DOCSLIB.ORG

Vol 1 (PDF, 5.15

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Vol 1 (PDF, 5.15 EXHIBIT LIST Reference No: HOC/00520 Petitioner: Buckinghamshire County Council Published to Collaboration Area: Wednesday 07-Oct-2015 Page 1 of 340 No Exhibit Name Page 1 A1436 Tunnel costs CDC July (A1436 ) 3 2 A1437 Tunnel costs CRAG July (A1437 ) 4 3 A1438 Derivation of non market effects note July (A1438 ) 5 4 A1439 DfT Advice note on VfM assessment (A1439 ) 6 - 30 5 A1440 Bucks intro (A1440 ) 31 - 39 6 A1441 Waste and SP (A1441 ) 40 - 55 7 A1442 Community Fund slides (A1442 ) 56 - 71 8 A1443 Community Fund BCC ideas list (A1443 ) 72 - 82 9 A1444 Community Fund WCC ideas list (A1444 ) 83 - 90 10 A1445 Flood and water (A1445) 91 - 96 11 A1446 Heritage (A1446 ) 97 - 107 12 A1447 Steeple Claydon Mitigation Plan (A1447) 108 - 132 13 A1448 Steeple Claydon Station Edi Smockum (A1448 ) 133 - 137 14 A1449 Steeple Claydon Station PB (A1449 ) 138 - 154 15 A1450 Landscape (A1450 ) 155 - 190 16 A1451 Landscape route wide (A1451 ) 191 17 A1452 SW Aylesbury (A1452 ) 192 - 204 18 A1453 Traffic and transport (A1453) 205 - 282 19 A1454 Ecology (A1454 ) 283 - 314 20 A1455 PRoWs (A1455) 315 - 324 HOC/00520/0001 EXHIBIT LIST Reference No: HOC/00520 Petitioner: Buckinghamshire County Council Published to Collaboration Area: Wednesday 07-Oct-2015 Page 2 of 340 No Exhibit Name Page 21 A1456 PRoWs letter (A1456 ) 325 - 326 22 A1457 Property (A1457 ) 327 - 340 HOC/00520/0002 True additional cost of options gPS CLT CLTi CRAG T3i Difference in construction costs £0m £532m £465m £396m (using HS2 figures where available) BUT Acquisition of land costs £50m £3m £3.3m £3.3m AND Non market effects £510m £56m £56m £56m AND Direct economic effects in the Chiltern District £170m - - - Consequent likely £730m £591m £524.3m £455.3m additional cost A1436 HOC/00520/0003 Do not remove this if sending to pagerunnerr Page Title Value for Money Assessment: Advice Note for Local Transport Decision Makers December 2013 A1439 (1) HOC/00520/0006 Executive summary 1. The Department for Transport uses the 'Transport Business Case'1 approach to support decision making for major investment. A key element of this approach is the Value for Money statement, which summarises the impact on the 'Economic Case' of the transport intervention under consideration. 2. The ‘Economic Case’ and supporting Value for Money assessment uses the HM Treasury Green Book2 method of cost benefit analysis. This assesses the value of a transport project by weighing the benefits against the costs to indicate whether it is Value for Money. The Value for Money assessment is, however, not just about money and saving people time; a wide spectrum of impacts is considered in a detailed appraisal, including various impacts on the economy, the environment and social welfare. Further details of DfT’s transport appraisal process, and how it relates to decision making, can be found in recently published note3. 3. As part of the devolution process, a significant portion of the DfT budget is being devolved and is part of the Local Growth Fund from 2015. The selection and approval of funding for individual local major transport schemes will now be the responsibility of local decision makers. 4. It is for local decision makers to determine the most appropriate criteria for prioritising spend on transport and the level of analysis required. Value for Money should nevertheless always be a factor considered in such decision making and in approving funding for individual schemes at all stages. 5. This note has been produced to help promote sound decision making and ensure that Value for Money of schemes is appropriately considered. It provides details of the Value for Money assessment process that DfT has developed over many years to assess major transport schemes, including the role of qualitative, quantitative and monetised information. It also shares some advice on the use of uplifts and values which have previously been used by the DfT in the assessment of major schemes. The presentation of this information and the use of standard tables such as the Analysis of Monetised Cost and Benefits Table and the Appraisal Summary Table are also discussed in this paper. 1 Transport Business Case: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/transport-business-case 2 HM Treasury Green Book: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-green-book-appraisal-and- evaluation-in-central-governent 3 Transport Appraisal in Investment Decisions: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/253484/transport-appraisal- in-investment-decisions.pdf 4 A1439 (4) HOC/00520/0009 proposal are assessed using qualitative, quantitative and monetised information. 1.6 The Value for Money assessment of a transport intervention has been designed as a staged process to ensure that a complete and robust analysis is undertaken by the practitioner. The Appraisal Summary Table9 (AST) helps to inform this process by providing a template for a summary of all the monetised, qualitative and quantitative impacts of the transport scheme to be presented as a coherent package. 1.7 The box below outlines the main 4 steps in the assessment process and how they make use of the detail presented in the AST. BOX 1: Value for Money Process Appraisal Summary Table Monetised Impacts 1. Initial BCR & the AMCB Table Qualitative & quantitative 2. Adjusted BCR information Adjusted BCR 3. VfM Category Qualitative & Quantitative Information Benefits vs. Costs, 4. VFM Statement Risks, Sensitivities 1.8 The assessment starts with the calculation of those impacts, positive and negative, that can be expressed in money terms (“monetised”). This would typically include things like capital cost of the scheme and revenues. These monetised impacts are summed to construct an Initial Benefit Cost Ratio (Initial BCR) – that is the amount of benefit being bought for every £1.00 of cost to the public purse. A summary of the monetised information along with the Initial BCR is then presented in the Analysis of Monetised Costs and Benefits (AMCB) Table10. 9 Appraisal Summary Table: http://www.dft.gov.uk/webtag/documents/project-manager/xls/U2_7_2- appraisal-summary-table110418.xls 10 AMCB table: http://www.dft.gov.uk/webtag/documents/project-manager/unit2.7.1.php 7 A1439 (7) HOC/00520/0012 2. Initial BCR 2.1 The Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) considers the impacts to the economy, society, the environment and the public accounts. It offers an estimate of the value of benefit generated for every £1 of public expenditure on a project or scheme. 2.2 The Initial BCR can be constructed using the DfT's WebTAG guidance. WebTAG Unit 3.5.4 provides advice on monetising the different benefits and costs of a transport intervention and also outlines the different assumptions for the appraisal of such impacts. 2.3 Benefits and costs that contribute to the Initial BCR can be presented in the Analysis of Monetised Costs and Benefits (AMCB) Table13. 2.4 The Initial BCR defines the initial Value for Money category. Proposals are judged to offer poor, low, medium, high and very high Value for Money based on the BCR boundaries. These categories include: Poor VfM if BCR is below 1.0 Low VfM if the BCR is between 1.0 and 1.5 Medium VfM if the BCR is between 1.5 and 2.0 High VfM if the BCR is between 2.0 and 4.0 Very High VfM if the BCR is greater than 4.0 2.5 The Value for Money assessment should then account for quantitative and qualitative information. The following sections of this advice note provide more advice on the use of this information, construction of the Adjusted BCR and final Value for Money categorisation. 13 AMCB Table: http://www.dft.gov.uk/webtag/documents/project-manager/xls/amcb-table.xls 10 A1439 (10) HOC/00520/0015 COST BENEFIT SUMMARY Net Present Value of activity / impacts Cost / Benefit of T3i Savings to HS2 Ltd (£m, 2011 prices) Savings in the cost of additional mitigation (if no long tunnel) +100 Savings in ‘Zone’ compensation paid by HS2 Ltd 10 Wider economic savings (conservative estimates) Landscape and Environment 185 Property Blight 100 Transport 4-19 Tourism 99 Overall savings 498-513 Additional engineering cost of T3i 204-286 NET PRESENT VALUE OF T3i £212-309m A1437 HOC/00520/0004 Buckinghamshire Local Authorities and Chilterns Conservation Board Derivation of £510M: Non-market Effects [Typed note of handwritten version handed to committee during local authorities’ presentation in July 2015] 1. Refer to Department for Transport Value for Money Assessment: Advice Note for Local Transport Makers, December 2013 2. Annex A identifies “Landscape Values” 3. Land types are described and values assigned 4. These land types include natural and semi-natural land and rural forested land (amenity) 5. There is no land type described by reference to AONB designation 6. The Local Authorities and CCB say that value attached to such rare and important land must be at least equivalent to that described in 4 above 7. In the AONB there is a permanent loss of 200ha and a temporary loss of 170ha: the temporarily lost land as designated becomes “agricultural land (extensive)”. This is valued at £0.88m per hectare. The value attributed to the designated land set out at 4 above is £1.8m per hectare Calculation Loss = 200ha x £1.8m = £360m Plus difference between: 170ha x £1.8m less 170ha x £0.88m = £156.4m £360m + £156.4m = £510m p:\hs2\chiltern\derivation of non market effect note.docx A1438 HOC/00520/0005 The Department for Transport has actively considered the needs of blind and partially sighted people in accessing this document. The text will be made available in full on the Department’s website.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Report Providing a Tourism Baseline in the HS2 Corridor
    The volume and value of tourism in the HS2 corridor of the Chilterns AONB A baseline study Prepared by: TSE Research Services 40 Chamberlayne Road Eastleigh Hampshire SO50 5JH Contributors and dedication Dedication This report is dedicated to Shirley Judges, (1949-2014), a passionate supporter and ardent protector of the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Without Shirley’s infectious enthusiasm this project would not have happened. Shirley gave unstintingly of her time and energy to protect the area she loved from HS2, but she also knew the importance of assembling robust evidence, using recognised research methods and arming oneself with the relevant facts and figures to fight a cause. Drive and determination had to matched by the evidence. Shirley wanted a proper baseline study on the value of tourism threatened by HS2. At her specific request we raised the money and commissioned Tourism South East, a specialist tourist organisation with a research arm, to undertake the study. The Chilterns Conservation Board, where Shirley had been a dedicated board member for 10 years, kindly agreed to manage the project. Shirley’s wish was to petition to the Select Committee. Through this report she will. Acknowledgements The following organisations provided a financial contribution to the study: Amersham HS2 Action Group Chesham Society Chilterns Conservation Board Chiltern Ridges Action Group Chiltern Society Great Missenden HS2 Action Group Great Missenden Parish Council Great Missenden Revitalisation Group Great Missenden Village Association Private donation (on behalf of Chalfont St Giles) Residents’ Environmental Protection Association Wendover Action Group Wendover Parish Council Thanks With thanks to the many people who contributed to the local tourism business audits, in particular Hilary Wharf and Jean Slater.
    [Show full text]
  • Development Control Agenda & Reports 28 November 2016
    Chesham Town Council Bill Richards Town Clerk Tel: 01494 774842 Fax: 01494 582908 www.chesham.gov.uk Email: [email protected] 18th November 2016 Dear Councillor, I hereby give you notice that a meeting of the DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE will be held in the Council Chamber, The Town Hall, Chesham, on MONDAY 28 NOVEMBER 2016 AT 7.30 PM when the business set out below is proposed to be transacted: AGENDA 1. Apologies for absence. 2. Declarations of Interest. 3. To receive and confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 7th November 2016. 4. To receive and consider planning applications received from the Chiltern District Council since the last meeting of the Committee and any planning applications and comments delegated to the Ward Members and Chairman of the Committee and to note previous planning comments submitted. Plans are available for inspection on Chiltern District Council’s website www.chiltern.gov.uk. 5. To receive and consider decision notices received from Chiltern District Council since the last meeting of the Committee. 6. Removal of BT Public Payphones Consultation. 7. Response to Local Plan ‘Green Belt’ Preferred Options Consultation. 8. Information items. Yours sincerely, Bill Richards Town Clerk Publication Date: 18th November 2016. Chesham Town Council, Town Hall, Chesham, Bucks HP5 1DS Twinned with Friedrichsdorf Germany; Houilles France; Archena Spain CHESHAM TOWN COUNCIL PLANNING APPLICATIONS 28 NOVEMBER 2016 1) CH/2016/1945/SA 12 Lycrome Road Chesham NEWTOWN Description: Application for a Certificate of Lawfulness for a proposed operation relating to the erection of a single storey front extension.
    [Show full text]
  • Chiltern and South Bucks Local Plan 2016-2036 Emerging Local Plan Evidence Base Draft Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) Update
    Classification: OFFICIAL Chiltern and South Bucks Local Plan 2016-2036 Emerging Local Plan Evidence Base Draft Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) Update Appendix 5 – HELAA Site Locations (Maps) – Volume 1 of 3 Stage 1 Assessment Results January 2020 Classification: OFFICIAL 01 02 05 06 07 03 04 08 09 10 Chesham Great Missenden 11 12 13 Prestwood 14 15 Chesham Bois 16 17 18 Heath End 19 20 Amersham Holmer Green 21 22 23 24 Little Chalfont 25 26 Hazlemere 27 28 29 30 Chalfont St Giles 31 32 Knotty Green Seer Green 33 34 35 Chalfont St Peter Beaconsfield 36 37 71 72 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Gerrards Cross Denham Green 45 46 47 48 49 50 54 Farnham Common New Denham 51 Stoke Poges 59 56 57 58 55 Iver Heath 52 53 Burnham Farnham Royal 60 62 63 64 65 Iver 61 Legend 73 66 67 Local Plan Boundary 68 69 Grid Reference Richings Park 70 A Road Motorway Settlement N Strategic Allocation Boundary 0 1.25 2.5 5 HELAA Site km HELAA Grid - Stage 1 Results Ordnance Survey © Crown copyright and database rights 2019 OS 100025874 and 100023578 Legend Local Plan Boundary Green Belt Strategic Allocation Boundary Accepted at Stage 1 CD0548 Rejected at Stage 1 CD0003 Ordnance Survey © Crown copyright and database rights 2019 OS 100025874 and 100023578 N Stage 1 Results: Grid 01, Cholesbury 0 0.1 0.2 0.4 km Legend Local Plan Boundary Green Belt Strategic Allocation Boundary Accepted at Stage 1 Rejected at Stage 1 CD0147 CD0319 Ordnance Survey © Crown copyright and database rights 2019 OS 100025874 and 100023578 N Stage 1 Results: Grid 02, Lee Common
    [Show full text]
  • 177 Bus Time Schedule & Line Map
    177 bus time schedule & line map 177 Chesham - Chartridge - Great Missenden - View In Website Mode Chesham The 177 bus line (Chesham - Chartridge - Great Missenden - Chesham) has 4 routes. For regular weekdays, their operation hours are: (1) Chesham: 8:50 AM (2) Chesham: 7:50 AM (3) Hyde Heath: 2:35 PM (4) South Heath: 3:58 PM Use the Moovit App to ƒnd the closest 177 bus station near you and ƒnd out when is the next 177 bus arriving. Direction: Chesham 177 bus Time Schedule 49 stops Chesham Route Timetable: VIEW LINE SCHEDULE Sunday Not Operational Monday Not Operational Broadway, Chesham Blucher Street, Chesham Tuesday 8:50 AM Park Road, Chesham Wednesday Not Operational Park Road, Chesham Thursday 8:50 AM Chiltern Hills Academy, Chesham Friday Not Operational Berkeley Avenue, Chesham Saturday Not Operational Chartridge Lane, Chesham The Warren, Chesham 177 bus Info Buslins Lane, Chesham Direction: Chesham Stops: 49 Old Sax Lane, Chartridge Trip Duration: 67 min Line Summary: Broadway, Chesham, Park Road, The Bell Ph, Chartridge Chesham, Chiltern Hills Academy, Chesham, Berkeley Avenue, Chesham, Chartridge Lane, Chesham, The Warren, Chesham, Buslins Lane, Chesham, Old Sax Village Hall, Chartridge Lane, Chartridge, The Bell Ph, Chartridge, Village Hall, Chartridge, Chartridge Lodge, Chartridge, Cherry Chartridge Lodge, Chartridge Tree Farm, Chartridge, Grove Wood, the Lee, Crossroads, Swan Bottom, St John's Church, the Lee, Cherry Tree Farm, Chartridge Princes Lane, Lee Common, Oxford Street, Lee Common, Sly Corner, Lee Common, Blackthorne
    [Show full text]
  • Sales & Lettings
    THE February 2018 LEE For The Lee, Lee Common, Hunts Green, Kings Ash and Swan Bottom library service, which is currently ‘out From the Editor for consultation’, a process that By Richard Dickinson inevitably suggests that Bucks. County Council would rather like to shut it very belated Happy New Year down. Does it matter? Well for the 511 from The Lee Newsletter A people that use it the answer is probably team! Hopefully by the time a resounding YES! Those people will this drops onto your doormat the sun tend to be elderly, less mobile, on their will have reappeared and there will be own and find it harder to visit the bricks some indications of climate change! In and mortar alternative. fact, we already have 76 minutes of st A more profound question however extra daylight when compared to 1 is this: What is the impact on our January but given the December we’ve community of the gradual withdrawal of had it is no surprise that snow features useful but non-essential services? Each in articles within. We thought however cut must surely diminish the community that we would help brighten up the unless of course volunteers and residents gloom a little with a splash of colour in step in to help out – which seems to be this edition, with a reminder of some of the solution that the County Council the flora and fauna that surrounds us. now want to suggest for the mobile The lively debate on woodland library. I asked to speak to someone at management continues in the letters the Council about the service and guess section and I was also interested to what? It was unable to provide a receive Phil Harrison’s observations response in time for publication! There about the recycling practices of Chiltern seems to be a recurring theme here and I District Council.
    [Show full text]
  • November-2018-Planning-Committee-Minutes.Pdf
    GREAT MISSENDEN PARISH COUNCIL Minutes of a Meeting of the Planning Committee held in the Parish Office at 7.30 pm on Monday 5 November 2018 Present: Councillor C Baxter (Chair) Councillors: L. Cook, M. Johnstone, I. Lovegrove, V. Marshall and R. Pusey Apologies: Councillor S. Humphries. 1) Public Forum: There was no-one present for the public forum and no public comments had been received other than as indicated below. 2) Declarations of Interest a) Councillor Pusey declared an interest in respect of the application listed as no 11 relating to “Middle Grove Farm” Chesham Road, Hyde End, Bucks HP16 0RD reference PL/18/3526/EU a property in which he and his family have interests in. It was agreed that he would address the meeting regarding the application and then leave the room and not participate in the discussion or voting process. b) Councillor Johnstone indicated an interest in respect of the applications numbered 5 and 18 relating to the property “Stepping Stones” , Ballinger Road, South Heath, Buckinghamshire HPO16 9QH reference number PL/18/3410/OA and with amended plans on the basis of his discussions with local residents as to the applications. It was agreed that there was no conflict of role or interest and that he could participate in both the consideration and vote in respect of the application. 3) Minutes - It was agreed that the minutes of the meeting held on Monday 1 October should be signed as a correct record, and Councillor Baxter duly signed a copy of the minutes. 4) Matters arising – i) The Committee noted that On 9 October in accordance with the decisions made by the Planning Committee on 1 October as ratified by full Council on 8 October letters had been written to Chiltern DC planning department setting out the representations of GMPC on each application considered, and that receipt had been acknowledged on 9 October.
    [Show full text]
  • Alice Van Cutsem SHEWETH Asfollows
    0670 IN PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF COMMONS SESSION 2013-14 HIGH SPEED RAIL (LONDON - WEST MIDLANDS) BILL Against - on Merits - Praying to be beard By Counsel. &c. To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Pariiament assembled. THE HUMBLE PETITlON of Alice van Cutsem SHEWETH asfollows:- A Bill (hereinafter referred to as "the Bill") has been introduced and is now pending in your honourable House intituled "A Bill to make provision for a railway between Euston in London and a junction with the West Coast Main Line at Handsacre in Staffordshire, with a spur from Old Oak Common in the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham to a junction with the Channel Tunnel Rail Link at York Way in the London Borough of Islington and a spur from Water Orton in. Warwickshire to Curzon Street in Birmingham; and for connected purposes." The Bill is presented by Mr Secretary McLoughlin, supported by The Prime Minister, The Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, Secretary Theresa May, Secretary Vince Cable, Secretary lain Duncan Smith, Secretary Eric Pickles, Secretary Owen Paterson, Secretary Edward Davey, and Mr Robert Goodwill. Clauses 1 to 36 set out the Bill's objectives in relation to the construction and operation of the railway mentioned in paragraph 1 above. They include provision for the construction of works, highways and road traffic matters, the compulsory acquisition of land and other provisions relating to the use of land, planning permission, heritage issues, trees and noise. They include clauses which would disapply and modify various enactments relating to special categories of land including burial grounds, consecrated land, commons and open spaces, and other matters, including overhead lines, water, building regulations and party walls, street works and the use of lorries.
    [Show full text]
  • The Chiltern Tapler Spring 2016 Free
    THE CHILTERN TAPLER SPRING 2016 FREE THE CHILTERN TAPLER NEWSLETTER OF MID CHILTERNS CAMRA SPRING 2016 www.midchilternscamra.org.uk LOOKING FOR HOLIDAY IDEAS? MEET THE MICROBREWERY ON THE MED! MIDCHILTERNS BRANCH CAMRA Page 1 THE CHILTERN TAPLER SPRING 2016 MIDCHILTERNS BRANCH CAMRA Page 2 THE CHILTERN TAPLER SPRING 2016 CONTENTS NEVER TOO OLD TO ENJOY REAL ALE In January, 93 year old Bill Kirk from Hemel p.3 Never too old to enjoy real ale Hempstead visited his 200th real ale establishment, p.6 Lost Pubs of Buckinghamshire – mainly within 15 miles of home, since August 2010. This Ale Trail began shortly after his wife, part 3 Christine, died. In their last 30 years together they had made a short daily visit to their local together p.9 Pub News and Brews where Bill had his usual pint and two whiskies and a chat with locals. Understandably he was lost and p.10 Around the Branch lonely when he found himself alone at home. By then he was also very unstable on his feet so p.14 LocAle pubs list needed to be accompanied if going out. His son p.15 Brewery News David and good friend Terry Gurney hatched a plan to cheer him up. p.19 New Zealand brewery feature Coincidentally, Terry’s father had died shortly p.21 Cyprus microbrewery feature earlier at the age of 95. Terry had spent many years taking his father to various country pubs in p.22 Festivals Calendar his latter years where he chatted to locals. Terry was convinced that the enjoyment had extended p.23 Branch Contacts and Diary Dates his dad’s life.
    [Show full text]
  • Chiltern District Monitoring Report 2013/14
    Local Development Framework Chiltern District Monitoring Report 2013/14 Chiltern District Council Authorities Monitoring Report 2013/14 May 2015 Front cover photographs Main: Kings Lane The Lee Top left: Pednor Vale Top middle: Walking in the Chiltern Hills Top right: Manor House Little Missenden Bottom left: Wallington House Wallington Road Chesham Bottom middle: Sheltered housing on Stokebury Centre site London Road West Amersham Old Town Bottom right: Kings Church Raans Road Amersham Produced by: Planning Policy Sustainable Development Chiltern District Council Classification: OFFICIAL Chiltern District Council Annual Monitoring Report 2013/14 Contents Authorities Monitoring Report 2013/14 Page Introduction .......................................................................................... 1 o statutory requirements o legislative context o purpose of the authorities monitoring report o why monitor? o local development framework diagram Executive Summary ............................................................................... 4 o local development scheme o key findings Quality of Life ........................................................................................ 9 o joint strategic partnership o links with spatial planning o standard of quality of life in chiltern – indicators o key trends and key issues Duty to Co-operate .............................................................................. 14 Local Development Scheme ................................................................. 17 o delivery development
    [Show full text]
  • Little Missenden Parish
    SHEET 4, MAP 4 Proposed electoral division boundaries and parish ward boundaries in Little Missenden parish A 4 1 3 Ballinger Common KEY A llo DISTRICT COUNCIL BOUNDARY t G d n s PROPOSED ELECTORAL DIVISION BOUNDARY WARD BOUNDARY A Y PARISH BOUNDARY L E S B PARISH WARD BOUNDARY U R Y WYCOMBE DISTRICT DISTRICT NAME R O A PO D T PROPOSED ELECTORAL DIVISION NAME GREAT MISSENDENTE ED R RO HERBERTS HOLE HOLMER GREENW WARD WARD NAME HUGHENDEN CP PARISH NAME HE RBERTS HO HYDE HEATH PARISH WARD PARISH WARD NAME LE (Track) COINCIDENT BOUNDARIES ARE SHOWN AS THIN COLOURED LINES D A O R A SUPERIMPOSED OVER WIDER ONES. R 4 E 1 G 3 IN LL A B RIG NA LL RO AD BLIND LANE BALLINGER, SOUTH HEATH AND CHARTRIDGE WARD A R Y iv South Heath L e E r S M B is U b K R o IN Y u r G R n NE e 'S LA O OD L WO A A D N The Gateway E CHARTRIDGE CP School W L L I IL NS I LO H T L W H T L F T I IEL I L H D R E F D H L E U I N F M D O R I O D R G B 8 12 E 4 L A A N E D A O B 48 R 5 K N LI B 4 8 Great Missenden 5 CH S HILL ESHAM ROAD GRIMM Allotment A Buryfield 4 M Gardens 1 Frith-hill I CHILTERN RIDGES ED Recreation 3 F L R L I 28 H Ground T L 1 I H A 4 G Great Missenden N (23) A H H C of E Combined IL E S L B T School RO R OM E FIE E LD T D CL Hyde End HAM ROA B 485 CHES MARTINSEND LANE T R Abbey Park H A Y F D E F H O St Peter and E R GREAT MISSENDEN WARD A St Paul's Church T D H R R O O A A D D Missenden Abbey 8 12 Adult Education 4 A College W a r r e n Allotment W D a A t RO Gardens e W r NE K R A P N G E R E R E G E N GREAT MISSENDEN CP The Misbourne L A School N
    [Show full text]
  • Public Session
    PUBLIC SESSION MINUTES OF ORAL EVIDENCE taken before HIGH SPEED RAIL COMMITTEE on the HIGH SPEED RAIL (LONDON – WEST MIDLANDS) BILL Tuesday 22 September 2015 (Afternoon) In Committee Room 5 PRESENT: Mr Robert Syms (Chair) Mr Henry Bellingham Sir Peter Bottomley Geoffrey Clifton-Brown Mr David Crausby Mr Mark Hendrick _____________ IN ATTENDANCE: Mr James Strachan, QC, Counsel, Department for Transport Ms Jacqueline Lean, Counsel, Department for Transport Witnesses: Mr Andrew Cordiner Mrs Susan Brown and Mr David Brown Mr Vincent Wolfe Mrs Karen Kay Mrs Eve Godoy Mrs Penny Semple Mr Sandra Telford Ms Pat Endacott Mr Geoffrey Aldridge Mr Paul Fullagar _____________ IN PUBLIC SESSION INDEX Subject Page Hyde Heath Village Society et al. (Cont’d) Response from Mr Strachan 3 Closing submissions by Mr Cordiner 15 Hyde End Residents Group et al. Submissions by Mr and Mrs Brown 21 Statement by Mr Wolfe 28 Submissions by Mrs Kay 30 Statement by Mrs Godoy 33 Statement by Mrs Semple 34 Statement by Mrs Telford 36 Statement by Ms Endacott 38 Statement by Mr Aldridge 42 Further submissions by Mrs Kay 45 Response from Ms Lean 50 Response from Mr Strachan 55 Paul Fullagar Submissions by Mr Fullagar 57 Response from Mr Strachan 63 2 (At 2.00 p.m.) 1. CHAIR: Order, order. Welcome back to the HS2 Select Committee. Mr Strachan. Hyde Heath Village Society et al. (Cont;d) 2. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Thank you. I’ll just try to take the issues in turn, as they cropped up, just by way of brief response. As a preliminary point, there is of course a wealth of material, which is available to both the petitioners and also the Committee, in terms of the environmental statement and supporting material.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Belt Assessment Part Two Draft Report Appendix 5: Completed Assessment Pro Forma Volume 4 – Section 4 Areas: Site Nominations 4.001 to 4.117
    Chiltern District Council and South Bucks District Council Green Belt Assessment Part Two Draft Report Appendix 5: Completed Assessment Pro Forma Volume 4 – Section 4 Areas: Site Nominations 4.001 to 4.117 October 2016 Classification: OFFICIAL Chiltern and South Bucks Green Belt Assessment Part Two Reference No. Area Name Hectares 4.001 Land North of Cholesbury Lane 0.59 Part One General Area No. 8d Boundary Assessment It is not possible to identify a boundary that is permanent and defensible in accordance with NPPF requirements. Although the triangular site is bounded by Cholesbury Lane to the south the remaining two sides offer no natural defensible boundaries. It is considered that the field/property boundaries which define the site on these sides are neither permanent nor defensible. Classification: OFFICIAL Classification: OFFICIAL Green Belt Purpose Assessment Not Applicable Green Belt Purpose Assessment Not Applicable Classification: OFFICIAL Classification: OFFICIAL Chiltern and South Bucks Green Belt Assessment Part Two Reference No. Area Name Hectares 4.002 Kingsgate Farm 2.27 Part One General Area No. 10b Boundary Assessment It is not possible to identify a boundary that is permanent and defensible in accordance with NPPF requirements. The site is poorly defined and relies on hedgerows/trees along field boundaries to denote its perimeter. The eastern boundary is especially weak in terms of a natural boundary as parts of it run through an open field. It is therefore not possible to identify a permanent defensible boundary. Classification: OFFICIAL Classification: OFFICIAL Green Belt Purpose Assessment Not Applicable Exceptional Circumstances Assessment Not Applicable Classification: OFFICIAL Classification: OFFICIAL Chiltern and South Bucks Green Belt Assessment Part Two Reference No.
    [Show full text]