they are conforming to the Code of Construction Practice, that’s going to be a very important role they have, which is their community relations, because they’re going to be in the community for a year or two or three, then they’re going to want the best relations with local people. They don’t want complaints; they don’t want hassle, because at the end of the day, they want to go and make a profit and do a good job; which is a bit laissez-faire, but still they have to conform to what they have to conform to.

64. Thank you.

65. MR CLIFTON-BROWN: The chairman has mentioned nominated contractors, will you make it clear in all your documentation that their subcontractors have to abide by these routes as well? It’s the one-off delivery lorry that could be the problem?

66. MR TURNEY (DfT): That’s absolutely right, and these provisions and the Code of Construction Practice requirements will be written into the contractual provisions, and that’s identified in the Information Paper E1. So, as it flows down the chain, the subcontractors are subject to the same contractual requirements.

67. MR HENDRICK: Could I ask about cases from your experience, not obviously with HS2 but more generally, have you come across where enforcement has been taken or legal action has been taken against subcontractors?

68. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): I suspect we’d have to look into that. As a general question: would you be interested in specific projects such as Crossrail or HS1?

69. MR HENDRICK: Say on HS1 for example?

70. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): I will see if I can find any more information.

71. CHAIR: I think a little more information about the Code of Construction Practice?

72. MR HENDRICK: It’s just subcontractors will sign a piece of paper; they’re happy they’ve got the job, you know, they’re going to make some money out of it. You know, the small print or a paragraph on page 59 isn’t necessarily what they’re interested in. If that’s what affects the safety and the likelihood of an accident near a sensitive site like a school, then that is an issue.

73. CHAIR: If there are complaints, it’s failed; because the point of the system is to get things solved at a local level. When we heard from Damien Green about Kent, he said actually what annoyed people were minor issues like traffic that was causing dirty windows and stuff on roads. It was trying to find somebody who had the authority to spend money to clear things up. So it’s the responsiveness which is actually got to be pretty clear. Any more information you can supply is pretty helpful.

74. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): I will provide some information about that. There is a financial incentive for subcontractors because their costs - for non-compliance, their costs can be disallowed as a penalty. But I will get you some more information and provide it.

75. MR HENDRICK: Because what I want to know is that there is a deterrent for subcontractors to behave in that way. If it’s just, ‘We heard the complaint and we told them not to do it again’, and that’s the end of it, that’s one thing, but if there is a penalty and they know about it, then it changes behaviour.

76. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Well we will provide you with some information about that.

77. MR CLIFTON-BROWN: It seems to me that in Wendover, which is a reasonable sized settlement along the route, is that what you’ll need is some sort of good community relations, somebody – the Parish Council or whoever – who has a number of somebody who can put it right quickly. I don’t know what mechanism you’ll have in place for that.

78. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): There are the Local Environment Management Plans, the LEMPs as they’ve been identified, which will have to be drawn up as part of these environmental minimum requirements, and those sorts of things are precisely the sorts of things which go into the content of the LEMPs. Those LEMPs – sorry to use the shortened term – will be subject to consultation with the local community; and there are some template versions, I think, in the material available, but precisely the sorts of things you are identifying are meant to form the content of those documents to give a practical way of ensuring both the local community are involved, and also they understand if there is a problem, how it’s dealt with.

79. CHAIR: The other point we come across every time we go down the route is that leaving aside HS2, there are usually transport problems or roundabout problems in towns before HS2 gets there. Clearly a lot of the issues you’ve raised need addressing anyway. Let’s help we can do it properly. Have you finished Mr Turney?

80. MR TURNEY (DfT): I have, thank you.

81. CHAIR: Any brief final comments on this?

82. MR SAVIN: No, I think the other comment I would make on this is that the HS2 route to the south, goes through Princes Risborough – I did say this – and Princes Risborough itself is a small village with lots of roundabouts and so on, and traffic problems – hence the attractiveness of heading up to the A41. Apart from that, thank you very much.

83. CHAIR: Okay, thank you gentlemen.

Dr John Savin

84. MR SAVIN: I’m the first of the petitioners, 1136?

85. CHAIR: Yes. What are you a doctor of…?

86. MR SAVIN: I’m a biomedical doctor.

87. CHAIR: Okay.

88. MR SAVIN: Doing medical stuff – I’m currently writing about French sexually transmitted diseases, which makes a change.

89. Thank you very much. So this is a personal petition. I have been involved in the HS2 process for some years. My property is shown on the map here as a small red dot?

90. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Do you work from home?

91. MR SAVIN: Well, I do a lot of work from my home office, so yes. I also work in London. So, my standard request, as are a lot of petitioners’, is for a fully bored tunnel and the overwhelming case for it.

92. I have a, hopefully, constructive suggestion which is – I know Mr Chapman has raised the issue of what is an overwhelming case yesterday. I’d be quite interested to hear what the overwhelming case was for the tunnel from the M25 to the north of Amersham. Presumably there is a set of figures or cost comparisons which compare the fully bored tunnel to bulldozing the way through the southern Buckinghamshire countryside. I’d be very interested to see what those were; we have asked for them and not seen them. That would provide a benchmark for consideration of other tunnel

options to see how HS2 approach that route selection process.

93. I’m also interested in the decision to take the railway up a hill to take it down a hill. One of the Secretaries of State, Justine Greening I think, was very keen on Victorian values. I don’t see the Victorians doing that type of thing, particularly when there’s a transport corridor, i.e. the A413 which goes nicely past Great Missenden. I’m not, incidentally, advocating that the railway should go past Great Missenden; I’m just curious as to why it goes up a hill and down again and creates so much complications

94. My initial two topics I want to talk about are property loss and countryside value. Property loss – a lot of people have dealt with before. If we can go to slide (4) please of my slide pack? My house is about 1km from the northern portal and just under 1 km from the construction site. So the construction impact is likely to be the major effect, particularly in the village itself and the surrounding area. There is, I think, an element of blight; the current blight according to the property bond figure would be about £60,000 if I sold the house today. Obviously living 1km from the line, I wouldn’t get any compensation whatsoever; in 2027, again using the property bond reports, my loss would be only £20,000. In practice I suspect these losses are much higher, because prices rise.

95. On slide (6) I have shown the local property transactions. I’ve shown these as an index rather than absolute values. You can see the property transactions have basically stalled for the last four, five years; and remain at roughly 2008-9 levels, despite other increases in the general Buckinghamshire area. This obviously has no immediate impact on me, because I’m not planning to sell the house; but if we had to move to another area, I would obviously be able to buy a less adequate property.

96. Slide (7) is more of a personal aspect. My particular opposition to HS2 as a concept and particularly in the Wendover area, is due to its impact on the countryside. I do a lot of cycling and walking; I decided to spare you the site of me in skin-tight Lycra but I could have done so. In particular, HS2 cuts across numerous routes; you’ve heard about a lot of these: the route up to Coombe Hill, Kings Ash, Leather Lane – I tend to go past Stoke Mandeville. There are a lot of cycling and other activities that occur in the Chilterns area, and the HS2 construction process will affect those for a long period of time. It will also, of course, impact on the enjoyment of the countryside after the route

becomes operational.

97. I’m particularly concerned also about the hydro-geology impact that might occur in my local vicinity. The picture on the right-hand side shows the Wendover Arm Canal and I chose this picture just to remind HS2 that when you’re going uphill with a very fast train, occasionally you do get adverse weather conditions even in glorious Buckinghamshire.

98. The amenity value of the immediate area – of the AONB, we talked about in July – as being 165 million. If we look at slide (8) – and I won’t go into these in detail, because I’ve just become aware that the next petitioners will deal with these in quite some detail – the area I live in, which is the star, is in the middle of three major water courses, and there are chalk springs just adjacent to the house. The local environment comprises the Weston Turville reservoir, the picture in slide (9); the Canal which is an extensive wildlife area; and I have calculated the amenity value – I’m aware that Sir Peter thinks amenity values are possibly dubious and I would disagree with some of those methodologies – but the amenity value sets in the government report of about 2000, suggests that this type of landscape has a value of about 6,000 – sorry, over £1 million per hectare. There are approximately 35 hectares of land in the immediate vicinity, which could be affected by hydro-geology impact which potentially puts the amenity value at risk of £45 million.

99. MR CLIFTON-BROWN: How is that figure made up?

100. MR SAVIN: There was a working group of various government departments some years ago which tried to assess the values of different types of landscape. They assessed the perpetuity value of wetlands, natural habitats at about £1 million hectare.

101. MR CLIFTON-BROWN: Yes.

102. MR SAVIN: So I simply drew a line on Google Maps and calculated the hectares. It’s very approximate, and I have no idea what the impact might be; it might vary from 0% to 100%.

103. Finally my conclusions: I just find the increasingly complex green tunnel proposals more and more unrealistic. Initially we were told that there was – we

wouldn’t hear HS2 for the birdsong. Now, we need a six metre high barrier. We’re not clear what the overwhelming case we need to make is. We hope to get clarification on that. It is certainly inflicting major losses on individual property owners; it’s not solving the issue of major and permanent damage to the general environment and to the recreational value and amenity value of the landscape. There’s obviously my big concern, is about the local impact on the wildlife areas and the natural environment. Thank you very much.

104. CHAIR: Thank you very much Dr Savin.

105. MR TURNEY (DfT): I think, sir, probably just on the cycle routes in the area. Again, the construction traffic is focused on the A413 in this area, so the other roads that Dr Savin referred to are not construction traffic routes. So whilst obviously there is activity in the area, this is not the routes on which he wishes to cycle that we are putting construction traffic.

106. I think there was a general point about route selection and obviously the committee has already heard about the process by which that was carried out in 2011 and 2012 so I won’t go back into that unless that would assist.

107. Should Dr Savin need to move away from Wendover, as he suggests might be the risk, the Need to Sell Scheme is the means by which the project deals with the short- term impacts of the scheme on property prices and property transactions. So, I think are, in headline terms – and I’d make the point again, on hydro-geology, we have a witness coming later, so I will leave that over.

108. CHAIR: Thank you very much Dr Savin. Thank you for your time today.

109. MR SAVIN: Thank you.

110. CHAIR: Right, we now move on to Philip Wallis, petitioner 614 and 1243 in the name of Anna Ellershaw and Marion and Philip Wallis.

Philip and Marian Wallis

111. CHAIR: Welcome Mr Wallis to the committee.

112. MR WALLIS: Thank you, firstly thank you for spelling my name correctly, it

very seldom happens. They’re usually both spelt incorrectly, so well done.

113. I’m here to give you my views on – particularly on how it affects my family. We were advised by the David Lidington that you’ve had all the technical stuff, you really want to know what the impact was on me and my family which is what I’m here to talk to you about. My wife and I are residents of 9 Coombe Avenue. You’ve heard some impacts on Coombe Avenue – my first slide please? A1287, thank you. We are residents of 9 Coombe Avenue and I shall be representing myself and my wife. You’ll be delighted to know that I’m not going to talk about the business impact. I’m not going to talk about the hydro-geological impact. I might touch on the noise impact as it affects us. Clearly noise is a bit of – depends whose expert you believe, looking at yesterday’s various presentations. They seem to be a matter of opinion more than actual exact science. Probably nobody will know exactly until it’s all done. So you will hear from people who are better qualified than me about these things but I do intend to discuss the devastating impact we believe it will have on myself, my family, and our life in Wendover.

114. Next slide please?

115. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Can I suggest you don’t have to read out all the words, we can read them quite well. Do you understand that we’re well embedded in the community, and then you can perhaps move onto the next one?

116. MR WALLIS: Well you’ve read the slide, any comments. I would say that my wife is a qualified artist, I was recently a Chairman of the Governors of Wendover House School which you heard from Ian McCall about earlier on, until recently. She is now a practicing artist, she was a teacher before that, and she exhibits locally. I have just included some examples of her work, so you can see that she’s not actually just stringing beads together – and by the way, orders are being taken for Christmas should you wish to take…

117. We’ve lived in Wendover – what does it mean to us? We’ve lived in Wendover for 43 years, and Coombe Avenue for 39 years. Our children were born and educated there, and despite me moving jobs several times, I was in the computer industry and have a bit of a history of moving jobs in that industry. I had several opportunities to move away but we elected not to do so and I undertook a longer commute, long

journeys – I covered Leeds, Liverpool, places up and down the country, with having to move jobs. I’m making the point that we did not want to leave from where we were, because we like the town, we appreciate what the town offers and the surrounding areas.

118. Moving on to my next slide? We’ve spent – when funds allow – we’ve spent a fair amount of money on our house over the years. We’ve lived in this house for 39 years; and as our needs dictated, we also changed things.

119. The next slide is actually incorrect, I apologise for that. It is actually 250 metres from HS2 line, blame the person who made the slide – actually me, but there we go. You can show where our house is situated; it’s the red block on the line there. It’s exactly 250 metres. You heard from Mrs Davies yesterday about Coombe Avenue and how far it is. I think the point to make is that we are approximately 500 metres – just over 500 metres from the southern portal. I won’t bang on about the noise; I would say that it’s still a bit unknown. We are on the cusp of 60-70 decibel contours.

120. Next slide please? What I would like to go on, on the next slide is what our main concerns are about – as you will gather – during the construction phase. I’ll be covering some of them in more detail but one of the more obvious ones which will be from an early stage is dust and air pollution. I was there when the Wendover bypass was built and despite comments from the gentlemen to my left, there was an awful lot of dust over Wendover during that period. I would like to know exactly what additional measures will be taken to alleviate that. It was not particularly nice; you couldn’t use your gardens, you couldn’t hang clothes out and what have you. It was really not a pleasant place. Your car was scratched particularly badly. I’ve already mentioned my garden in the tranquillity at 4. This is particularly important to us. I shall be covering some of the other points in the next slides.

121. I’ll just talk a little bit about our house. You’ve seen a photograph of it. It is our main asset like most peoples’, and being 71, I am pretty certain that we will probably have to sell within the next 10 years for health reasons, for family reasons, whatever. I have a minor heart complaint; my wife suffers with depression which hasn’t been helped by the last five or so years. Our family move around, they are fairly young. So we may need to move is what I’m saying. I think there’ll be a financial impact, despite what the property compensation plan says. Property in Wendover is already blighted; I can’t

really see it every catching up with the surrounding areas and in the south of England.

122. Moving on to the other one, the road closures and traffic. I do have to take issue with my colleague, Mr Turney on the left, who says that the construction traffic will not affect us; it’s going down pre-defined routes. But, there is always a knock-on effect; people using rat runs, I’ve used them myself I am embarrassed to say, to avoid traffic. You do. It’s not just the construction traffic, which needs to be considered; it’s all the associated traffic in the area.

123. There will be a cost and time impact, but probably the most important thing to us is, we have a grandson, aged 9, who has just learned to ride his bike. I do not want to see him under a truck – not even a truck because he won’t be riding down those roads – but even the local roads will be affected and I defy you to say they won’t.

124. Moving on, this is my dog who is enjoying a run on Coombe Hill. She couldn’t care ‘tuppence’ about HS2 but I’m not quite sure how to break it to her that she might not get up to Coombe Hill because the footpaths are going to be closed for the next few years and she won’t be able to get to her favourite places. We regularly go up Coombe Hill, walk the Arm Canal and hydro-geology, I know, is being covered in another presentation.

125. Moving on to the other concerns we have, you’ve heard from several people yesterday about – the Parish Council and others – that to get a doctor’s appointment is not easy: two weeks is for a non-important – or a routine appointment, is not unusual. With the people, staff and contractors moving into the area, I can’t help feeling this will have an impact and I don’t see where this has been addressed. Ambulance access – I have unfortunately had to use them myself. I’ve been to both High Wycombe and to Stoke Mandeville. There would be delays because the main routes would be the ones that you are going to use. Perhaps you should consider an air ambulance. What about other services in the area? I know that local schools are at capacity now, I don’t see how they are going to cope with the additional – you’ve heard from the gentleman at John Colet and from the Wendover Middle School. I don’t see how the schools are going to cope with an additional load. And the shops and businesses are going to be affected, and you’ve heard from Mr Guy about that, or you will be.

126. You’ve heard from several people about the requirement for a fully-bored tunnel.

It will come as no surprise to you that I’m going to make the same request. I think that it’s important; I believe a fully-bored tunnel – sorry move on, next slide please? I’m just wrapping up now. I believe a fully bored tunnel is the only solution, which will actually alleviate disturbance during construction which is our main concern, reduce the air pollution and dust, reduce the traffic congestion, and remove most of the operational noise, as far as we’re concerned, in Coombe Avenue. I do not believe this request is unreasonable, and I would ask you to give it due consideration, and the impact on the lives of our family against the incremental cost.

127. I will just leave you one slide, from the people who are imploring you to please help us. My dog and my grandchildren, as it happens. Thank you very much.

128. CHAIR: Those are the grandchildren?

129. MR WALLIS: How old or where are they?

130. CHAIR: On the picture? The dog or the grandchildren?

131. MR WALLIS: Yes, sorry. The grandchildren on the right!

132. CHAIR: Thank you very much Mr Wallis! Mr Turney?

133. MR TURNEY (DfT): Sir, I will just say on dust, because it’s raised by a number of petitioners that there are four and a half pages in the COCP that deal with dust at the construction site. I’m not going to go through all the measures but obviously I’ll make sure that Mr Wallis sees a copy of that. I can’t speak for what measures were employed in 1997. But we do as a result of these measures, in our assessment, in the ES, conclude that there is not likely to be any significant dust effect or other air quality effect in this area during construction.

134. CHAIR: Okay. And enforcement of that, presumably it’s again, the local authority that will test such things?

135. MR TURNEY (DfT): That’s right, and it’s the same set of measures that are set out in Information Paper E1 that Mr Strachan referred you to this morning; and then through those enforcement mechanisms if there are dust issues, they can be dealt with. You’ve heard already about the small claims, so if there are localised dust problems,

they can be dealt with in that way if dust is deposited on something or something along those lines. But it is not, in our Environment Statement, we come to the conclusion that there is not likely to be any significant dust effect in this area in light of those measures.

136. CHAIR: Okay.

137. MR WALLIS: I find that hard to believe to be honest with you. I’ve lived through it, and I don’t know how you can justify, how you can actually predict what the dust is going to be? You’ve got piles of soil, you’ve got chalk dust, you’ve got the wind in the south-westerly direction, it comes right across the village. I just cannot accept that, I’m sorry.

138. CHAIR: Okay and rights of way being closed towards Coombe Hill?

139. MR TURNEY (DfT): If it assists, I can show you what happens with those? It’s Exhibit P7576(3), this is in the permanent case. It may be easier to show P7575(3). The main route to Coombe Hill crosses the railway line and the A413 and follows Ellesborough Road I think. That’s the main footpath out which forms part of the various national routes and local routes. During the construction of the Ellesborough Road – the new alignment of Ellesborough Road, which is on the original alignment but over the tunnel lid – there is a temporary diversion of that road, which is this loop here. The footpaths will be routed down there, in the temporary case.

140. In the permanent case, they’ll be put back on their original alignment, which will then be over the tunnel lid, so it is a temporary diversion there, following the temporary diversion of the road.

141. MR WALLIS: How long is this temporary diversion?

142. MR TURNEY (DfT): I can find that for you? That is in – sorry, if you will allow me one second? Two and a half years? P7634? Yes, Ellesborough Road, up to two years. And if we just go onto the next one please?

143. CHAIR: When it says, ‘Up to two years’, is that worst case scenario?

144. MR TURNEY (DfT): Yes.

145. CHAIR: So it’s likely to be less?

146. MR TURNEY (DfT): Yes, that’s right. I think what happens here is there is a series of diversions related to one another, so Bacombe Lane and Ellesborough Road are at one stage connected through a temporary link road, but at all points, the road coming out over the London to Aylesbury railway line, and over Nash Lee Road will be maintained, either through this temporary diversion, and then back on its original alignment in the permanent case down Ellesborough Road. So there will be a temporary diversion but the committee will see it’s not a significant diversion. Effectively, you go behind the row of houses on Ellesborough Road for that period of diversion before the original alignment is really stated.

147. CHAIR: Sorry, Mr Wallis, you want to raise a question?

148. MR WALLIS: I would like to please, Mr Chairman? I was actually referring to the footpath – I use that every morning to take my dog for a walk in the Cricket Club. The cricket field will not be reinstated there; or will not exist. That path there is the one you can go diagonally across and join and cross the Aylesbury Road there. Those paths won’t exist for quite a long period of time even if they are ever reinstated once the green tunnel is built, do you accept that?

149. MR TURNEY (DfT): Yes, that’s right.

150. MR WALLIS: Thank you.

151. MR TURNEY (DfT): So the route coming over the road will go back onto – in the temporary position, the route coming over the road won’t be able to get through where you see Wendover Cricket Club. So there is a temporary diversion of that route – I’m trying to compare two plans here. There’s a temporary diversion of that route, which would take Mr Wallis or others up to the road, the start of Ellesborough Road or the end of Pound Street as it is there, over the railway, and onto this position, and that’s for a period of two years and three months. Then that footpath in the permanent case is reinstated over the tunnel lid. So for two years, Mr Wallis is right to say that he’ll have to come up to the road, and over the road bridge.

152. MR WALLIS: And I won’t be able to use the Cricket Club?

153. MR TURNEY (DfT): The Cricket Club is acquired under the scheme; the Cricket

Club – or part of it is – the Cricket Club is to be relocated; you’ve heard about that already. But yes, so far as that’s within the construction land take, which looks like at least some portion of it is, that won’t be available during the construction period.

154. MR HENDRICK: That land will be available for a path after this work has finished after two years and three months?

155. MR TURNEY (DfT): Well, the proposal is to reinstate it that.

156. MR HENDRICK: So the land won’t have any other use since it was a Cricket Club?

157. MR TURNEY (DfT): Well, so far as it’s been acquired by the scheme, obviously the process then is to return it to original owners if they wish to have it; but in respect of this land and the tunnel lid, that will be – certainly the side slopes on this side are suitable to return to agriculture. The area to the east of our alignment, I don’t know if there’s a specific proposal for?

158. MR HENDRICK: Well, given its proximity to the railway, probably not.

159. MR TURNEY (DfT): For the use of that land, the former Cricket Club land.

160. CHAIR: Okay, thank you Mr Turney. Mr Wallis?

161. MR WALLIS: Thank you.

162. CHAIR: Thank you very much for giving your presentation.

Anna Ellershaw

163. MR WALLIS: I have one more to give you; you haven’t got rid of me for the moment.

164. CHAIR: Is that now?

165. MR WALLIS: Yes.

166. CHAIR: Is this for Anna Ellershaw?

167. MR WALLIS: Yes.

168. CHAIR: A relative or a neighbour?

169. MR WALLIS: She’s my daughter as it happens, yes.

170. CHAIR: Okay, but well spotted.

171. MR WALLIS: I won’t read the slides. I will merely allude to the fact she would’ve been here herself but she’s occupied in full-time teaching and couldn’t get the time off. So the words here are in fact her words; I will paraphrase them as best I can and she’s asked me to present on her behalf.

172. As you will gather, she was born in Wendover, she was educated in Wendover and went to university in Sheffield.

173. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Can I suggest that we can read all those pages, and if you go on to (4) please?

174. MR WALLIS: Yes, that shows you the position of her house which is in Thornton Crescent, which you have heard about many times, I suspect. It’s 350 metres from the northern portal. I’ve shown the next few slides, which clearly shows the same picture, but pictorially, but it shows the proximity to the line. I will not mention too much about the sound; we’ve discussed that before, but this is – she is not technical, she doesn’t understand what it really means, but she believes it means she will have a disturbed sleep both for her son and for herself.

175. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: She may believe that; it’s not what we heard yesterday.

176. MR WALLIS: I was listening yesterday as well, but I wasn’t sure that it was that clear to be honest with you, but there we go. She is very concerned about her proximity to the northern portal; she is really concerned about the day and night noise – which we may agree or disagree about perhaps – and I know the people from Nash Lee Road were talking about how well houses were selling in Thornton Crescent, but that’s not strictly true; that’s not always the case. She is really concerned about the dust and noise pollution during the construction phase for the reasons stated there, but she does have a son who suffers from asthma and has had to be rushed to A&E on several occasions as a result of his asthma attacks. So I don’t believe – this is why I was banging on a bit

about dust earlier on. But I do think that it’s an important subject that needs to be addressed.

177. She has the same sort of concerns about construction traffic, about the Wendover cricket field. I lend out my dog occasionally and she takes her for a walk, and the impact to those shops. Neither she nor I want to live in a ghost town which is what we believe could happen. She is aware of the issues with the teaching and the schools, and the learning.

178. Moving on to the one without – the next slide please? She does use the footpaths regularly; she enjoys all the same sorts of areas that we like. We do not believe that when she is up Coombe Hill that the scar of the HS2, when it’s been constructed and the mounds of spoil, will be that enjoyable. She also enjoys the walk in Wendover Woods which hasn’t featured too strongly in these things but I believe the access to that will be affected as well in terms of traffic access. She believes that the only fair solution, as we’ve said, is a fully bored tunnel for the same reasons that I believe in a bored tunnel, and I haven’t coached her in this, I promise you. Her request is to give this due consideration, and that’s really what she’s asking. The current plan would destroy the essence of Wendover, the surrounding area and the land she loves.

179. There they are taking a walk, next slide please? There they are; that’s on behalf of my daughter; I did rush through it a bit and I appreciate your forbearance.

180. CHAIR: We’ve got the point, thank you very much. So where do your other grandchildren live? The ones that moved back from Spain?

181. MR WALLIS: They’ve moved temporarily to Guildford, because I don’t think they can afford a house there unfortunately, but they’re renting in Guildford at the moment. But they did spend six weeks living with us and then moved back, and I think we’re still recovering from that!

182. CHAIR: Okay, thank you very much indeed. Thank you for sharing your time with us. Right, we now move on to 1451 David and Karen Crosser, are you here? No? Okay, 1554, Kim and Gillian Wharton?

Kim and Gillian Wharton

183. MR WHARTON: I don’t know if this is a good thing or not but I have absolutely no slides. I’m just going to talk –

184. CHAIR: Trying something new?

185. MR WHARTON: Talk from the heart and I suppose the downside is you may have to look at me rather than the slide, to listen. I also don’t even have a map of where our house is, but if I describe it? Oh, it’s on the map and you’ve even mapped it for me, even better. So as you can see, my wife and I live in Hale Road in Wendover which is on the southern side and if you drew a line from it you’d probably bisect or cross the boundary between Wendover House School and Wendover Church. We moved to Wendover about 14 years ago and we chose to do that because we thought it would be where we would retire to; I haven’t retired yet, but I don’t have to work for too much longer – or I hope not to work for too much longer. We have a love of the countryside and part of the reason for moving there was because we enjoy the outdoors and we chose Wendover because it was a relatively tranquil place with beautiful countryside; and it’s also a thriving town, as a couple of people have alluded to. People visit it and spend their money and bring their money into Wendover.

186. A couple of things that are more personal about the things we do and how it will affect us. My wife’s primary hobby is gardening and beekeeping, so that means she spends quite a lot of time in our back garden which is obviously the closest part of our property to HS2. I’m another one who wears a bit of Lycra at the weekends and I enjoy cycling; and whilst I understand the argument that was made – or the point that was made a moment or two ago about not cycling down the A413 that much, there are a number of other roads, around Small Dean Farm, around Dunsmore and those kinds of areas which many cyclists like I use, and I go out at least once a week on my bike. I think even if we don’t cycle down the main road, other roads will be busier, it’s been alluded to earlier, and that makes them potentially more unsafe.

187. I also like to fish. I fish on Hampden Pond which is just across the road from Church Lane, opposite the church. We also walk, we also have a dog; he’s rather aged but I suspect when he passes away we’ll replace him with another one, and a number of the footpaths we use currently take us across where the route will be, around the Small

Dean Grove farm areas, up to what is called Hogtrough Lane, so all areas that I think will be impacted both during construction and during operation.

188. That is not what we moved to Wendover for. I’ve looked at the recent noise mitigation plans which I’ve done fairly hurriedly given when they came out, but trying to see what’s done. I do appreciate that in those, that the committee and you, Mr Syms, made the point that you wanted an extended green tunnel. I see that HS2 have said that that’s not a good solution and, admittedly, when you look at the model, the big concrete tube that comes across to the viaduct doesn’t look like a very appealing solution.

189. CHAIR: Could I ask, would you like some extension of the tunnel, not necessarily 700 – would you like it to go a bit farther?

190. MR WHARTON: I would much prefer a bored tunnel, but I think if that is absolutely impossible, then I think something else is better than nothing at all.

191. Even on the south side, that’s the bit where I think we feel most exposed. Other than residents in Wendover Dean, I think we probably feel the least accommodated by the whole process so far. The other point I would make, just talking about the tunnel extension is that the viaduct that goes over the A413 at the Small Dean area is raised as well. That adds to the potential for noise to travel and it also, with the south westerly wind, you’ve already mentioned a couple of times this morning and probably ad nauseam before, that pretty much comes in our direction from that area. So I guess my concerns are firstly that the line is not in an extended tunnel at the moment, but also that that viaduct is raised and elevated to a significant level.

192. Now, obviously HS2 proposed some noise mitigation measures, and I do welcome the fact that people at least appreciate that some extra mitigation is needed for the southern end of Wendover. But I have a couple of reservations about those. If I may just comment on those briefly: firstly, there are a number of noise barriers or fences proposed; and secondly, there was some suggestion about helping both the church and the House School with extra insulation on their buildings. Now, that’s fine when you’re indoors but what I’ve described are a number of things that my wife and I like doing which are outdoors and that’s generally what one chooses nice countryside for. Similarly, the children at the House School, I assume, spend some time outside as well. So whilst those measures collectively do a lot to mitigate the noise; they do it to a lesser

degree when you’re enjoying an outdoor activity. Now, I would say – I know you heard a fairly impassioned, and I think very good speech from the headmaster of that school when you visited Wendover – and I would just sort of pay testament to the job they do, because in 14 years of living very close to a school which has some slightly troubled boys in it, we have had one boy in our back garden in that whole time, and he disappeared fairly quickly, so we’ve never had any trouble. I would hate to see even one child who went to that school have his potential life that was going to be back on track – if you’ll excuse the pun – actually adversely affected. Clearly if it happened on some kind of scale, that might affect some of us who live around that area as well.

193. So, I think I would say that - there is one other thing that I nearly forgot – I suppose like some MPs or politicians, if you don’t look at your notes occasionally, you might forget a really important point – the other thing I wanted to say about the noise barriers and things is that unfortunately, like a lot of places, Wendover and the surrounding areas suffer from a bit of graffiti and while I am sure they are effective against noise, I also think they present a beautiful easel for people to go and put tags and their names and scribbles and things. Whilst they might mitigate against the noise, I don’t think they do anything at all for the potential environment of that end of Wendover.

194. So I would fully advocate a fully bored tunnel. If that isn’t possible, then I would really – and only if that isn’t possible – I would really ask the committee to think about that extension but also about the line travelling underneath the A413 rather than over the A413 because clearly that is the issue that leads to a problem with the extension of the green tunnel for Wendover.

195. CHAIR: Okay.

196. MR WHARTON: I think that’s it, thank you very much.

197. CHAIR: Pretty good without slides as well; well done. Mr Turney?

198. MR TURNEY (DfT): Can I just quickly show the committee P8161(33)? This is our revised noise assessment. It’s table 3 of appendix 8 to the Wendover Noise Mitigation Report. I just want to point out that for this – Mr Wharton’s location, his property is somewhere between 369, 370 and 369, 288 on Hale Road. So it’s between

the two of them. Just to emphasise that we were reporting in the ES a change in LAeq of plus-3 decibels day and night. That’s now – well, for one of them, no change; minus-1, minus-1, so an improvement in the noise environment –

199. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: What we would call, not unnoticeable change –

200. MR TURNEY (DfT): I should say it’s the change is an improvement, compared to the scheme. So, that’s the LAeq measure. The LAmax measure, we were reporting 61 and 65, which is obviously the HS2 train, the TSI compliant train, the two different figures, and you can see those figures are lower, marginally lower than the LAmax. So, compared to the Bill scheme, the noise mitigation package produces some improvement, for this petitioner’s location. It’s not the most improvement compared to other locations in the middle of Wendover, where the A413 noise barriers really benefit the petitioners.

201. CHAIR: Can I ask about noise barriers? Those within the curtilage of the railway clearly are behind fences and to some extent protected, to stop people getting on it. But if you’re putting a noise barrier on a road with the cooperation of Buckinghamshire County Council, how do you stop people spraying it and doing stuff with it? Or is that a County Council problem?

202. MR TURNEY (DfT): I think it’s then for the County Council. But it may be those are the kinds of things that can be discussed with the County Council.

203. CHAIR: Okay, it’s been raised two or three times by people in Wendover, apart from the look, they don’t want people painting on these things.

204. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Pre-treating them so anything that goes on can come off fast; and possibly making them green; if you put ivy all over the place –

205. MR WHARTON: It makes it easier to clean but it doesn’t prevent it happening in the first place –

206. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: I’m just trying to give a helpful addition.

207. MR WHARTON: And with respect, I think it’s a Council job to clean it; they have trimmed budgets and everything else; it may not be the highest priority. So we may have to live with it for a serious length of time before it’s removed.

208. MR HENDRICK: For example, again, on HS1, clearly you will have had experience of this where you’ve effectively created a canvas for local graffiti artists. Does it not weigh on your conscience at all that you’re passing the problem over to the local Council, which is of your making?

209. MR TURNEY (DfT): Well, certainly for the railway barriers, it’s not handed over to the local Council – for the barriers on the railway, the noise barriers on the railway or other security barriers on the railway, that’s not handed over to the local Council; that remains part of the railway and the responsibility of the nominated undertaker. In terms of Council responsibility noise barriers, I think we will have to come back to you on that as to whether there is any instance in Kent of us handing over a new barrier to a local authority and the maintenance of that. So, if we can be permitted to come back we’ll look into that and see how that was dealt with.

210. MR HENDRICK: Yes, if you could because clearly it’s going to be a problem not just there but along the route generally.

211. MR TURNEY (DfT): There’s clearly a discussion to be had as to how we will deliver the noise barriers for the roads with Buckinghamshire County Council. They’re aware of the proposals but they’re obviously at an early stage and the detail needs to be worked out.

212. MR WHARTON: Can I just come back to the point you made on the noise? Obviously, accepting those numbers, there is a tiny reduction downwards. The point I was trying to make is that it’s not so much about being in one’s house and having noise interference; it’s actually about being outside or being in the surrounding areas and having that noise interference. When we moved to Wendover, we knew when we bought it that we had a Chilterns Mainline which we can hear from our back garden. The trains on that run I think at a maximum of eight in both directions in peak times, and on average four in any hour. And we also knew that we had a bypass which generates a small bit of noise. I know that HS2 make the point that it would protect Wendover from noise from those two things as well. But we bought our house knowing that those two things existed and accepting it. What we didn’t buy our house knowing is that we were going to have a high-speed rail line put within a few hundred yards of it.

213. And, the other point I would make is, I guess your map which shows that the

sound doesn’t take into account strong winds and, as we talked about before, we have a south westerly more often than not and that blows exactly in the direction to bring that noise. So those would be my thoughts back on the minor improvements that the mitigation plans make.

CHAIR: Thank you very much, Mr Wharton, for your contribution. Thank you. Right, we now move on to Andrew Band and Brian Thompson, petitions 104, 22, 23, 24, 597 and 598?

Thompson, Band et al.

214. MR BAND: Okay, Mr Chairman, sirs. The old English meaning of Wendover is ‘White Waters’, referring to the chalk streams in the area. The foundation of our community is based around these streams. We are a group of long-term Wendover residents who have come to realise that the hydro-geology in the area is particularly important and our assertion is that HS2’s assessment of the hydro-geological issues in the Wendover area is fundamentally flawed. Those who are involved in managing farmland, sadly – I believe one of your committee members knows exactly how to manage farmland – will know that if you have a wet field on a hillside, and you wish to dry it out, what you do is you dig a ditch across it. Can we have the next slide please?

215. My apologies – we need to go to slide A1273(2), thank you. I will try and be brief, Mr Chairman, we will go through this. Can we have the next slide please? This is a view of Wendover which I think most of you will be familiar, by now, with. What I wish to point out on the screen – in the top-left hand corner, sorry, top right corner is the first set of springs that feed the Wendover Canal and then subsequently the Grand Union Canal some 7km downstream. The second set of springs feed the Castle Park – from Castle Park area, and they feed directly into the Weston Turville SSSI, which is in the foreground in the bottom left-hand part of the picture. The third set of springs are the middle of Wendover and those flow into Bearbrook which runs past the outskirts of Wendover and then past the outskirts of Weston Turville and ultimately into the Thames. The remaining set of springs on the right-hand side of the picture, those flow directly into Aylesbury.

216. Now, across this vista, HS2 are in effect going to dig a ditch, and what I mean by that is a green tunnel and a cutting. So we contend that there is a significant risk of

irretrievable damage to these water courses and hence, our local environment. We believe the issue has the potential to delay the project and cause significant impact on costs unless an appropriate engineered solution is produced now. What we are asking for is a clear recognition of the problem. The issue was raised in the session on 14 July with the community councils, and so far HS2’s responses to us indicate that they do not recognise this as anything other than a low risk issue. So the purpose of the evidence we will want to present today is to recap on the hydro-geological issues very briefly; highlight the issues and progress that we’ve made since 14 July and explain to you the impacts that we believe will result in the problem being recognised. This is what we’re looking for, for mitigation.

217. So before I hand to our expert witness, Mr David Johnson, can I introduce him properly to the committee this time around? David Johnson is a chartered civil engineer, an independent hydro-geological consultant. He was the senior technical hydro-geologist at the Environment Agency and co-authored the Environment Agency Best Practice guide on hydro-geological issues.

218. MR JOHNSON: If we could go onto the next slide please? The next slide is a schematic of what we’ve just seen, so this is what I’ll try and build on and try and simplify so that it’s easier to explain.

219. CHAIR: This is the same as we saw in the summer?

220. MR JOHNSON: This is exactly the same one we saw this summer. The start of springs, and Wendover is the yellow blob; and we are standing to the East and looking back across to the west with Aylesbury on the right hand side. Ourselves and HS2 agree that, how the system works at the moment is the rain falls on Coombe Hill to the west, flows underground and comes out through those springs. So if we go onto the next slide.

221. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Just put a pen across as though it’s the HS2 line?

222. MR JOHNSON: That will come in the next slide.

223. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Okay.

224. MR JOHNSON: So if we go onto the next slide? So if I take the lid off the

groundwater system now; we can see the groundwater flow directions there, the blue dotted lines going across the aquifer and you still see the springs across that spring line. Now we introduce HS2 into that hydro-geological system. It’s worth saying, when I say hydro-geology, that’s the underground hydro-geology, anything on the surface. So we introduce HS2 into that system. The first section of it is the Wendover green tunnel; that’s the two triangles that we’ve put there; and then after that we’ve put the Wendover north cutting. Again, we agree with HS2 that this will act as a drain and it will drain water away from those springs and towards the north, in the direction of Aylesbury. So there’s no disagreement at the moment; what we don’t know at this stage is how much water will be drained, so let’s go onto the next slide. This is a slide just taken straight from the HS2 reports and this is a cross-section again, looking in the same direction through the geology so we can see the geology, the aquifers, the green geology, and the clay is the brown geology. What we’ve got is the red line, is the base of the HS2 route; and the blue dotted line is the groundwater table. That’s the normal groundwater table. So that’s important because I’ve taken – that’s the data that I’ve taken from the HS2 report to use in my calculations. I’ve coloured in blue triangle the area where HS2 will be below the groundwater table. This is all data that is taken from the HS2 report. We can see at the bottom the two red ellipses are Wendover green tunnel, which takes us partway through that cutting and then Wendover north cutting takes over from there. If we go on to the next slide, this is where we start to disagree with HS2. So, what I have done here is some very simple calculations to estimate the flow that will be intercepted and that is the black numbers at the top. There are also some red numbers by each of the springs and those are the predicted reductions in spring flow to each of those springs. The green numbers above those are the spot measurements of how much flow was in the spring when I did some spot sampling in February of this year.

225. So, the key number to concentrate on is the 24 megalitres a day, which is in black at the top. That is the total amount of water that could be intercepted by the cutting in temporary conditions. That is during construction and that equates to 5.2 million gallons of water a day, in old money. What you can see if we now start looking at the green and red numbers for each of the springs, working from left to right, is that we have a spring flow of 5 megalitres per day, a loss of four, and that gives you one left; six and five, that gives you one left, so you can see a profound impact and this is just the average impact that I am predicting.

226. Those numbers were not challenged on 14 July and the only challenge to those numbers that we have received was in a rebuttal which is part of the HS2 evidence. Unfortunately, HS2 made an arithmetical mistake in that evidence, and I can point to it but I was just going to explain it. If you want me to show you the exact points, they have submitted it as evidence. What they said is that I did my spot sampling in the winter, and because I did my spot sampling in the winter the flows in the springs would be higher than you would normally expect and that has made my assessment of the impact very conservative. So, I have overestimated the amount of impact that would happen, but actually it is the reverse, and I will show that to you.

227. So, if you imagine, what they are saying is that that figure to the left, that five megalitres a day in green, is too high. So, if we reduce it to four megalitres a day and take four away from it, you can see the impact is even worse. So, it is an arithmetical mistake. They have taken it in the wrong direction. That is the only rebuttal I have had so far of my evidence in terms of the numbers.

228. I think, really, the rebuttal was missing the point. Those green numbers are there to give me context and say, ‘I’m losing four megalitres a day. Does that matter?’, and if I have measured a flow in there of 100 or 200 megalitres a day, it would not be a serious impact but the point is that it is of the same order of magnitude and that is the critical point here. So, profound impacts potentially on those springs.

229. If I contrast that with what HS2 have done, they haven’t estimated the flow impacted. So, they have made no estimate of the amount of flow that will be taken away. They say that it will be flow impacted but they don’t make any estimate of that flow. For me, it is always the first thing I do, to try to get an estimate of flow. You can’t always do it; it’s not always possible but you always try and make some simple calculations to give yourself that number just so that you can start to work out how serious a problem you have.

230. The second thing that HS2 did that was an error, in my opinion, was that they looked very much at the downstream receptors. So, if you look again at those blue dotted lines, you can see that what they say in their hydrogeological impact assessment is that there will be an impact but it will occur to those springs down there to the north of the diagram, which is Stokes Brook. What they have said is that there will be a

significant impact; they acknowledge that. They do not say how much it will be but what they will do to mitigate that impact is to turn the flow into that brook. Now, that is fine for Stokes Brook but there are two problems. One is that if my 24 megalitres a day is right, and that is what is drained from the brook, that is more than there is in Stokes Brook. That is more flow than there is so where is it going to get the rest of its water from? That is one of the reasons why you always do a flow estimate. The second thing is that you would turn all that water into Stokes Brook, which then flows into Aylesbury and there has been a flooding issue on that stream. So, there are a number of issues around there. I did not look in detail at the flooding issues so I am not claiming that but certainly I always know that from returning more water into a stream that is flooded, it is always something to be concerned about.

231. Could we move on to the next slide, which is the temporary impact. So, that is when the green tunnel and the cutting are being constructed. Now, I go on to the permanent impact. What I am saying here is that when the green tunnel has been backfilled I am going to assume that there is no impact at all. That is not quite right but I do not want to be accused of over-egging the impact, so I am going to assume there is no impact. I am just dealing with the north cutting. The numbers that I want to focus on here are the black numbers at the top now. The total amount of water diverted now is 13 megalitres a day and that is the average, but you can see that I have a range below that from 26 to 3 mega litres a day, and that is a good practice for a hydrogeologist. You always put a range on anything. The three megalitres a day is based on the river coefficient for a very small stream, so a two-metre wide stream. The middle estimate, which I am saying is my best estimate, the average, is based on a two to five metre wide stream and the upper estimate of 26 megalitres a day is 5.7 million gallons is based on a stream that is seven to 10 metres wide.

232. HS2, when it is constructed, will be 19 metres wide. That is like a 19 metre wide river. There are no river coefficients for anything like that because we have not modelled anything like that in my experience, anyway. So, I am saying that we are very much at the upper end of that range and that 26 megalitres a day is virtually the whole flow. So, that is virtually 100% of all the spring flow that we have coming out of those springs.

233. I now move on to the next slide, and I have been looking at very typical situations.

So, again I have taken some information out of an HS2 document, which is part of the evidence that they have submitted today. This is the situation when you get ground flooding, so it is an extreme situation. We had it in early 2000, where the groundwater level comes to the surface. You may have seen pictures of villages which have been flooded for months at a time. That is groundwater flooding. What I have done on the second section there is to show the groundwater table going across the top of the cutting, just so that you get an idea of what we are talking about here. We are digging a cutting through an area of groundwater flooding. Now, if that cutting was flat, that cutting would just fill up with water. That is what would happen. But because the cutting is sloping away, it can transfer an enormous amount of water. You can get a huge volume of water down that cutting and taken away, so we are not going to end up with a cutting that is full of water but we are going to end up with a cutting that needs to be engineered to remove a huge amount of water, potentially and safely down that cutting. The key things that you want to avoid are slope instability. You don’t want springs appearing at the base of that cutting and so I look at this and think that if I were in charge of the design of this I would be wanting to make sure that the water table never got anywhere near the bottom of the cutting and therefore I would be engineering that as an efficient drain. If that is going to act as an efficient drain during groundwater flooding, it will act as an efficient drain all the time. So, I would finish by saying that I think that our reasonable worst case is that there would be no flooding into the Wendover Arm Canal, the Grand Union Canal. There will be no flow into the Weston Turville Reservoir and no flow into Wendover Brook. I think that is a perfectly reasonable worst case situation. So, I will hand over to Mr Thompson.

234. MR THOMPSON: Good morning. As you may guess, I actually live in Halton but I walk along the canal every week. The canal cuts through the centre of Halton village and dissects the Halton Estate. I think you can read most of what is on the slide there, but let me give you a little bit of background. The Wendover Arm Canal was completed in 1799 with the sole purpose of providing water to the highest point of the Grand Union Canal at Tring. It originates in Wendover and it follows the 390 foot contour, which means that it actually does not have any lock as it goes all the way to the Grand Union Canal, six and three quarter miles later. Obviously, as you guess, it goes through Halton, Buckland Wharf, Drayton Beauchamp and then on to Little Tring before joining at Bulbourne.

235. The next slide just highlights some of the environmental and ecological issues. The canal acts as a wildlife park. I would not say that there are rare species down there but there is a lot of wildlife which people enjoy. It is certainly enjoyed by walkers and birdwatchers. Birds such as the grebe that need clear water to feed use it and therefore if it was drying up it would obviously impact the area and the biodiversity in the area.

236. Could we move on to the next slide, please? The Wendover Arm Canal is in fact being restored by the Wendover Arm Trust. That is because there is a part of the old canal which, because it was leaking, was put into a culvert between Ashton Clinton and Little Tring to ensure that the water supply to the Grand Union Canal was not endangered. They are now restoring the canal and progressively taking water out of the culvert, so we have an open water canal again. They are doing it in three phases. The first phase is Little Tring, which is complete. The second phase is from Little Tring to Ashton Clinton and they are working through that, and then the third phase would be from Ashton Clinton up to Wendover trying to make it navigable. They are a charity and they are using volunteer labour to do the work. They have up to the end of 2014, 81,000 volunteer man hours to do that work which, if you priced it at standard labour rates would be in excess of £1.1 million. So, you can imagine that if the canal dries up, all this volunteer effort would be wasted.

237. One of our co-petitioners, Peter Lockett, is in fact a volunteer for the Wendover Arm Trust. If I could just read out one of his sentences, he has said, ‘The reason I do the restoration work is I have a general interest in the history of canals and the Wendover Arm, in particular, as it is our local waterway. Some volunteers are boaters but the majority are not and the interests range from the engineering view to the ecology view of having restored a waterway for the future of our generations’. So, that is why he volunteers to help open up the Wendover Arm Canal.

238. Could I have the next slide, please? Having talked to the Canal and River Trust people, they have in fact modelled what the potential impact could be. However, you have to understand that the Wendover Arm Canal feeds over 1 million gallons a day into the Grand Union Canal. It contributes either by going to reservoirs or going straight in there. So, what the Canal and River Trust people have said is, per se it won’t necessarily dry up the canal as you see in the pictures, and I will explain those in a minute, but what it would do is to threaten the resilience of the Grand Union Canal

because if you have taken that amount of water out, the likelihood or risk of the canal drying up increases. Of these two pictures here, one was taken in February 2012 when the water levels at Marsworth were 80% down, so it had been a very dry winter and they ended up actually having to close the canal for four weeks. Then the other one was taken in July when typically there was lots of rain before then and the levels had gone back up to 90%.

239. So, the comment here we are saying is that losing the flow from the Wendover Arm Canal will make the potential risk of drying up the Grand Union Canal a bit more frequent.

240. Could we have the next slide, please? Obviously, you have heard David Johnson tell you that it also feeds into the Weston Turville SSSI site. That was obviously sited as Clearwater fenlands which support both some rare breeds and some fauna which is specific to fenlands, which is quite rare in and of itself. The important bit here is that the Bucks, Berks and Oxfordshire Wildlife Trust are managing this with the Canal and River Trust people to maintain the water level and the water quality. It is important that the water level is right for the fens but also the water quality and if that deteriorates then it could put that fenland element at risk.

241. Could I have the next slide, please? I will do this very quickly. Obviously, the bittern is a visitor rather than a permanent inhabitant there. They use it on their travels but it is on the red list and therefore it is one of the few areas they can use. The rare fauna is the early marsh orchid. It is rare in terms of it is quite common, I think, in fenlands but it is rare because there are not many of them around and obviously the Wildlife Trust do the conservation on the wildlife. Our other co-petitioner, Ian Hanson who lives in Wendover, is a volunteer for the Wildlife Trust, so if you do not mind I would like to just read a comment here. ‘The SSSI is within a quarter of a mile of my house and it gives me considerable pleasure through fitness, fellowship and a sense of involvement with a group of other volunteers. I get a real sense of achievement by contributing to the future of the site, helping the community enjoy and learn about the natural world and, in a small way, contribute to people’s wellbeing by having such a peaceful and beautiful area they can enjoy’.

242. Could we move on to the next slide, please? Interestingly enough, Aylesbury is

probably one of the places which is furthest away from the sea you can get to, which means that the ability to do sailing is somewhat limited unless you have a reservoir close to hand, and that is what Weston Turville Reservoir is used for as an amenity. It is for sailing, birdwatching and fishing and it would be terrible if we lost that amenity.

243. The next slide, please. Finally, to wrap up, obviously, as I said, the extra water that goes into our new canal feeds into the Marsworth Reservoirs. Equally, they are wildlife centres as well and it would have an impact on them. It has already been touched on before but if all the water is being diverted away from the canal and the reservoir into Stoke Brook and into the network of streams around Aylesbury, then you can’t help but believe that the flood risk which has happened before in Aylesbury, could be increased. I now hand back to Dave Johnson. Thank you.

244. MR JOHNSON: Could we move on to the next slide, please? What we have done is to put a table together summarising where we think we are now and the progress we have made since 14 July. So, the first row is recognition of the problem where HS2 said on 14 July that they recognised potentialities and that they would write a note. We received that note in draft form on Friday. It does not add greatly to the picture we have so that is the kind of recognition of the issue at the moment.

245. From our point of view we have identified a number of errors in the HS2 assessment which have a material impact on the value of the assessment to identify significant impact in the Wendover area. We have reworked that hydrogeological assessment in line with best practice and we have a reasonable worst case of 100% reduction of flows out of those springs. That estimate has not been challenged up until now, so there is no challenge of that number. So, in terms of recognition of what that impact means, HS2 has said that they will defer to ground investigations; it has not. They have said that there is insufficient information to make the estimates and that the risk is low and they have also issued assurances to the Canal & River Trust and the Environment Agency and the Wildlife Trust that any damage will be put right. So, it is very unlikely, they have said, that there will be any damage but if there is they have made assurances that it will be put right. That looks to me like an open cheque, whereas what we have said is that there will be significant impacts not only on the individual discharges around Wendover, which will have the impact that Mr Thompson referred to, but just on the whole environment of Wendover, which is named after its chalk streams.

There is also that potential of an increased flooding risk to Aylesbury and also the impact on the Grand Union Canal. So, that is a summary of those.

246. If we go on to the next slide, again summarising, we are asking for an engineered solution, so where are we in terms of that? HS2 say that we are going to move on to a ground investigation phase. At the moment all the documentation says that no mitigation is required, whereas what we have said is that at the very least we wold need to see an investigative groundwater model. That is the only way, really, to improve on my calculations at the moment. We have talked to the Canal & River Trust, the Wildlife Trust and the Environment Agency during the preparation of our evidence. I anticipate that once it is more widely recognised that these impacts are or could be as severe as we have said, then I think there is a series of investigations that will be required there to identify what is required next.

247. Finally, how much will it cost? HS2 have said this to us in meetings, that it is a low-risk issue, so the zero to £20 million mark.

248. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Low risk being a problem?

249. MR BAND: In their risk register they consider this issue as a low risk.

250. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Unlikely to happen?

251. MR JOHNSON: Unlikely to happen.

252. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: And unlikely to have much consequence if it does?

253. MR BAND: Yes, and therefore they categorise the pricing for that risk between nought and £20 million.

254. MR JOHNSON: We think that actually it could be an extremely costly issue. I understand that the extension of the green tunnel is estimated to cost around about £37 million. That will go some way to helping with this issue. It won’t solve it but it would go some way to solving it.

255. MR BAND: That £37 million is a figure from HS2.

256. MR JOHNSON: But I think the last part of my evidence, really, is about a case

study in Kildare in Ireland. It is quite rare that a construction project gets built and then they have a post-project appraisal. What happened in Kildare was that there was a €100 million overspend, which was attributed to the hydrogeological issues that happened during that project. The hydrogeological issues are similar to what we have here but the real wisdom of that case study is that hydrogeological mistakes can be expensive. That is the first lesson I draw out of that. The second one is that the longer you delay the recognition of the problem, the more expensive that problem will be to solve. So, the longer we won’t recognise that there is a serious issue here, it will get more and more expensive. The final piece of wisdom I take out of that report is that they estimated it would cost €6 million to solve the problem in terms of capital works and yet when the final construction bill came in it was €100 million over. So, it is not just the capital works; it is the delays, the investigations and all the uncertainty that causes increased costs as well. I will pass you on to Andrew.

257. MR BAND: Could we move on to the next slide, please? Mr Chairman, we are close to wrapping this up. Our ask: what we are asking for is an appropriate engineered solution. Ideally, a bored tunnel for Wendover will go some way in our view to mitigate most of the issues and the Malvern Hills report shows that that is the case. However, we are well aware of the discussions that you have had over the past two months and we are also aware of the issues. HS2 have said explicitly to us that a bored tunnel would be the most ecologically advantageous solution. From our side, obviously we acknowledge in turn that there is a cost issue but we point out, I think as David has said, that there is a potential risk of significant cost and time escalation for the project, which makes the alternative solutions that they come up with less palatable than actually doing a bored tunnel.

258. MR BELLINGHAM: Can I just ask, what would be the cost of the extension of a green tunnel along the length you suggest?

259. MR BAND: HS2 has said to us £37 million.

260. MR BELLINGHAM: To extend the green tunnel?

261. MR BAND: They have said that the extension will be similar to the south green tunnel, slightly less because of the civil works structures. So, that was a figure which was confirmed to us over the past two weeks.

262. MR BELLINGHAM: And what is the distance again?

263. MR BAND: It is similar.

264. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Why is that not 2:40:01

265. MR JOHNSON: It is because what should happen with the green tunnel is that you allow the water level to come back up to its original level and that allows it to discharge at its natural outlets. The problem with the cutting is that it means that the first place the groundwater can get out is the bottom of the cutting. As you seal the tunnel and you allow the water level back up, then it can now discharge to natural ground level.

266. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: So, the green tunnel is low enough to allow the water to flow over the top of the tunnel?

267. MR JOHNSON: Yes. Groundwater always finds a way round so it will flow over and round and so on and so forth. It actually flows underneath because it just equalises the level.

268. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: You saturate below?

269. MR JOHNSON: Yes, exactly.

270. MR BAND: So, in effect it is tanking?

271. MR JOHNSON: That is in theory. In practice, you would have to be very careful with the backfill of the green tunnel, but that is a detour.

272. MR HENDRICK: Did you actually say that HS2 are aware of your concerns on this and have recognised potentialities as such? Why do you think that they want to pursue this rather than take on board your suggestion with regard to the green tunnel then?

273. MR JOHNSON: I am hoping that we will have a discussion now in front of the Committee about exactly that.

274. MR HENDRICK: What are your suspicions?

275. MR JOHNSON: I think that what has happened is that they have made a series of very common hydrogeological errors. When I have raised the guidance for the Environment Agency five or six years ago it was a culmination of five or six years’ research work. I used to work at the National Groundwater and Contaminates Land Centre. We had a series of research projects. I am a groundwater modeller. My background is that we were trying to enable accurate assessment of groundwater resources in the UK and we had a number of components of that. We had the national groundwater modelling programme and a number of software development programmes where we were developing software, and through that process – we did that with universities as well as the British Geological Survey – we learnt an enormous amount about hydrogeological impact assessments. All that wisdom was then put into our hydrogeological impact assessment. The first chapter that we wrote of that was called The Common Misconceptions. So, these are mistakes that hydrogeologists commonly make. One of those mistakes is that you only need to look at downstream receptors when you are looking at impacts. That is one of the mistakes that I believe HS2 have made. There are a number of other mistakes, but that is the easiest one to explain. The downstream receptor issue is a bit like only looking in one direction when you are crossing the road. You can get away with it but it is not a great long-term strategy. A lot of hydrogeologists do that. They look downstream and they think it’s not a problem and that comes, I suspect, from its water quality hydrogeologists because that is where water pollution moves like that, but actual water flow is entirely different.

276. MR HENDRICK: So, you are saying, effectively, that they are taking a bit of a gamble and you are saying it would be worth their while not taking the gamble because by going for the green tunnel solution it would mean that the concerns that you have about the water movement are addressed and it would cost them less than if they make the mistake that you say they are likely to make?

277. MR JOHNSON: I think that the green tunnel is one step in the right direction. It will reduce the risk. The Wendover north cutting is the component I am most worried about. It is a permanent impact, particularly trying to build a cutting through an area of known groundwater flooding. I fear that that will turn into a money pit, so I think that the green tunnel is one step in that direction. The bored tunnel solution is really a much better solution in terms of the hydrogeology for a number of reasons, so the bored

tunnel, if you can imagine, goes into the deep –

278. CHAIR: We have heard quite a lot of those before. Rather than speculate about the promoter, perhaps we ought to let the promoter respond to what you have said. Have you finished, Mr Band?

279. MR BAND: I will just wrap up.

280. CHAIR: Okay. I am sorry to have cut you off, Mr Johnson.

281. MR BAND: So, as an absolute minimum, and we believe that HS2 will be happy to do this, we would want an undertaking from the promoter to demonstrate that the design incorporates necessary measures. These necessary measures are about making sure that there is a minimisation of the impact on water flow and water quality.

282. What I would like to do in terms of wrapping up is to go back to slide A12733. When my first son was born we took him to feed the ducks at Hampden Pond, which is right at the top here. When my second son came along the A413 bypass which follows the general route of HS2, had been built and that had barely intercepted the groundwater level at that northern end of Wendover, but it had a perceptible impact on the Hampden Pond. The Hampden Pond itself dropped in water level between two and three feet. So, we weren’t able to take my second son down to feed the ducks at Hampden Pond because there no ducks at Hampden Pond. It has recovered slightly but still the water level is low. Hopefully when my grandchildren come along, I don’t want to be in a position where I find there is no water and hence no ducks. So, please, what I would like to convey is a message from us and the community that we are passionate about this. We want the issue to be looked at seriously, please. We are the ones who are going to have to live with the consequences in the future. Thank you, Mr Chairman.

283. Thank you. Mr Savin, or you, Mr Strachan?

284. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Sir, do we have the 1873 slides in our packs? I have the petitioner’s exhibits, and I have found Mr Band’s one. Maybe I am flipping over things too fast.

285. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Sir, in my copy these exhibits are about three sets of exhibits in our end.

286. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Thank you. That is very helpful. The other point is am I right in thinking that there was supposed to be a meeting between the petitioners and the promoters on this a week ago? I am just wondering why it didn’t happen?

287. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): That is right.

288. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: So, there has not yet been the sort of meeting which we would expect to have happened?

289. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): That is correct. There may be differences on why that has not happened.

290. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: No, we are not fussed about why, but I do think sometimes it helps when it is a pretty technical issue for you actually to have had the chance of meeting, whatever the differences have been rather than put us in a position where we have to –

291. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): I totally endorse that and certainly we would encourage a meeting. We have invited Mr Johnson to a meeting.

292. CHAIR: I am sorry, do you want to say a quick word, Mr Thomson?

293. MR THOMPSON: Could I say that yes, we have been invited to a meeting. The issue is we are paying for Mr Johnson to attend the meeting to help HS2 and he is a very good hydrogeologist, but he is expensive.

294. MR THOMPSON: And we don’t have the resources of HS2. We have said we are happy to meet them if they would pay for his day rate.

295. MR BAND: Mr Chairman, I would like to say that we are financing this ourselves.

296. CHAIR: Okay. Mr Strachan?

297. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Can I just deal with the question of the meeting? You appreciate, and I will come to this in a moment, that we already have an independent body that is an auditor of our work in this area, namely the Environment Agency. I will take you to the protective measures and what we have already done with

them. It is perfectly acceptable for a petitioner to come along and challenge the work that we have done, the work that has been looked at by the Environment Agency and if that does occur we will, of course, meet them and try and agree assumptions so that we take less time in Committee. What we do not do as a matter of course and what is not appropriate is for us to fund experts to pursue their points against us. We are certainly happy to meet and cooperate with agreeing differences of view and one way through this conundrum may be that Mr Johnson is here today and we have someone here who can sit down with him outside the Committee room, which may then mitigate any cost concerns that the petitioner has. I just want to explain our position. We don’t generally fund experts who are taking contrary views to us.

298. MR HENDRICK: Okay, that’s clear. You have mentioned the process but it is clear also that the petitioners are here today and they have made a case. Whether or not technical argument should have taken before or should take place in the future is neither here nor there. What I would like to see as a member of this Committee is to response to the substantive points.

299. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Absolutely. I was just dealing with that as a preliminary point.

300. MR BAND: Can I suggest, Chair, that one of the problems that we as petitioners believe you have is that at the moment, and I am sorry to say this, we don’t trust what HS2 have actually put forward to us and what we would like is an independent peer review process. I appreciate that Mr Strachan has mentioned the EA. However, what we would suggest to you is that perhaps we could have an independently funded peer review process which we would be more than happy to obviously participate in provided that there was some form of funding the promoter is required to put forward so that we can do this adequately together as a community. We are prepared to work alongside HS2 in providing the right solution, but at the end of the day if we could have some of that sort of funding then we could match your resources to actually get the right experts to come to the appropriate solution.

301. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Squash this if this is a silly idea, Chairman, but if we have other petitioners here it might be sensible if the experts went outside and had their talk before we had the promoter’s response and then we would find it probably

easier to know what is accepted and what is not and where the areas of difference are. If, for example, we came back to hydrogeology first thing after lunch after they have had a chance to have a preliminary informal discussion, I think that could save quite a lot of our time.

302. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Can I try and assist? We are very happy to proceed however you think it would be the most efficient use of time. I think what I would like to do before we go away is to show you the Environment Agency’s position and point out to you why this is not actually an issue that is really appropriate or necessary for the Committee to resolve because there is, within the Bill, and within the Environment Agency’s remit, full control over this issue. Can I just show you one letter and then we can proceed with whatever meeting might be appropriate? The reference is A1327. I don’t know if it can come up on the screen, A1327.

303. MR BAND: I am sorry, Mr Strachan, the date of the letter?

304. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): 17 August 2015. I think it is the one you were circulating earlier today. It is up on the screen now. The Environment Agency is here commenting on when they were green tunnel north cutting. They refer to the Environmental Statement that has been submitted in support of the Hybrid Bill with its assessment of impacts on groundwater. There is understanding of what has been done so far by HS2 as a high level assessment of receptors at risk and possible impacts and it has fully understood that further data and evidence will be required at detailed design stage. This is what would be expected at this stage in the proceedings. This high level assessment was intended to identify whether the route was feasible. In our response to the draft ES we raised some further issues that will need to be considered before detailed scheme design. We expect a full GI ground investigation.

305. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: GI meaning?

306. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Ground investigation, or I think it is groundwater. It is both. We do ground investigations generally but it will cover groundwater. An investigation including more detailed assessment to come forward in advance of scheme design to demonstrate no impact, and then these provisions: ‘The protective provisions’, which are actually set out in schedule 31 to the Bill, ‘and the minimum environmental requirements’, which is what ties us to what we have identified in the

Environmental Statement, ‘included in the Bill provide the reassurance that the environmental effects will be no greater than those assessed in the Environmental Statement.’ Just to pause there, we are identifying no material impact on the very issues of concern, the canal, for example, and the SSSI and the water, that is of concern. ‘It will be no greater than those assessed in the Environment Statement. It is understood by ourselves and HS2 that when detailed design stage is reached, there will need for further information to demonstrate this, including simulated groundwater levels from our groundwater model as well as an adequate monitoring network of on/off site boreholes capable of detecting the potential offsite impacts.’

307. The protective provisions in Schedule 31 apply both in fact to the Environment Agency and, of course, the Canal & River Trust. They are two bodies specifically identified and under those provisions we have to agree effectively what we are going to do which could affect either the canals or indeed groundwater in this location. So, there is a double mechanism to ensure that what happens in practice does not actually result in any of the impacts which are feared, but which we, for our part, based on our expertise, do not consider to be a likely effect but if it were to occur, there is a mitigation measure, a package, which would ensure that it did not occur and, indeed, we wouldn’t be able to go ahead with the scheme if it were to occur because of the environmental minimum requirements and the protective provisions which require the consent of those bodies.

308. MR HENDRICK: That is all very well. You are saying that that is a requirement, but what that requirement doesn’t do is to address the points being made by the petitioners as to why they feel that there will be problems on water levels. Could you actually pick the holes in what you are saying there and why they are wrong?

309. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): I am very happy to do that and we will come back to it. There is a difference between the experts on the approach.

310. MR HENDRICK: We understand that there is a difference. We want to know what the difference is.

311. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): I know, I understand that and I am happy to do it right now.

312. CHAIR: As I understand the situation, HS2 are under an obligation to engineer

the situation so that it does not have this effect with the various bodies but has not got to the point of doing a lot of the detailed work. So, the benefit of having a discussion with Mr Johnson at the moment would be whether there would be some more information which would give you a heads up about whether there is or is not a problem and at the moment HS2 have not got to the point of doing the detailed work, as I understand it.

313. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): That is right and it is also consistent with what the Environment Agency expects of us at this stage. That is what they have identified. What we have done at this stage is the type of level of assessment they require. I am very happy to arrange for the experts to speak.

314. CHAIR: Yes. I think that would be sensible. Let’s have a discussion and perhaps report back at two o’clock about whether there is any agreement or there is wild disagreement but I think there are a few points which the Committee members would like to be chewed over. Okay, so, on that basis we will leave that there for the time being.

315. MR THOMPSON: So, we will report back at two o’clock?

316. CHAIR: Yes, at two o’clock come back and just say, ‘We violently disagree’ and come back with black eyes, or, ‘We agree’.

317. MR BAND: I was going to facetiously put on the bottom of my presentation that we want to maintain our white waters rather than have red faces, so we would welcome a discussion.

318. CHAIR: Thank you.

319. MR BAND: Mr Chairman, can I just explain that the previous presentation, which was A1272, was actually my own individual petition presentation, which unfortunately was put in front of you before we started off, hence the interaction. So, I would like very briefly to have the opportunity to present petitions 22 and 24. This is regarding the concerns over construction.

320. CHAIR: Okay.

Andrew Band

321. MR BAND: I will be extremely brief. Many of these issues are in the petitions but I will defer to the previous petitioners because a lot of the issues have already been covered.

322. I live in Bridleways, which is 250 metres from the centreline of the tunnel on the north side of Wendover, so I am clearly going to be affected by the construction. I am not sure whether the Committee or, indeed, HS2 are fully aware that there is a prevailing south-westerly wind which runs across the vista from right to left. That prevailing wind would carry the dust and noise that we are so concerned about. So, those are our concerns, particularly the impact of construction traffic on the A413, which clogs up regularly at the moment. So, the impact of construction traffic will cause me personally issues. But I am also concerned that from our meetings and parish council meetings with HS2 there does not appear to be a recognition that this will have an impact on the local area authority resources to monitor, to police, the works. I believe that this issue has been a concern.

323. CHAIR: I think there is a policy in which there will be recompense to authorities who have to work with that.

324. MR BAND: At the moment I don’t believe that is clear, and I believe the quantum on Wendover is significant. So, coming on to the next slide, which is our asks, or one of our asks, I have to point out again it is incredible that Wendover is at this particular point HS2 is within 100 metres of an existing railway line so why are we not using the existing railway line to at least transport materials and spoil in and out of the site? We have a perfect opportunity here, gentlemen, to create a railhead to cut down on the traffic. We understand that HS2 are keen to follow the example of Crossrail.

325. So, what we ask for, gentlemen, is please can we have a detailed, integrated traffic management plan which looks at railhead use, park and ride for the workers, particularly those who construct the viaducts at the south of Wendover, and to look at, clearly the hours of restrictions for working with this.

326. We are also looking for a stricter local area noise limitation plan, which I understand you are generating but we would look for provision of continuous

monitoring. Perhaps HS2 might consider ultimately replacing the tarmac on the A413 afterwards, with a quiet tarmac, or something like that to repair the local roads.

327. Finally, what I would be looking for on the north side of Wendover, and certainly residents in our area are looking for, is some form of visual impact, environmental impact mitigation with some form of advanced planting of natural screening. I will come on to the last slide. This shows just a simple scheme. Again, with HS2’s proposals on noise mitigation, this may be another solution that may be considered, to simply look at, on the north side of the existing railway line, a planted tree screen. The reason for asking for that is for a visual impact mitigation as well as to look for bats and other wildlife that runs along the edges in that area. Sir, that is all I am going to be saying.

328. Thank you. Mr Strachan?

329. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Since it’s on the screen shall I take that point first? First of all our scheme in terms of landscape effects is mitigated by a series of planting on the northern side and as you know, in relation to noise screening, the additional noise mitigation, the revised noise mitigation strategy put in a further noise barrier here. What is not appropriate, unless there is a case for it, is for us to take further land from anyone and put in additional planting or screening where it is not actually needed to screen the scheme. So, we haven’t suggested taking that.

330. MR HENDRICK: The visual impact, I think.

331. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): The visual impact. I am sorry, I meant the visual screening. The scheme here you can see on this plan, if I can bring the arrow down.

332. CHAIR: It would be outside the Bill limits so it would need an additional provision which people petition against and the person whose land is being taken would turn up in front of the Committee saying, ‘Why is my land being taken’?

333. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Yes. The screening we have provided – I will just show you on the line on the screen – is there to mitigate the visual effects of our scheme from, say, the north, so it is not clear why one would put additional screen there. There will be, of, a transport management plan and that is already provided for under the Code

of Construction Practice and that is a matter for the local Highway Authority as you have already heard, so there will be one, but it is not for us to produce one now in advance of the detailed design, but the Code of Construction Practice provides for that to happen.

334. I think on the issue of noise and the question of wind direction, you have already heard but I can give you the reference in the Environmental Statement. The noise assessments are taking account of a reasonable worst case scenario. In fact, that is assuming a light wind blowing noise across to a noise receptor and the reason why that is considered the worst case rather than a strong wind is that, as I understand it, strong winds can actually have a greater masking effect than a light wind blowing the noise. So, the noise assessment takes the reasonable worst case scenario in working out the noise impacts and so what you see in noise modelling are conditions which are considered to give rise to the potential for the greatest noise propagation.

335. On the burdens imposed on local authorities, there is, in the Code of Construction Practice, recognition that in relation to noise and vibration monitoring, that activity is not within the remit of local authorities and the draft Code of Construction Practice includes an obligation for the undertaker to require its contractors to undertake and report such monitoring, including real time noise and vibration monitoring as is necessary to demonstrate to the authority compliance with the relevant consents under the Control of Pollution Act. So, that is already picked up and swept into the Code of Construction Practice to recognise the situation for local authorities. And clearly the local councils are having discussions.

336. MR BAND: Absolutely, chairman. I am well aware that that is the case. However, at the end of the day our concern is that we are a large community. We would like to see that there is actually some independent funding. We would not want to think that we were relying solely on subcontractors to actually undertake that work. You have an obligation, as I understand it, to appoint a local environmental officer anyway. Is that the case?

337. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): There is an obligation to produce local environmental management plans and I have referred to that at the outset. Those will address the local circumstances. They are designed to be environmental management

plans tailored to the local area and its specific needs, so that is why the precise content is not fixed. There is attached to the Code of Construction Practice a template for what goes into those local environment management plans and those will be produced in consultation with the local community. So, I recognise that these are all legitimate concerns about how construction will take place but I do emphasise, and I don’t want to repeat, that there is a considerable body of detail based on experience of how to do these projects and learning lessons, in the Code of Construction Practice which covers these sorts of concerns in full.

338. MR BAND: Mr Chairman, I’d just like to point out in response to Mr Strachan’s kind response, the point of the visual screening that we are asking for now is to actually look at preventative measures before the construction work actually starts. The reason why I am asking for this is because when the plan was registered to build this, it would take three years from the start of the first dig to actual completion, naturally the last thing that is done in any construction is the actual tree planting. So, we won’t see any trees or bushes for four or five years. What we are asking for is we would like to see something up in advance so that we can at least mitigate some of the construction measures and not damage things like the bat runs, the bird runs and the bird life in that area.

339. CHAIR: I think that that is a fair point and no doubt the clerk will make a note of it and when we do our final report I think it is quite important that things are done in a particular order, where possible to get these things in place.

340. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: I think we had some body language yesterday that people were thinking of doing that and they might use local farmers to grow some of the trees, so I think we are pushing at an open door.

341. MR BAND: Yes, a win-win situation.

342. CHAIR: Thank you, Mr Band.

343. MR BAND: Okay, thank you, Chairman.

344. We are now on petition 616, Nicole Alcock.

Nicole Alcock

345. MRS ALCOCK: Good morning or is it just about good afternoon? I had a very late night last night.

346. CHAIR: Twelve is not late.

347. MRS ALCOCK: I saw Murray Cooke on the train this morning at ten past ten and there were eight more people after him so I think he got to bed one side and got out the other. A lot of people have used very technical terminology. I was advised to tell a story so I am going to do that. I have written it and re-written it and re-written it until I ran out of printing ink so I have had to write it in a book. I have agreed with Mr Caulfield that it will take about 25 minutes if I speak fairly briskly.

348. So, it is a personal story about dealing with the vagaries of the Exceptional Hardship Scheme, the Need to Sell Scheme, living in a very blighted property and along the Aylesbury Road where most of the properties will have been purchased certainly from where we are, by HS2, and then just a little bit about the community.

349. CHAIR: Okay.

350. MRS ALCOCK: Just to tell you, I think my first slide – I will show you some pretty pictures of Wendover – is, I think, number 33, A1289(33). So, my name is Nicky Alcock. I am speaking here on behalf of myself but also of my husband John and son, Sam, who can’t be here with me today. We live at number 39 Ellesborough Road in Wendover. Until a few years ago I had my own business, responsible for the design and project management of property refurbishment and renovation projects. My husband is self-employed in the field of marketing, which has taken quite a downturn since the recession. Our son is a graduate of Imperial College in mechanical engineering, and is a design engineer with Mercedes Formula One team, a great job; a very unfortunate location in Brackley, bearing in mind that we live in Wendover and he works in Brackley. Getting into work is going to be hell, I think.

351. Anyway, back to number 39 Ellesborough Road, Wendover, an address which used to elicit the response, ‘Oh, lucky you’, and we have always felt very lucky to live there, but now it is, ‘Oh, I am sorry you are going to be badly affected aren’t you?’ I have written all this down so that I don’t go off piste, really, and take extra time.

352. Our beloved home, which we had never intended to leave, is a large detached property built in 1928 standing in just under half an acre of gardens. It is in an elevated position in the AONB with wonderful views currently, very conveniently placed and with direct access from our garden to the Bacombe Hill SSSI and from there on to the Ridgeway and the National Trust Combe Hill, which overlooks the Chequers Estate. I do note that Chequers was donated to the nation with the prime purpose of the Prime Minister of the day being able to understand the needs of the country as well as the town. I think we feel in Wendover that really, this isn’t quite happening for us. Anyway, it looks very lovely, the Chequers Estate.

353. So, that is who we are and where we live and now on to why we are petitioning. My concerns are twofold: the effect on my family and also on the community and countryside. Firstly, the effect on us and our family and what resolution we are seeking. So, a bit of background, some pictures of our lovely village. You will notice that these weren’t taken in the rush hour but just on a normal day. It is not exactly teeming with people. People do go out to the restaurants at night but they go home promptly. They don’t stand round the streets drinking and creating mayhem. The first one is the Ann Boleyn’s cottages, as we call them, part of Ann Boleyn’s dowry on the Tring Road, then the Red Lion Hotel.

354. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Could you very kindly spare us a trip through Wendover through the pictures?

355. MRS ALCOCK: Okay, will do. Some of you have been there, so you have seen it. Okay, so on to my next slide, in that case. This is our property. The previous one, actually, was a view of the cornfield through which the track will go.

356. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: We have been there.

357. MRS ALCOCK: So, you have seen that and you know we will lose the cornfields.

358. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: We know that well and we appreciate your house, so we need to get on to what you are after getting.

359. MRS ALCOCK: Okay. I am still being advised to tell the story, so I will do that.

I think our point is that our lives have been turned upside down, really, in the last five and a half years. We have loved living in Wendover, had not intended to leave Wendover, used the footpaths, the cycle paths every day. We now find ourselves in a situation where we have built an extension in order for my parents to come and live with us, which we started with a degree of forward planning in 2005.

360. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: We have appreciated being able to read the correspondence which spells out a lot of that as well.

361. MRS ALCOCK: Okay. I think you will also understand if you have read the correspondence that it was felt by my parents and by their doctor that the property was entirely an unsuitable place for them to come to bearing in mind that we will pretty much be surrounded by a construction site. My parents are also very concerned about emergency services and in the promoter’s response to my petition they have said, ‘Well, the blue light system will operate’. I am sure it will, but it does now and if you need to get to hospital quickly – my father has asthma attacks and so on – unless the ambulance can take off Chitty Chitty Bang Bang style, I can’t see how they are going to get there any faster than anybody else. I don’t really agree with the promoter’s response that the construction traffic will not be overly more dominant than any other type of traffic.

362. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Well, the thing is the plan is not going to be fulfilled?

363. MRS ALCOCK: Exactly. They need care on a daily basis. So, therefore not wishing to leave, loving our house and the community and never wanting to live anywhere else, actually, we are now forced to go afield. My parents live in Bath. I am up and down trying to give them support as much as I can. It is getting extremely difficult. They don’t have any accommodation for me. I feel it is causing their lives an awful lot of distress and certainly us too. We have letters from their doctors and letters from our doctor. My husband has high blood pressure. I know that Andrea Leadsom has spoken about this actually in the House of Commons and we can both identify with this. Andrea Leadsom said, ‘Some of my constituents actually feel suicidal’. We have had dark days where we have dragged ourselves out of bed in the morning and I have said to my husband, ‘I could just put myself under a bus’, and he has said, ‘I’ll find one for us’. It has been that bad it turns your life upside down. So, we were going to apply

with David Lidington’s help, to the Exceptional Hardship Scheme, our house being where it is and so very obviously blighted. Our neighbour had his property on the market for five years. It went down from its initial asking price of £1.25 million to under £1 million. Nobody was remotely interested in it.

364. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Have you applied to sell?

365. MRS ALCOCK: We have applied to the Need to Sell.

366. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Yes. Have you had a response?

367. MRS ALCOCK: We have had no response yet. We have spoken to nine estate agents from 2011 to 2015 and I have supplied a timeline of that. We have five estate agents’ letters. Most honourable estate agents didn’t want to market our property. I spoke to nine because I spoke to local agents in the village, those outside the village, and national agents to get the whole spectrum, the whole picture. None of them were interested apart from those few who were only too willing to take our money upfront but with no hope of selling our house.

368. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Have you put that to the promoters with your application?

369. MRS ALCOCK: We have.

370. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Okay. Well, I think that saying more on it now won’t help us because we have heard it before and it won’t help you here because the decision makers aren’t here and we need to make that decision.

371. MRS ALCOCK: I agree but I think the point is that we should not be forced into a situation where we have to apply to a scheme where a panel decides in their opinion whether you have a need to move or not. I think we know whether we need to move or not and out of the 22 properties between us and the last one by the railway station, in only two of them people are willing to stay. Most of them will be demolished. Some have been purchased already under the Need to Sell or in the extended support zone.

372. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: What are you asking us to do on this?

373. MRS ALCOCK: I think the point is that we should not have to go through such

an invasive process. We had a lot of medical information for my parents and ourselves. We have supplied a lot of financial information which we are uncomfortable doing because my husband has been the victim of identity theft. Alison Munro agreed with that and understood that but said, ‘We will look after all your information and it will be returned to you safely’. It came back to us in a plastic sleeve which the Post Office, the Royal Mail, put it into in a flimsy, torn envelope, torn completely open with all our data available for everybody to see, copies of deeds of the house, certificated copies of our passports, our profit and loss accounts, everything, more than enough for somebody to steal my husband’s identity again, all completely open. The Post Office put it in plastic. Our response from HS2 Limited was, ‘We are as concerned as you are’. Well, I doubt it and the bank have had to put a watch on all our accounts. They have just said, ‘The Royal Mail have accepted responsibility’. They accepted responsibility for trying to get our parcel safely to us but they didn’t pack it. They didn’t overpack a flimsy envelope with far too much evidence. So, this was the very last thing we needed, to have to ring the bank and say, ‘Can you put a watch on all our accounts now, please, because our correspondence was very confidential’, and my parents’ information as well came back not safely at all. It was open for all to see.

374. So, what I want, I think, is for people to show a little more consideration, to take more care and not to go through an onerous exercise. My neighbour’s property is owned by HS2 Limited. My other neighbours tried to sell for two years unsuccessfully as well. We are clearly blighted. We can’t sell, didn’t want to leave and are forced to do so now because of HS2, with all the attendant out of pocket expenses that we had not anticipated. Our neighbour was valued by Knight Frank at £1.35 million. Christopher Pallet said £1.3, should have been achievable. He has received 1.2. That’s a bit of a hit that luckily he could afford. I think we will take a bigger hit. Our house is very much larger.

375. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: I think you are going into more detail about other people’s lives than we should be hearing in public.

376. MRS ALCOCK: Yes, but I think the problem therefore is as Kieran Sinclair, David Lidington’s parliamentary assistant has said, that some people get good news regarding the value of their house and some people get bad news. The problem with this system is that apparently Smiths Gore, who valued our neighbour’s house, contacted a

local estate agent saying, ‘We’re finding it very hard to put a value on these houses. Do you have anything similar?’ Hamlet Hayward said, ‘Well, no, we don’t’ and so we’re struggling to put any value on them. The blight has been so great that most properties, many properties, are affected and it is a struggle to try and now value them because the blight has been baked in over this five and half years. So, that is our situation really. HS2 is the reason we have to go.

377. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: The Need to Sell, I thought, and I hope perhaps you put this in your application, is because you need to be with your parents and they can’t come to you.

378. MRS ALCOCK: Exactly.

379. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: And in that case you have to go to them.

380. MRS ALCOCK: Exactly.

381. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: So, indirectly it maybe the scheme which has caused that but I think you are better focused on why you need to be with them.

382. MRS ALCOCK: Yes. They had always wanted to come to us. We built an extension.

383. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: I am not trying to startle you; I am just trying to give you a gentle hint.

384. MRS ALCOCK: I know. The other problem, I think, was trying to work out how we would get access to our property once construction started. This has been an uphill struggle for a year and nine months. Somebody came to see us in December 2013 and said, ‘Yes, you will need physical assistance getting out of your drives’. We saw that if the verge was taken away if you actually look at Google Street View and our images of our drive, and I can’t think what image that is now – I am not sure that we need to go through them all, to be quite honest. Actually, I will take you to slide 41 as well. This is one of our drive. I would like to show you 41 after that of the community forum, part of the Environmental Statement and the view purported to be one from the dwellings on the Ellesborough Road.

385. This shows a left-hand drive. We have two drives. You can go out in one in one direction and one in the other direction, pretty dangerous and adrenalin inducing. The problem with the left-hand drive is that we would have about a 60 centimetre drop from it so we wouldn't be able to get out of it in a car, not unless you are James Bond, that is, and this is the real world. The other drive is blind to approaching traffic and with the tiny bit of dogleg taken off at the bottom, also really blind to oncoming traffic, so really when you come out of that right-hand drive you stop at the bottom, wind down your windows, listen and accelerate like hell and go. That’s life and that’s how we’re used to it on the Ellesborough Road. It has taken me a year and nine months in supplying these images, which David Lidington has sent to David Higgins, to say, ‘How are these people going to get out of their drive? Could you please help them?’ and eventually we were advised that our left-hand drive would be blocked off and our right-hand drive would still be usable. Nobody knows whether or not our hedge will be taken away and when the vegetation is all taken away across the road that means we have, as David Lidington said in his letter of support, an uninterrupted view of the entire construction site. I know you have all seen in my evidence our images of the view from our property, which is very elevated, about 10 metres, actually, higher than the image in construction, the ES Community Forum 10 image of the construction site, which is up there somewhere. I have got lost with my slides now, you see, because I have gone all over the place.

386. Slide number 41, I think, purports to be a view from properties on the Ellesborough Road. The viewpoint is incorrectly positioned. It’s taken from a corner of the field by somebody standing in it. I think it is a view, probably, of a rabbit’s dwelling but it certainly isn’t a view from a dwelling on the Ellesborough Road. There was a wide angle lens used and the spoil dump looks nothing like we imagine it will. The very wide angle lens makes everything seem further away and I am very tempted to say that the construction vehicles, the few of them that they are, look as though they’re produced by the Lego Corporation.

387. So, I think this is our anger. Sometimes we have to be told things we don’t like, but we would like not to be misinformed and misled more than is intentional. So that is, I think, our bugbear. I know I’ve got my imaginary soapbox here and I will put it away in a minute and let somebody else speak, but I think I will go on to subjects now which

affect everybody in the community.

388. CHAIR: Are they subjects that other people have raised in the community?

389. MRS ALCOCK: No, not in detail, really; I think generally. Just very briefly, on the AONB and economic concerns, local issues, Mr Mould suggests that even if visitors are unable or unwilling to come to those parts of the AONB affected by construction work and congestion that the AONB as a whole will not suffer; people will just go elsewhere. Well, the fact that trade in Tring is thriving won’t be of any comfort to local businesses in Wendover who will be struggling to survive, and, like the many farms affected, will be forced to make some staff redundant. I think a local farmer, Mr Mogford, spoke to you, Mr Clifton-Brown, actually, on that matter when you were standing on the corner, rather precariously standing on hard core.

390. The community fund will not be sufficient to assist them. Secondly, on noise, mainly during the construction period this concerns us although when operational I think we do feel that whatever mitigation there is it is not going to fully prevent the problems of tunnel boom which, as things stand without an extension of the southern portal as well, where we are, we will hear noise from both. I think we know that because we do hear the church bells from St Mary’s Church, so we are going to hear the tunnel boom as well and so is everybody else in Wendover really, nearby.

391. A petitioner asked, prior to the summer recess, how residents would sleep bearing in mind possible 24/7 construction hours where deemed to be required, noting in this that where, apparently materials have to be stockpiled on site they will be removed during the day, but I fail to see how stockpiling is going to be carried out silently at night.

392. Also, there are the concerns regarding, once operational, as I say, the dreaded tunnel boom. This is going to be about every 500 seconds from 5 a.m. until midnight. Where the train is in the open this may not be precise to the second but my son is a design engineer with Mercedes – he is pretty good on this – and says that you probably have about 27 seconds of peace between one train passing and the next. That is near enough, really. We don’t have to get any nearer than that. It is pretty bad. But Mr Mould stated that Wendover is a busy town, a busy noisy town, I think he said, with people talking on the streets, cars going by, trains and so on. This is in the evening and

at night. Now, this is an entirely different Wendover to the one that any of us know. You would think there was a curfew at about 10 p.m. Much of the time it’s a very tranquil place and anyone who has spent the night there will attest to owls, muntjac and the early morning chorus of birds being the only thing that really keeps you awake. We wouldn't be able to open our windows, actually, when this all starts. We wouldn't be able to enjoy gardens as other people have said, and we do enjoy our garden. We enjoy walking. We’d had a dog. Sadly, he has gone now, we had hoped to get another dog. I am up and down to Bath looking after my parents and can’t have one and that actually makes us very sad. I know that might not matter to some people, but if you are dog lover, not having one in your family is a terrible sadness. That is straying off the point, slightly.

393. What I did want to ask Mr Mould, and I am so sad he is not here, is has he ever spent the night in Wendover or that he could admit to because if he hadn’t then how would he know that Wendover is apparently a noisy place with people talking on the streets and cars whizzing by and so on because actually, although we have some great restaurants and I recommend The George and Dragon when you all come back again to Wendover, as you will want to, people leave and go home politely. They have a little drink by the clock tower on New Year’s Eve but otherwise it’s not a very noisy place. I know now you are imagining Mr Mould, aren’t you, spending the night in Wendover.

394. I move on to crime and security. Crime increase during construction of HS1 we all know is a given.

395. CHAIR: I am sorry, is it a given?

396. MRS ALCOCK: Well, it is a given. I think there is quite a bit of information out there about it which I won’t go into because I am not an absolute expert but more to the point, actually, crime even increased during the construction of the Wendover bypass, just a little bypass. Petty criminals took advantage of the inability of emergency services to reach victims in an appropriate timeframe. There was more littering, burglaries and cars broken into. Actually, we got off quite lightly. We only had our washing stolen off the line but still, it was very unpleasant for some people and we wonder how the situation will be monitored for residents. It is all very well ensuring that the construction sites are kept secure but what about opportunists targeting

individuals? If extra policing is required, HS2 Limited will need to provide the funding and I think with the local rural roads being such an utter mess, as the Committee all realised when they came out, there is going to be a fair bit of road rage. People won’t be able to get the kids to school, won’t be able to get to appointments and so on. We will need extra policing, I think.

397. I would just flag up concern, as other people have said, about cyclists. I caught the morning train at the weekend out of Marylebone and was staggered to see how many cyclists and their bikes were on the platform all coming out to the Chilterns to cycle for the weekend. There were lots of ramblers as well, and I fear with so many cyclists on the road, especially mountain bikers whizzing down from Wendover woods, the dangers of cyclists and HGV traffic and everybody else trying to get to their destination when we have gridlock, so that was a real concern for me. Not every cyclist is as fast as my son. He was stopped by the police going at 42 miles an hour on his mountain bike down from Halton.

398. I don’t know whether you want these up – one of the slides is rather offensive – but you have seen something, however, in the last but one slide. We have doctored an image that was sent through to us by HS2 a few days ago where they talk about promoting health and wellbeing, urban forests, art and heritage and so on. I think that many of us seeing that were incandescent with rage. We have had no health and wellbeing benefits so far over this five and a half years. I am just wondering whether locals under the viaduct are supposed to stage craft fairs or whether would-be Banksys will be decorating them for us. My father said, ‘Well, I wonder whether they intend to hang hanging baskets on the viaduct to make it look a little prettier.’ This is the spin, I think, that we are getting, really, very tired of. We really just want the truth now.

399. On the last slide I put in – you don’t have to bring it up but you have all seen it – I think we would like to ask if it is within the remit of this Committee that the people in the Chilterns are treated with respect. We have had a lot of insults from Government Ministers. The Secretary of State was quite rude calling us NIMBYs, actually. We ignored Boris Johnson, because Boris Johnson, bless his heart, has a mouth like the Mersey Tunnel so we don’t take too much notice of his insults. However, I think what annoyed us so much was the fact that the taxpayer had funded what was supposed to be a grass roots campaign for High Speed Rail with which, actually, Philip Hammond and

Simon Burns associated themselves. It wasn’t grass roots campaign. It was astroturfing. It was dreamt up by Westbourne Communications who are paid by the DfT.

400. CHAIR: We are slightly going off the petition here.

401. MRS ALCOCK: What I am asking, really, is whether it is in your remit to ask that perhaps we could have a bit of a let-up from the propaganda and the spin and be treated with a little respect because the whole thing has been so distressing for local people, many people in Wendover and elsewhere along the line, hence what Andrea Leadsom has said in the House of Commons. But I think it is the propaganda and being so misled which is the most upsetting thing for people. I think we can cope with other things. We would like to be able to have conversations with HS2 Limited but I think we are a little tired of being patronised and fed propaganda. So, if it is within your remit to ensure that people just get treated with a little more respect, then that would just be fantastic.

402. This is our last ask and you will know what it is. You know what we all want for Christmas, the long, deep bore tunnel. I think this would also possibly help to futureproof the plan because in 25 years we don’t know where technology will take us. People now are talking about the high pollute. What on earth will we be talking about in 25 years? In 25 years we may well have carbon rationing, although as Andrew McNaughton said, any government that mentioned that will never get into power again, but it may be a reality in 25 years. So, we need to look forward and try to futureproof this at a time when people may not travel so much because they have to make a choice: ‘Can I make this trip up to Birmingham or wherever this weekend to go and see the factory or next month can I take my family down to Brighton for the weekend?’ Even though that may not be in the remit of this Committee, we do have to look to the future and how our lives will be. Young people, particularly, think that this –

403. CHAIR: We are wandering off your petition.

404. MRS ALCOCK: I am.

405. CHAIR: Yes. We can speculate about these things all day which would be very nice, but we do have to get through other petitioners who are sitting behind you.

406. MRS ALCOCK: That is absolutely fair enough. So, a deep bore tunnel, please, if we could. That would be brilliant.

407. CHAIR: Okay, thank you Mrs Alcock.

408. CHAIR: Are you answering, Ms Lean? Could we concentrate on the impact on the property in terms of access and the other points?

409. MS LEAN (DfT): Yes, sir. I wonder if we could possibly turn up a letter from Alison Munro that was sent to the petitioner in, I think, January 2014. It is at A1289(12). I know there has been a great deal of confusion in this area. I think we discussed yesterday with Dr Jackson the notice that had been served that led to some confusion about whether parts of properties were taken or not. I explained there that one of the reasons the notice had been served was because it was unclear who owned the highway. It might be the people in front of this. You will see in the third paragraph of that letter a confirmation that the work should not affect any part of Mr and Mrs Alcock’s property and therefore their current driveway would not be affected and that residential access will be maintained to the front and rear of the properties on Ellesborough Road during construction. So, that is the position with the properties. We don’t take land; we don’t take part of the property. We are not demolishing walls or taking up driveways and we will be maintaining access during construction. Mr and Mrs Alcock are broadly where there is a tie-in for the temporary diversion works that you heard about yesterday. It is, of course, possible if specific issues come up whilst there is construction traffic going down there that there might have to be some form of assistance just to ensure safety but that would just be something that would be looked at as part of the planning works and obviously there would be liaison with the affected property owners there in respect of that.

410. In respect of noise, I think as you heard –

411. MRS ALCOCK: Can I just ask you on that, you say that our drives won’t be impacted but they will because one will be blocked off and the other one will then be the only one we have to use to turn right or left.

412. CHAIR: That isn’t what the letter said. Can you carry on, Ms Lean. She has to answer the points and then you can have a chance to comment.

413. MS LEAN (DfT): Sir, I spoke to some of the engineers this morning about the point and noted that access would be maintained but they are obviously going to ensure that when there is a temporary diversion there is access from the temporary diversion to the track and access to property.

414. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: When you say access will be maintained does that mean access to one driveway or to both driveways?

415. MS LEAN (DfT): One drive. I am afraid that I do not have the exact detail on that.

416. MRS ALCOCK: Well, I do, actually. It has been sent to me.

417. CHAIR: Could we have Ms Lean?

418. MS LEAN (DfT): I am very happy to go back to the engineers and ask for a letter to be written to Ms Alcock confirming exactly what the position is to clarify. I can see that there might have been some confusion. I am afraid I don’t have the details now about the two driveways. I have just been told that access will be maintained to the property. I am happy to go away and confirm that and have a letter written.

419. CHAIR: Okay.

420. MRS ALCOCK: We have actually received one, though, from Alison Munro confirming that one drive will be blocked off and we will only have one accessible from which you can actually only turn left.

421. CHAIR: All right. So, shall we leave it for HS2 to either confirm that situation or that both drives are all right.

422. MRS ALCOCK: Yes.

423. CHAIR: But really we are not going to get very much further until we get a bit more information.

424. MRS ALCOCK: Yes.

425. CHAIR: Okay. Further points, Ms Lean?

426. MS LEAN (DfT): On the Need to Sell application I understand that that decision should be received on that by the end of this month.

427. CHAIR: Okay. We do take the point about lots of information and we will be looking at the compensation schemes at some point but carry on.

428. MS LEAN (DfT): In terms of safety and crime, a short point just to note that we don’t accept that an increase in crime is a given. The Committee has already heard from us I think in February of this year and again yesterday about the sort of measures that we anticipate taking set out in the Code of Construction Practice to ensure safety and security around worksites and liaison with the community generally. As regards working in this area, just to confirm again it is not anticipated to be 24/7. It should be the standard daytime working hours that you previously heard about. Just on noise, in terms of the concerns about operational noise, I think we brought up this area yesterday with the Jacksons. We have the relevant exhibit here for operational noise. That is at P7573(4). Ellesborough Road is here and you will see that as regards operational noise following construction there won’t be noise impact at the property above those levels, certainly not getting anywhere near LOAEL so in terms of concerns about sleeping or use of garden, that should not be a problem during operational noise. Clearly we acknowledge that there will be some noise factor in the construction phase but again the CCP sets out the sort of general measures that will be taken to try to reduce those.

429. MRS ALCOCK: Can I ask, if we hear the bells from St Mary’s Church how we won’t hear the noise of the train coming out of the portal? I hear the sounds of the cricket match down on the cricket pitch and that is a very pleasant, comforting noise, as is the bells of St Mary’s, so I find that hard to believe in the way that the sound travels up from that field. I find that very hard to believe that we won’t be impacted and will be able to enjoy our gardens.

430. MS LEAN (DfT): You have already heard from Mr Thornely-Taylor how we assess likely noise arising from the operational railway and the effect of it being a wind tunnel and that HS2 is confident and, indeed, we are required not to exceed the assessment that we have set out in the Environmental Statement by reason of the environmental minimum requirements. I don’t think I can usefully take the debate much further other than to –

431. MRS ALCOCK: No, I’m sure you’re right. It’s just when you live in a very tranquil area this is going to affect you, and where we live it is going to affect us, and with most of our neighbours gone it’s not somewhere we wish to live anymore. The community will have all gone, because we all feel the same way.

432. CHAIR: Well, let’s hope that you get the news that you want in the next month. Anyway, thank you very much, Ms Alcock.

433. MRS ALCOCK: Well, let’s hope so. Thank you. Thank you for your time.

434. CHAIR: Thank you. Bye bye. Right, we now have 428, Ian Barnes. Welcome.

Ian Barnes

435. MR BARNES: Thank you. Good morning, or good afternoon. I will be brief because I’m in the position really that everyone else has said everything in front of me, so I would just like to reiterate that obviously I would prefer a full bore tunnel, but I’d have the issues then as on my slide number 2.

436. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): We just put up a slide, I think, which was your property, but I don’t know if that helps.

437. MR BARNES: Not particularly. This is –

438. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): No, that’s alright. That’s fine.

439. MR BARNES: So, yes, I would just like to formally say that I have all these issues, the same as other people, but I won’t propose to go into those in any detail, because you’re all well aware of those.

440. Could I have the next slide, please? Obviously I have the same personal impacts that everyone else has, mountain biking, walking, because I do try and keep fit, although it doesn’t look like it I do, and obviously it’s all going to be affected by everything that’s going on, probably mostly through the years of roadworks than the train perhaps.

441. One thing I did particularly want to raise, which was why I came down today, was that there’s actually only two routes west out of Wendover, and I work west of

Wendover. So I really, really, really want to make the point that please don’t shut both roads at the same time, because otherwise you’ve got to go a massive diversion through Aylesbury and out again, and it’s going to cost me a fortune and be a right pain. So that was the key point for coming down today. If I can have the next slide, please? This is just illustrating that point that those two routes are the ones going west, which I would have to take one or the other.

442. CHAIR: Buckinghamshire County Council will be consulted on all these sorts of things, but in other parts of the country people raised similar concerns about lots of roads being dug up or lights going in.

443. MR BARNES: Yes, absolutely, I’m sure. Obviously the route’s going to go north, so everything going west is going to be affected. I’m just hoping that they can keep one or the other open.

444. Then can I have the next slide, please? So just last year I went out and took some pictures, planning ahead for this meeting. I would just like to make the point that if you don’t have the full bored tunnel then you’re going to destroy a lot of things. So there’s this oak tree that’s going to be destroyed, and the next one, please, next slide, my source of brambles for making jam and things is going to be destroyed. Most importantly to me, the next slide, please, my source of sloes, which one should never really admit to, the source, is going to disappear, so I’m going to struggle to make sloe gin for Christmas.

445. CHAIR: Okay.

446. MR BARNES: So I will just reiterate the point that the full bored tunnel would be a good idea.

447. CHAIR: Alright. Thank you very much, Mr Barnes. Thank you for your contribution. You said you’d be brief and you were, stuck to your word. And do you want to add anything to that?

448. MS LEAN (DfT): I was just going to say, given this particular concern it might just be worth noting that, as I understand it, the two concerns about Ellesborough Road and the B4009, we don’t shut either of those for any prolonged period. In respect of the

B4009 there’s construction of an offline diversion, which will take place for approximately 16 months, and then there’ll be a permanent diversion in use thereafter. And Ellesborough Road, I think we saw this slide yesterday, there’s a construction of a temporary offline diversion, then there’ll be use of the temporary alignment for 24 months before it will go back onto the permanent alignment. So although the ES does show a temporary closure of those roads at both times there’s a sort of swap over during the closure periods to either an offline diversion or a permanent diversion, so there is no point where they’re both substantially closed for any length of time.

449. CHAIR: Okay.

450. MR CLIFTON-BROWN: Can I just ask, because I had this near my own home the other day, there were two different road schemes with two different diversions, and neither of them were properly signed, when roads are temporarily closed could you organise that there would be signs on those roads with a little bit of advance warning so that motorists know when the roads are going to be closed?

451. MS LEAN (DfT): I’m sure something like that will be looked at as part of the traffic plans, sir, but if it assists, in terms of the diversion here it’s a quite clear diversion.

452. MR CLIFTON-BROWN: When you have to temporarily close roads, which inevitable you will have to do.

453. MS LEAN (DfT): I’m sure that will certainly be part of what’s picked up as part of the COCP and in discussions with local highway authorities.

454. CHAIR: Okay. Thank you very much, Mr Barnes. We now move to 438, Eifion Lewis.

Eifion Lewis

455. CHAIR: You’re the son, as I understand it?

456. MR LEWIS: I am Eifion’s nephew representing him today, because he can’t be here due to poor health, so I was sort of on standby to come along and see if I can make a point on his request.

457. CHAIR: We’ve got about 10 minutes. Is that enough time?

458. MR LEWIS: I think that’s about fine. I’ll make it short and sweet. I’m not going to ramble on about anything.

459. CHAIR: Thank you.

460. MR LEWIS: Yes, so I’m Ed, and while I haven’t got a presentation – actually, I do. I made it all last night, but part of the problem due to my uncle’s health is this sort of stuff didn’t get organised and didn’t get sent over.

461. CHAIR: Okay.

462. MR LEWIS: Okay. So I’m just going to talk. He’s experienced unfortunate circumstances for the last 10 years. The main point I’m going to make is due to the health. I think everything else with HS2 is pretty bad, but I’m just going to focus on the health. So the location of where he is currently living, I’m just going to show this –

463. CHAIR: It’s on the map in front of us.

464. MR LEWIS: Okay, great. So we –

465. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Just in front of you.

466. MR LEWIS: There you go. So that’s his house there, and, as you can see, the line is going right across it. He’s got to get to several appointments with medical staff, hospitals, gyms, surgeries, just on a weekly basis, and through the construction, through when the line is actually in use it’s going to be a severe inconvenience to him, but mostly it’s going to have an adverse impact on his health. He’s got to go to Amersham, Stoke Mandeville, Wycombe Hospital, Chesham for his pool for hydrotherapy, Amersham gym, and these are things which are fundamental to him. 63 years old now, but these are things which he needs to do to continue, although it may be a poor health at the moment, he just needs to continue that. So those one, two, three, four, five points or occasions are going to be severely affected by the train line which is happening.

467. I’m going to run through a couple of the major health issues which I’ve got here. Now, he suffers from three chronic health issues. It’s been since 2006 he was forced into early retirement. He’s heavily dependent on medication. He has up to 20 pills a

day, which, as with any pill, has adverse effects for general living, so he’s not in good condition anyway. As we’ve proven today, his health conditions are volatile, so he wasn’t sure if he’d be able to make it today. I said I’d come in and represent on his behalf, so it’s frequently out of control which is obviously making it difficult if there’s going to be other things, such as a train line coming through.

468. He’s got chronic neuropathic pain to his lower abdomen and groin, which makes it difficult for everyday issues. Resting is a central part of his pain management scheme, which he was put on by the doctors, so that means he’s got to lie down flat for at least 20 minutes of the day at points. He has to generally be in quite a tranquil place just to relax because of his condition. He’s actually got severe depression, and this was a peak in 2011/2012. He had the cognitive behavioural therapy, which lasted for around 1.5 years, and the stress that’s caused from all the pain which he’s in on a daily basis. So these points make it difficult for him to understand.

469. Regular migraines, this is another reason for the stress, and it doesn’t help with the depression as well. So he can’t actually sleep very well at night, so I reckon he has around four hours maximum sleep. So even though the train is not going through at night, he generally doesn’t sleep well at night, which means he has to usually have some points of rest during the day. With the train going by it’s going to be a bit noisy, the traffic might be coming through. He’s going to find that difficult, and I imagine that’s going to cause a bit more stress.

470. Just in 2011 he tripped, fell, cracked his head open on the side of his house, cracked his head right open, had to go to A&E. Fortunately there was a neighbour who could take him there, whizz him straight to A&E, got him there quick. With the potential of things going forward that’s going to be difficult, at least going forward that’s going to be difficult, and these are the key areas of focus here.

471. Traffic conditions to go to see relatives and friends, which is important for everyday life, is going to be difficult for him, and that’s what he relies on quite a lot. People who are depressed or people who do need family support, you do need to go and be around your friends, do need your own family. I live and run a business in Wendover but I intend to move out of there, but that’s for other reasons than the HS2. He’s been advised by his doctors to do this meditation, relaxing, and he needs to be in

that area where it’s pretty peaceful, and thus this will be disrupted by the construction and operation of HS2. This is also vital when he’s recovering from all these things, depression and the migraines.

472. The sound fence which has been proposed doesn’t actually cover up to his property. It covers up to Wendover House School and it covers to the church, so that’s something which you could potentially look at. Obviously it’s close to the line. I’m not going to say how close. That’s pretty close. He’s going to get bothered by that. Like everyone says, the walking and the leisurely strolls, that’s going to be taken out, but I think it’s not massive compared to his health issues which he’s got. Yes, as I say, 63 years old. I reckon this will be a trigger for a rapid deterioration of his health, going forward, absolutely. It already has happened slightly. I’m not going to say suicidal like some of the other people, which is a load of rubbish probably, but it’s going to have a negative impact. I’m not talking about feeding the ducks or riding bikes or small things like that, because he can’t really do that, playing golf or cycling. That’s all cut out. We’re talking about his health, him feeling – his conditions for the last 9 years, taking that over time, and having a load of roadworks and everything, which is going to have a negative impact on him as a person.

473. Down to the mitigation, Mr Lewis is obviously is against it. The main thing which everyone’s saying here today is a completely bored tunnel. That would obviously be good and be a massive yes if they can get that done. There’s obviously a financial cost towards that, which I’m sure is going to be considered. Extending the fences towards his house so the noise can go over his house, it doesn’t bother him as much, and advance warning of any sort of traffic warnings and diversion which are going to be happening. So if we can keep all those things, work as a community and seem to get those things nailed on the head that’d be good.

474. I think the last fact is I intend to potentially help him move away from the area as well, and I think he should be helped by the people who are potentially causing the problem, perhaps with the committee here as well. I know apparently it’s not wise to mention the financial figures here, but there obviously will be a slight financial cost of doing that, so if there’s help from the HS2 or to – he’s just outside the extreme hardship zone so he can’t really sell his house that well, so if there is help to move away and perhaps a bit of financial support on that as well, that would be greatly appreciated, but

other than that that’s pretty much my point.

475. CHAIR: So he could go for Need to Sell at some point to try and sell his home, I presume, given his situation?

476. MR LEWIS: Yes. He doesn’t want to sell his home, but like everyone else that’s probably a fact which if there is all this trouble which is going to cause him the stress and it’s going to happen, then it’s probably likely to moving home to somewhere else which is close to his family and his relatives still. But I think that’s probably a good idea and if there’s help on that from any of the third parties then that’s –

477. CHAIR: Okay. Well, thank you very much, Mr Lewis. Thank you for stepping in for your relative. We’ll ask Ms Lean, sound contours and everything else and barriers, how well protected is Mr Lewis going to be, Mr Lewis’ relative?

478. MS LEAN (DfT): Sir, the noise contours without any additional noise mitigation are at P – sorry, I’ve totally lost my reference number. P7573(4). I’m assuming I’m in the right place. Mr Lewis’ property falls just on the cusp of the passage there, where you see the boundary between South Street and Chapel Lane. With the additional noise barrier we have the tables for those, which I think you were taken to yesterday, which are at, thank you, 8161(32).

479. CHAIR: And presumably that improves the situation?

480. MS LEAN (DfT): It shows the situation of no change day or night. The closet receptor is 3615(67), so the second line down, so with the proposed scheme 46, 32, 62, do nothing 52, 49, 56, do something, opening your baseline with the traffic, day 52, night 49, and the change of 0, 0. So with the additional noise mitigation the effect is essentially no change from the present. That’s the operational position.

481. CHAIR: So clearly the additional mitigation helps, and anything more that could be done would help your relative.

482. MR LEWIS: So just to get this right, the current fence, it will help? So he’s not going to hear anything from the train which is going by? Is that what you’re saying or…?

483. MS LEAN (DfT): There won’t be a change in the overall level of noise experienced. There might be a change – it won’t be any noisier –

484. MR HENDRICK: For the whole scheme?

485. MS LEAN (DfT): – from now.

486. CHAIR: From now, before the scheme?

487. MS LEAN (DfT): From now.

488. MR HENDRICK: Oh, right.

489. MS LEAN (DfT): Sorry, from a 2021 without scheme world.

490. CHAIR: Yes, as modelled. So I know it’s worrisome though.

491. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): The trains will be audible as they pass because the LAmax level gives you a figure of 62, which is just above the LOAEL level that Mr Thornely-Taylor identified, so you will be able to –

492. CHAIR: You’ll hear the trains.

493. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): But they’re not going to increase the average noise levels to those which are currently experienced, and indeed there are other one off events or maximum levels along those roads which occur currently.

494. MR HENDRICK: You might want to talk about, as with the petitioners yesterday, things like birds singing or things people like to hear rather than trains going by.

495. CHAIR: The road

496. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Well, the main environment is noise from the roads. With these properties the LAmax levels are generated by traffic on the roads.

497. MR HENDRICK: Again, they tend to be smoother rather than bursts.

498. MR LEWIS: So why will there be no difference in noise? Sorry, I’m just a bit confused here. So is it pre-construction or post-construction?

499. MR HENDRICK: There’s a background noise that’s there anyway from the traffic.

500. CHAIR: Yes.

501. MR LEWIS: Sure. So the train doesn’t increase it?

502. CHAIR: There’s road noise, there are other noises. The level of train noise shouldn’t be substantially more than anything. It will be part of the pattern of noise.

503. MR HENDRICK: It will be mixed in with the noise that’s already there, but no greater.

504. MR LEWIS: But surely if you add a noise then something else is going to be louder?

505. CHAIR: No, it doesn’t work like that.

506. MR LEWIS: Right, okay. I’m just trying to get my head round that.

507. CHAIR: If the cottage were a little bit farther south then the noise levels would be higher.

508. MR LEWIS: Sure. Can we get that, a guarantee, in writing?

509. CHAIR: You’ve got the charts.

510. MR HENDRICK: You’ve got the tables.

511. MR LEWIS: Because that would be good.

512. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: If you look back on the website to the evidence that was given on Monday most of it was there, how it works and what the barriers are, and forgive us for not repeating the whole thing.

513. MR LEWIS: Sure. I understand you guys go through this all the time, and perhaps I should do more research on it.

514. MR HENDRICK: But I think HS2 can give you bit of a paragraph on what it means in this bit of the table, surely.

515. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): It may be even better if someone speaks to Mr Lewis now outside.

516. CHAIR: Okay, somebody to have a quiet word with you now about how the system works, so when you report back, when you get off the train to Wendover, you can tell your relative exactly what the situation will be, but we understand as well.

517. MR LEWIS: Sure.

518. CHAIR: And thank you for standing in and coming and being brief and telling us about your relative’s problems.

519. MR LEWIS: Thanks for listening.

520. CHAIR: Okay. Thank you. We will resume at two o’clock. Order, order.