Public Session

PUBLIC SESSION

MINUTES OF ORAL EVIDENCE

taken before

HIGH SPEED RAIL COMMITTEE

on the

HIGH SPEED RAIL (LONDON – WEST MIDLANDS) BILL

Tuesday 23 June 2015 (Morning)

In Committee Room 5

PRESENT:

Mr Robert Syms (Chair) Mr Henry Bellingham Sir Peter Bottomley Ian Mearns

______

IN ATTENDANCE:

Mr James Strachan, QC, Counsel, Department for Transport Mr Brian Adams, Stop HS2

Witnesses:

Mr Geoffrey Powell Ms Jill Watson Mr John Coombe Mr Raymond Snoddy Mr Jamie Langton Mr Martin Hillis Mr John Donovan

______

IN PUBLIC SESSION

INDEX

Subject Page

Caroline and Richard Spooner and others Submission by Mr Brian Adams 3 Response by Ms Strachan 7

Geoffrey Powell Submission by Mr Powell 13 Response by Mr Strachan 18

Jill Watson and others Submission by Ms Watson 22 Response by Mr Strachan 26

John Coombe Submission by Mr Coombe 31 Response by Mr Strachan 39

Raymond Snoddy and others Submission by Mr Snoddy 42 Submission by Mr Langton 42 Submission by Mr Hillis 45 Response by Mr Strachan 48

John Donovan and others Submission by Mr Donovan 52

(At 09.31)

1. CHAIR: Order, order. Good morning to the HS2 Select Committee in the second of five consecutive days of business. We’re a little bit like the Windmill; we never close, for those who remember the Windmill. We start off with today with petitions 721 and 725. We have Brian Adams, if you’ll please kick off.

Caroline and Richard Spooner and others

2. MR ADAMS: Thank you. Could I have A1121(1), please? I apologise; it’s me again. The two groups of petitioners that I’m presenting on behalf of – and unfortunately, I’ll explain the lead petitioners couldn’t come today, so they’ve asked me to stand in instead for them.

3. I hope, last Thursday when we were presenting, that I left with you an impression of the large numbers of people who are going to be affected by both the construction and operation of HS2 in the Ickenham area. We are 11,500 residents and we also, as an area, are used by many other thousands of people on a daily basis. When we were faced with the petitioning process in May last year, we decided as a community, rather than flood you with thousands of petitions, because everybody in Ickenham is affected, we will establish groups with lead petitioners. They are their neighbours then would construct a petition, so we ended up with 28 petitions. What we hope to do today is step you through different parts of Ickenham, so you can see what’s the impact for groups, for individuals, for associations.

4. I’m going to start with one specific area of Ickenham, so number 3, please. The petitioning group that I am representing this morning are in the area of Ickenham High Road. My basic chart of Ickenham and all the various roads through it doesn’t really represent very well what that area is, if you go to number 2, please.

5. Mr Noad, he lives in Parkfield Road and there’s an arrow pointing to that. It’s one of the roads that feeds into Ickenham High Road. The characteristics of that area are all of the roads there, both sides of Ickenham High Road, are effectively cul-de-sacs. The only access to the outside world that they have is via Ickenham High Road. Mr Noad has lived there for 55 years; he has actually made a very significant contribution to the area. He is on the Ickenham Festival Committee. He is Chairman of the local Neighbourhood Watch. He is very heavily involved in the church activities. He got

married in St Giles Church 55 years ago, so we owe, all of us in Ickenham, a great deal to Alan. Unfortunately, he is quite seriously ill and, therefore, he’s not with us today.

6. I think, if we look at Ickenham High Road, I tried to demonstrate our concerns last Thursday that, if HS2’s plans actually happen and we try to put 1,000 lorries through Swakeleys Road every day, the knock-on effect across all the roads in Ickenham is going to be very significant. At this moment in time, we still get heavy congestion on the other roads in Ickenham, particularly Long Lane, where people are travelling from the north to the south. We can see that Ickenham High Road specifically will be very badly affected. Number 4, please.

7. In addition to today’s very heavy congestion, particularly in the evening where the traffic is moving from the south to the north, we have these new developments on Ickenham High Road, with McCarthy & Stone and Taylor Wimpey. We have Tesco to the south and we have the expansion. We have pedestrian crossings; we have pedestrian-controlled traffic lights and we have also automated traffic light systems, all of which lead to further congestion.

8. The issue for the people who live in this area – number 5, please – is the impact upon their daily lives of trying to leave where they live and use Ickenham High Road. We’re talking about a substantial number of houses here. In Parkfield Road we have 70 households; in Oak Avenue, 63; and then the other side of Ickenham High Road, Brackenbury Village, with 500 houses; and Ickenham Park, 480. Today their life is quite difficult to use that Ickenham High Road, because of current congestion, but if it’s actually heavily impacted by HS2 plans, it’s difficult to see how they can possibly run their normal daily lives.

9. The other thing is to build on what Mr Taylor said on West Ruislip. Should it be necessary to work on the utilities at West Ruislip bridge – the gas, the water, etc. – because of the emergence of the tunnel there, he explained we had a gas emergency earlier this year, which took three days and the whole area just freeze. I can confirm that because, in fact, it was right in front of where my mother lives at West Ruislip. For those three days, I was unable to get to her; she was unable to go out and do the shopping.

10. If you start to expand that to possibly months, it’s very difficult to see how our

society in that area can survive. How will deliveries happen to shops? How will buses run? How will people get to their destinations?

11. Also, there was the concern very much – in fact, Mr Taylor said that, through personal observation, there were very few HGV movements currently on that road. That’s perfectly true, because there’s no reason for HGVs, at this moment in time, to go down that road. All the HGV traffic is in Harvil Road and in Breakspear Road South. Any HGV driver going down Ickenham High Road knows that it’s going to be a very difficult route for them, because of the traffic lights, crossings and that major pinch point beyond West Ruislip, which is called the White Bear Roundabout, and into Ruislip High Street. Apart from supermarket and pub delivery vehicles, it’s hard to see what HGV traffic there would be.

12. Bringing HGVs into this part of Ickenham is very concerning. It’s a cycle track. If they were to be parked on West Ruislip bridge, we’d have major concerns about what cyclists would do to get round that. The headlines on the Evening Standard last night, another woman cyclist killed by a lorry, just raise further anxieties in terms of bringing HGV traffic down here.

13. That is the essence of Mr Noad and his neighbours’ concerns about HS2’s plans. If I move on to Mrs Spooner, I can talk personally about that, because it happens to be my daughter. She lives behind the Ickenham pond area, actually at the junction between Ickenham High Road and Swakeleys Road, by the Coach and Horses pub. I showed you last Thursday just a few photographs of the accidents that have occurred at that junction. Well, she’s been taking those photographs, because she lives on the spot.

14. CHAIR: You said your daughter was caught in an accident.

15. MR ADAMS: She was involved in actually an accident moving up Swakeleys Road into where I live, in Breakspear Road South.

16. If you look at my daughter and her family she has three children. She’s very typical of an Ickenham family. Her husband goes off to work using the commuting facilities into central London, at half past six/seven o’clock every morning. She fights to get the three children ready. She takes the middle one to Breakspear School; the elder one, the teenager, he walks off to Swakeleys or cycles. We obviously have concerns

about his safety on his bike and round that area. The younger one, the new baby, she has to take to a babyminder. She works in Stockley Park. At this moment in time, that four-mile journey is taking 40-45 minutes. If the HS2 plans come to fruition and we have this potential 1,000 lorries, Long Lane will also become highly, highly congested, because people we try it as an alternative.

17. She is very concerned about her future. She’s very fortunate; her employer is very flexible. There is some opportunity to work at home, some opportunity for flexible hours but, at the end of the day, if she can’t get to work it’s very difficult to see how she can continue her career.

18. Number 7, please. Obviously, the petitioners are looking for solutions that will avoid increasing the congestion in the area they live. They’re obviously looking for solutions that would avoid putting heavy good vehicles on that stretch of road, with all the potential dangers on that junction that we see and the dangers to cyclists.

19. Reflecting on some of the information last week that I heard, for instance, HS2 made the point that they were concerned about the volume of traffic that would go on to the M25 if they were excavating a tunnel at West Hyde. If you calculate the number of HGVs that they wish to put through Swakeleys Road, it comes to nearly 220,000, so the difference of putting HGVs on to an eight-lane highway, versus a small, suburban highly congested road, with bus routes, bus stops and children walking to school, I cannot understand why that would be acceptable. We feel that, really, we would ask you to ask HS2 to look for solutions that would avoid such a situation.

20. CHAIR: That’s it.

21. MR ADAMS: That’s it.

22. CHAIR: Very important. Mr Strachan.

23. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Thank you. We obviously looked at the traffic situation in and around this area last week, so I’m not going to repeat any of that detail. There is information before the Committee that looks at the phasing arrangements for the different parts of the work in this area. We did look at some slides last week, and they’re in the standard pack for the Ickenham residents in this area. The reference is

P6209 through to 6211.

24. The particular stretch of road that Mr Adams raised, first of all the Ickenham High Road, is an area where there is some activity in relation to the first three years of construction, where there is HGV traffic. It’s just coming up on the slide now. While that’s coming up on the screen, could I ask for P6219 to come up next? The phasing – I’ll just point to the screen. Ickenham High Road is this section here. These phasing plans show levels of traffic in the start-up just over here of 20 additional HGVs each way, per day, so that’s 40 both ways during the day.

25. CHAIR: That’s to set up the work site.

26. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): That’s to set up the work sites in the first 18 months. The Ickenham High Road is heading off to the West Ruislip portal site for the Northolt tunnel. In that 18-month period, there is anticipated to be 20 each HGVs per day.

27. In Phase 2, which is the next slide, 6210, it’s similarly a period of, I think, nine months when there is a similar level of flow whilst works are being done at the West Ruislip site. That’s the level of HGV traffic that’s predicted to occur in that period.

28. The most intense period, so far as Ickenham High Road is concerned, is in the next phase of nine months only in year 3. If we just look at 6211, sorry – they take a little while to come up on the screen, but I think there’s some detail – I hope you can see the same boxes showing 90 HGVs each way during the day, so that’s a daily flow, rather than obviously at peak hour, so that’s the level.

29. After that, I don’t need to show you the slides, but you can see them if necessary, phase 4 and phase 5, which is a seven-year period, that figure reduces to zero for Ickenham High Road predicted HGV traffic. There is an effect of HGV traffic on Ickenham High Road, from which others take access, as Mr Adams has explained but, in terms of daily increases in HGV traffic it’s relatively modest. I’ll come back to the Swakeleys Road issue at the moment, but it’s relatively modest. You can see the levels of existing HGV traffic from P6218, just to give you a flavour of how much additional traffic is being added for this construction.

30. If we just look at A and B on the map, that’s Ickenham High Road. If you then go to the right-hand column, it’s rather small, but if we can just zoom in there, I don’t know if you can see the figures. The existing, i.e. 2021, flows of HGVs along Ickenham High Road, without HS2 at all, are 317 northbound, 590 southbound. There is HGV traffic currently flowing and will continue to flow along Ickenham High Road. This is measured counts. The volume of traffic that one’s adding in addition is relatively minor.

31. You may have seen from these slides – these ones are taken from the ES – the next column refers to 150 HGVs as a result of HS2. That assumes everything happens at once, whereas the phasing plans we’ve just been through actually strip out when the relative phases are likely to occur in practice. That’s why you get the differences in numbers, so we’ve provided that level of detail. That’s the context for the amount of HGV traffic that’s generated in that particular location.

32. So far as the Swakeleys Road issue is concerned, we looked at that in a lot more detail last week.

33. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Sorry, it takes me some time to get going at the beginning of the week. Are you saying, if you take for example B, and HGVs as well as the cars and the… First of all, we’ve got nearly 10,000 cars and light vehicles, and we have estimated in 2021 590 HGVs. Are you saying, at any one time, the more likely number of HS2 HGVs is the 20 or 30, not the 150?

34. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Exactly. In fact, if one scans left, this is showing – there are two slides. One shows peak activity and one shows off-peak activity. That’s showing the maximum level of construction, but it shows it compressed into one slide, and so it’s over-predicting but, for robustness purposes, the levels of HGV traffic and assumes everything happens on the worksite at once. The phasing diagrams I took you to a moment ago actually show it in a more detailed way, if you show the likely levels of phasing in those three-year periods, and that, Sir Peter, has showed a level of 90 HGVs each way for a nine-month period, so that was the higher period. For the bulk of the period, it’s in the region of 20 to 30. For the seven-year period, you’ve heard about the fit-out, it drops down to zero because the main work’s been done.

35. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: It’s significant. You might have an increase of 15%

of HGVs, where the HGVs are making up about 15% – it’s more than that – 67% of the general traffic. It’s noticeable, but you, HS2, would say it’s manageable. Either the road’s blocked anyway, or it’s not blocked, in which case they can squeeze through.

36. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): That’s what our modelling is showing and that is the overall effect. Yes, there is an increase but, in terms of the road capacity and what existing traffic occurs there currently, albeit there are some problems, it’s not going to have materially worsened. That’s the prediction.

37. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: It won’t improve it. It will certainly worsen it, but it won’t improve it.

38. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): It becomes more complicated because, in traffic modelling terms for the West London area, one then builds in diversionary effects. Strangely enough, traffic can improve by greater diversion taking place, when people know that certain works are happening. That’s part of TfL’s own modelling model. I don’t need to go into the detail of it, but I’ll just flag that up.

39. Can I just add one further point? Of course, you’ll recall last week we gave some assurances to Hillingdon, in light of the traffic in this area, particularly in relation to the Swakeleys Road, where of course the three roads are joined to go down to the A40, that we would carry out further modelling of those three junctions and, if the modelling shows some materially worsening situation, then to consider introducing measures to improve flows through those particular junctions. I don’t think I need to get that up on the screen but, you’ll recall, that was an assurance given to Hillingdon by a letter.

40. CHAIR: It’s normal for the project to have an agreement with the local authority about traffic management.

41. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Precisely.

42. CHAIR: I think Peter makes a good point that, as long as the traffic flows, at this point, there shouldn’t be a problem. I’ve known that an Ocado van or a Tesco home delivery vehicle park inappropriately, and then everything can get jammed up. Presumably the local authority can tell if there’s utility works or if there’s something else going on, because I think problems will occur when something comes out of the

blue, on top of everything else.

43. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Certainly we’ve all experienced that, no doubt. Certainly that can be the case. Both in the code of construction practice and in relation to further detail we’ve provided, things like utility works, which do have to occur, are subject to seeking to minimise the impacts to keep the flows going but, more importantly, to have consultation with the local authority. I haven’t gone into the detail here of the traffic management plans, but this is all predicated upon traffic management plans that will have to be agreed with the local authority and approved for these levels of traffic, so they have the opportunity to see what we’re predicting.

44. That in a nutshell is just a recap of where we got to last week. On cyclists, we identified last week the code of construction practice commitments in relation to cyclist safety and HGVs, going forward.

45. CHAIR: When we discussed it last week, I raised the issue of tagging vehicles so that people know when they’re going. Presumably HS2 should know when most HGVs are moving and the local authority would have that information as well so that, if people went off the routes they’re supposed to do, that could be picked up and audited.

46. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Yes, and Mr Smart gave some evidence about that in GPS tracking last week.

47. CHAIR: He’s nodding.

48. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): He is, so I got that right. Yes, there are a number of measures that are built into the code of construction practice, built into the powers of Hillingdon to approve routing, which we’re going to ensure that these routes are kept to and of course the flows are, yes, inevitably there are flows and we’ve looked at the levels, but the impact of them is minimised, so far as one can.

49. CHAIR: Some years ago I went to Birmingham, and I went in the centre where there was CCTV, but it wasn’t manned by police; it was manned by civilian volunteers, because the police said they didn’t have the resources to man it, which was watching key areas in shopping areas. Clearly, with the pressure on this area of the road network, will there be CCTV? Will there be somebody monitoring what’s going on in particular

rows, so that somebody can look at the overall situation as traffic’s being displayed?

50. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): I imagine some of this will come out of the work of further modelling assessments of the junctions and what steps might be necessary if there’s a problem. Can I just answer in this way? One of the sorts of things that’s introduced in relation to junctions are more intelligent traffic light systems, which then do monitor the flows from one junction to another and are able to phase the light sequences. I think there’s one called Link Mover and another called SCOOT. Those are both types.

51. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Split Cycle Optimum Offset something or other.

52. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Indeed, exactly. It’s not monitored by an individual; it’s a computer.

53. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: It’s a predictive algorithm.

54. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Exactly, but it’s an algorithm that is responsive to what’s actually happening on the roads at the time, because it’s monitoring real flows and then seeking to phase the sequences, so you can control further down the road the levels of flows coming in. Those are the sorts of measures that we looked at in relation to Buckinghamshire County Council. Those are the sorts of things that can be done to improve junction flows if it’s necessary and, as I said, we’re carrying out that further work at the moment.

55. CHAIR: I just have the feeling there ought to be somebody sitting in a box somewhere monitoring what’s happening in Hillingdon and people getting stuck somewhere, just so they can phase the traffic lights or try to help.

56. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): I understand that. I suspect that the view is that the algorithm approach is maybe more effective, in terms of the analysis and being able to monitor more points at once. I don’t know the full detail of that. We’re not limited to what measures we can consider, because it’s more look at what the flows produce and then consider what measures can be agreed to look at improvements.

57. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: The residents know we know that the road system doesn’t have capacity for present levels of traffic, and this will add traffic.

58. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): The information that’s there shows that some of these roads are operating in excess of theoretical capacity currently. There is an existing problem and clearly we’re aware of that. The question is the effect of HS2 traffic on some of these roads, and that’s why we’re looking at in more detail.

59. MR ADAMS: I don’t want to go through the presentation I gave last Thursday, but we still find it incredulous that trying to put 220,000 HGV movements through Swakeleys Road is even conceivable when the concern that it can’t be done on an eight-lane highway. Specific to Ickenham High Road, there are, on HS2’s predictions, a number of HGVs. We’re a little bit surprised by those numbers, because our own observation is that there’s nothing like that level of traffic. We wonder, when they did the survey in June last year, that that might have been the time of the fitting-out of these new construction sites, at McCarthy & Stone and Taylor Wimpey, so there was some additional HGV traffic at that time. That is not our normal experience. It is not an HGV road.

60. CHAIR: Essentially the project has to agree with Hillingdon, and Hillingdon no doubt would have some input on the figures. The local authority will no doubt do a lot of counting as well. We’re some way off the start of the project, and I think these things will be updated and changed, as we go ahead. If it were high, then that would be noted.

61. MR ADAMS: We think the addition of HS2 HGV vehicles is very significant. If one looks at Phase 3, if my calculations are correct, that means there are 30,000 HGV movements in Phase 3 through Ickenham High Road and through what we believe to be a very unsafe junction. I think I showed you last week the range of accidents that take place at that junction, where we have great concerns.

62. Also, two years ago, when we responded to the environmental statement, we clearly stated that the relevant model that was being used was not the appropriate one for this area. We have access to Brunel University and professors there, who understand traffic modelling. Obviously the fact that HS2 is now willing to model the junctions is an admission that that model was never the appropriate one. We would ask, building on that, an assurance letter that, in addition to the junctions that they’ve identified, they should also include Warren Road, Woodstock Drive and the Drive, because these are major arteries that feed from the rat runs also into Swakeleys Road.

63. I think, again, we would reinforce the fact that, should it be necessary to put in a road system to handle the utility work, we don’t see how that would work at West Ruislip for any extended period. The fact that it’s only required because the tunnel emerges there gives us even more feeling that there’s an advantage to extending the tunnel and avoiding such major effects on the road system. Thank you. Mr Powell is sitting next to me, so we did decide to do it that way so we can move more quickly.

64. CHAIR: It’s called hot-seating.

Mr Geoffrey Powell

65. MR POWELL: I have organised no maps, nothing. I live in the Greenway. You visited the Greenway on 15 January, so you know where it is. I listened to Parliament TV last Thursday and I heard what you’ve said – that you’ve had heaps of retired engineers telling HS2 how to do their business. Being in that field, I’m only going to talk about compensation. That’s all I’m going to talk about; I’m not going to talk about anything else.

66. Just to introduce myself, I’ve lived in the Greenway 37 years, 38 years, of my 67 years. I’m very happy there and obviously I don’t want to move, but what can I do? Since I was there, in 1983 there was a Government scheme to actually concrete the Chilterns and to put buses on. That was cancelled. Then in 1999, we had Central Railway that wanted to build some sort of commercial railway system. What they did was, within one month, 30 days or less, they gave me a contract with a mutually agreed price of my house, index-linked, for the next 25 years. Unfortunately the company went bankrupt and I didn’t get anywhere, and I didn’t want to move anyway, but it can be done. It can be done. I got a phone call from a solicitor. I overvalued my house, as many people do, then we came to a mutually agreed value within days. I was surprised at how they dealt with people right down in the Greenway, so it can be done.

67. On the compensation that we have here, I know it’s been approved on 16 January this year. I’ve read it and read it and read it. A lot of people in the Greenway don’t know anything about it. Either they’ve got their heads in the sand or they have not been informed or maybe not got the literature from HS2. I’m not quite sure. Nick Hurd canvassed to us to get from urban to rural, which is good news, because at least we can get some sort of compensation. Obviously the Rural Support Zone is now before Royal

Assent, so we can actually go for the cash offer of 10% or the unblighted price of the house, which is great, okay. The trouble is: what’s the good of it?

68. The 10% is almost as if you’re giving in to what’s happened, so I’ve ignored it, but then a neighbour may be, might be, changing my mind; or the unblighted price. What am I supposed to do? At 67, I’m supposed to sell my house for the value of the house, whether it’s blighted or not blighted. At the moment, there is no blight. We might as well be absolutely honest. I’m telling you what I know and I’m not hiding anything. It’s not blighted at the moment in the Greenway, because there’s such a lack of housing all over Greater London that anything will sell for a certain price. You might lose the odd 10, 20 or 30,000 in the future, depending. HS2 is not really that widely publicised. A lot of people don’t know anything about the impacts of it. The compensation was slightly improved, but I think they’ve got a long way to go.

69. I read your report, which came out on 23 March, the interim report. You speak about the Government position is not unreasonable; well, I don’t think it’s reasonable at all, because what I would get would be the value of the unblighted price of my house. I would avoid the cost of the estate agent, which is what? £6-7,000. That’s the only advantage I would get by going through the HS2 compensation. They’re not going to give me any stamp duty. They’re not going to give me any removal costs. They’re not going to give me any solicitors’ costs. They’re not going to give me anything, really, other than the price of the house, of course, if they did give me the price of the house.

70. That’s another thing. If you read statements from Mrs Cheryl Gillan, she quoted in Parliament – well, actually, it’s the building opposite Parliament – at the end of March that her constituents had to sort of answer a lot of questions, spend £1,000 on accountancy fees, in order to put a case forward. I don’t know which scheme we’re talking about, because there are so many. There are so many schemes that you get completely and utterly confused which one you should go for. Obviously in the Greenway we have two schemes. Fair enough, okay.

71. Heathrow Airport, they give a compensation up to 150% of the value of your house. Now, I wouldn’t be here if somebody offered me 150% of the value of my house, because it would have been a waste of time. I think a lot of people may not be here. They may decide, in their old age, we’re not going to be in front of Western

Europe’s largest construction site, because that’s what it will be, in front of the Greenway. I’ll be looking at it from my window and many other people in the Greenway will be, with all the traffic that’s been talked about from Mr Adams and so forth. Why is Heathrow Airport offering a better deal than HS2? Why aren’t they sort of at least streamlining the same compensation system?

72. You know, I lived in France for over 20 years and TGV, Train à Grande Vitesse, was actually welcomed by the French public, because it gave cities all over France a huge advantage. All of a sudden, they could go to Paris; they could go everywhere within France. It took years of course to build, but it was not against the will of the French people; it was with the will of the French. Here, it’s against the will of the British people, it seems to me. A lot of people will be affected. The compensation is just not good enough.

73. The questionnaire that I tried to fill in a couple of weeks ago, I discovered that page 1 is easy enough, because I know my name and I know my email address and I know my age but, when you get on to pages 2, 3 and 4, well, my wife has told me not to be rude because I could be evicted here.

74. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: She’s right, of course.

75. MR POWELL: But it’s absolutely pathetic the way it’s written. They talk about section 1, but there are no words ‘section 1’. You would expect section 1, section 2, section 3 and 4, and go through it. It’s all over the place. You have to read in through it. They want proof of this, proof of that and proof of everything. Of course, not everybody has that proof. I have it, as it happens, because I didn’t have the house in joint names until recently, and so I did it with my wife.

76. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: How long have you been married?

77. MR POWELL: 37 years. We still have separate bank accounts. It’s one of these things you never get around to, that sort of thing. I don’t know; Joe Rukin of Stop HS2 called it the ‘exceptionally hard to get scheme’, and I think he’s right. Lots of people are having a lot of trouble here. We don’t hear about the people having trouble, because they’re just fighting on their own and they’re hoping to get somewhere.

78. What Heathrow Airport is doing is that they’re actually purchasing all these properties from affected homeowners, and then they refurbish the property and insulate against sound, before they resell it on the open market. Sounds a good idea. Okay, it could be said that, if you live near an airport, you expect noise. If you live near a railway, you expect noise.

79. CHAIR: Can I ask how many properties has Heathrow purchased?

80. MR POWELL: I think they’re going to buy 160,000 homes in Berkshire, Surrey and London, apparently, with this third runway. These are newspaper figures. Who’s to know?

81. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: If you don’t mind, we’ve heard enough Heathrow.

82. MR POWELL: Fair enough, okay. It’s just that the compensation for Heathrow, I was trying to put it forward.

83. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: We picked up the point the first time.

84. MR POWELL: Okay. The compensation, I mean, I’m 67 years of age. I recently retired. This is the only house I own. I don’t own another second home. I’ve spent more than £50,000 getting ready for retirement and then, by 2010, I found out that HS2 was coming out, so I stopped buying anything. Even the carpets need replacing, but I’m not going to spend that on them. The way I look at it is the Government has a win-win situation, because they’ll get stamp duty out of me when I move, which I will not be compensated for. They’ll be VAT on the solicitors’ fees, on everything that I deal with, removals, and really it’s a win-win situation for the Government and lose-lose for me really. On top of that, I was diagnosed with leukaemia last year, so I have to make a decision quite quickly, in the next 6-12 months.

85. I think things will get worse, because people will be realising that this scheme, this project, will go ahead. Of course, there could be problems with blight. At the moment, there isn’t, but tomorrow might be a different situation. That’s all. Really, I suggest that it’s great to come to the Greenway and all these places, but I think you should go to France and have a chat with SNCF and the French Government. I know we’re not very keen on the French, but I just thing that they deal with these large projects in a much

better way. If you compensate people, then people don’t moan. They just take compensation and decide what they want to do. When they get nothing other than the value of their own house, I don’t think that’s good enough really.

86. MR MEARNS: The trip to France, can we go in the last week of July, first week in August?

87. MR POWELL: Is that when you’re going?

88. MR MEARNS: It’s a nice idea.

89. CHAIR: Thank you very much, Mr Powell.

90. MR BELLINGHAM: While we’ve got this map up, Mr Powell, I know you haven’t mentioned this, but it was discussed last week, and that is focusing on the TfL depot, which is just to the side of Ruislip Gardens. There was a suggestion made that that could be the site of the new depot, with a link road going around the side of Northolt Aerodrome, subject to the MOD agreeing to this scheme. It would need a slipway or something on to the A40. What would your view of that be, because it seems to me that that is a possible option?

91. MR POWELL: Instead of the golf course, it would be the London TfL.

92. MR BELLINGHAM: Yes, it wouldn’t be an option to move it if there wasn’t the link road to the south, because you’d simply be putting the problems that we’ve been discussing in the last few days, during hearing this evidence, somewhere else. Often when you move something from one location, you’re simply going to move the problem elsewhere. In this case, it did strike me that you could solve the problem if you utilised perhaps the surplus land of Northolt Aerodrome, but of course that would require the agreement of other Government departments.

93. MR POWELL: The trouble is it’s a juggling act, isn’t it? Before blight turns up, you want to do something; you want to make a decision. We’ve been waiting for five years and we’ve looked at loads of things, because there’s so much information coming out all the time.

94. MR BELLINGHAM: Have you looked at this particular solution?

95. MR POWELL: Yes, I did. I looked all the stuff that came to me last Thursday and it starts to talk about all this. This is not definite, is it?

96. MR BELLINGHAM: I’m talking about whether you and other residents have actually done some serious analysis of this possible option in the past.

97. MR POWELL: No, because I only heard about it two months ago. In April, I heard about this TfL situation. Don’t forget the information has not been out there open for a very long time and it keeps changing. What I got last Thursday, it shows a portal that goes along the Greenway right to the end. I thought that sounded good. I didn’t know that goes right along the Greenway, right to the end. I thought that sounds good, because a portal was supposed to be at the beginning of the Greenway; all of a sudden, it’s at the end. I didn’t know that until I saw it, and I kept asking people outside here, ‘On the legend, the black bit shows a portal. What’s a portal?’ Okay, it’s a concrete thing full of holes to stop the noise, the whoosh and all that, of the train, but will it help us? I don’t know.

98. Also, what Mr Adams is talking about and many other people is the construction. I’ll be dead by the time this starts, in 10-12 years’ time or whatever. It’s the construction time that is really the difficult part, isn’t it, not the operation.

99. CHAIR: Thank you very much indeed. You don’t have to go. Mr Strachan will answer some of the points you made and then you’ll have an opportunity to come back. Mr Strachan, could you say something about the portal as it relates to the Greenway and then a little bit about what compensation is available?

100. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Yes. In fact, the two things go hand in hand because, as Mr Powell has identified, there is an element of choice that he’ll have to make in relation to the Rural Support Zone. I’ll just come to explain that but, sticking first of all with what’s going on in this area, could you just look at 6630, which is the next slide? This I hope will be of help for a number of petitions that are going to come this morning.

101. You can see the Greenway, which is accessed off Ickenham High Road at this location, and then the Greenway comes up here and the red is Mr Powell’s property. The line is running to the north and of course – you can’t make it out here – the Chiltern

Line is in between the Greenway and the proposed line route for HS2. Can I show you that on P6631, just an aerial photograph of what’s going on here? Again, the black is the line of route of HS2 and just to the south of that is the Chiltern mainline. You’ll see for the Greenway there is some existing vegetation, which runs along the back of the Greenway, along the Chiltern mainline.

102. CHAIR: Is it above ground or in the tunnel here?

103. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): The HS2 line is coming out of the portal and it’s rising. It’s actually, and I’ll show you from the cross-section, below the ground level, in the vicinity of Mr Powell’s house. It’s coming up and rising, but it’s below the Chiltern mainline.

104. MR POWELL: Only by a couple of metres, I believe.

105. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): If I just take you to P6634, we have two cross-sections. Both of these are taken from Mr Powell’s house. This is during the construction phase, which I understand is the phase Mr Powell is most concerned about. The cross-section is from 101B. We look at the next slide, P6635. You can see what I was explaining, I hope. Mr Powell’s property is on the other side of the Greenway then the ground drops a bit. Moving along, there’s the line of existing vegetation there, which rises up.

106. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: You’re essentially saying that the most they’ll see is a gib. They may hear it, but they’ll see the gib.

107. CHAIR: And noise contours?

108. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): The noise contours in the operational phase – can I just show you what’s going on in the operational phase at this location, just by an equivalent cross-section, P6637? Once the line’s built, you’ll see again the HS2 lines in cutting here, retained cutting, so it’s below the Chiltern Line. Above, just at that point, you’ll see that that’s where we’re putting in a noise barrier of five metres in height. That runs between the Chiltern mainline and the HS2 line, and of course then existing vegetation. Indeed, in terms of visibility, you won’t be able to see from this point in the Greenway the HS2 line.

109. The noise contours you get from P6641. I’m just showing you this slide because, in the ES, there were some noise contours that were modelled. Unfortunately for this location, they didn’t take account of the five-metre noise barrier, so this is what was in the environmental statement. We’ve since produced an explanation for that at 6644.

110. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: That’s unmitigated.

111. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): That’s effectively unmitigated without the five-metre noise barrier. That’s explained in the slide we sent out, P6644. We’re predicting effects on 200 homes. We’ve actually carried out the modelling with the noise area, and it reduces to an effect in the general area of about 100 homes. I can just show you that on plan, P6645. You may need to zoom in a bit actually, but you can see the location of Mr Powell’s property and it moves into a… It’s still affected by a light yellow area, but the predicted noise levels are 40 to 45 dB and 150 during the day. You can see that from the colours of the plan so, with the noise barrier in place, the predictions are that, broadly speaking, the noise environment has improved from that which we were shown.

112. That’s really the first point covering what Mr Powell will experience during construction and operation. I hope that that helps him with the point about him having a choice to make and one of his neighbours being persuaded by what he’s seen to take a cash offer and stay.

113. Can I then turn to the compensation? You can see that, from the compensation property zones, P6646, Mr Powell, like many of the properties in the Greenway, falls within the Rural Support Zone in this location. I’m afraid that the yellow should be more of an orange on this slide. It just comes out slightly differently, but he’s within the Rural Support Zone. Under the compensation schemes that means he’s eligible to apply for either the cash offer, under the Rural Support Zone, which would be 10% off the blighted value of the property –

114. CHAIR: Up to a certain level.

115. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): It’s between 30 and 100,000. I think I’ll just check that, so a maximum of £100,000 and a minimum of £30,000. There’s the option to stay and take the cash offer or, alternatively, there’s the option to exercise the right to require

us to purchase the property under the voluntary purchase scheme, which I know the Committee has heard a lot about already. There is that choice for Mr Powell to make, based on what we’re showing in relation to the levels of construction and the effects, and the future in terms of operation. It is important to understand what’s going on and I hope we’re able to demonstrate more of that to him.

116. Of course, both of those offers are dependent upon Mr Powell making an application to the scheme. There is an application form and, if Mr Powell has had difficulties in completing it, there are people sitting behind me who, no doubt –

117. MR POWELL: I sent an email 10 days ago listing the problems that I’ve had and I’ve had no reply, or only an automatic acknowledgement.

118. CHAIR: The point, Mr Strachan, is that Mr Powell or somebody in Mr Powell’s position could take the cash offer payment and then, at a later date, require the project to purchase the home, and then they would simply net off. You have more options than you realise, Mr Powell, from the fact your Member of Parliament has declared you rural. If he can get you farm payments, he’ll deserve re-election as well.

119. MR POWELL: The only thing is he’s still not getting the stamp duty off the next house and all the costs.

120. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: We understood that.

121. CHAIR: At some point, you might want to move to a smaller house anyway. The point of this is to allow people to move on.

122. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Can I just be clear on the cash? I don’t want to mislead the Committee. Under the scheme, if one accepts the cash offer, then you’re rejecting the voluntary purchase scheme under the Rural Support Zone scheme, but you have the ability to apply under need to sell and then it’s netted off. I just wanted to be clear about that; there’s a choice to make.

123. CHAIR: It will mean more forms to fill out.

124. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): As I say, I hope the information that’s provided enables you to make a choice. If there are particular problems filling out the form, I do

have people sitting behind who can, I’m sure, talk to you today, since you’re here.

125. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: As Mr Powell goes – thank you, Mr Powell – if it turns out that the form could be redesigned in a way that would be more helpful to more people, perhaps we could be told.

126. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): We’ll certainly look at that. I’ve just managed to get it up on the screen and maybe just the description of what is section 1 and what is just a preliminary of filling out the form is the issue Mr Powell has raised, but we will take that away.

127. MR POWELL: More people should be told about it as well, because I find there are a lot of people ignorant of what’s going on.

128. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): We have done quite extensive publicity, but I note what Mr Powell said.

129. CHAIR: Thank you very much. Good luck with your treatment.

130. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Good luck with your half-share of the house.

Ms Jill Watson and others

131. CHAIR: We now have Jill Watson, petitioner 710 and 1458. Good morning. Welcome.

132. MS WATSON: Good morning. I’ve been here quite a lot lately. I feel as though I’m amongst friends.

133. CHAIR: Do you want to pour yourself some water before you start?

134. MS WATSON: Yes, thank you. Good morning, gentlemen. My name is Jill Watson and I’m representing residents of the Greenway and Ickenham. I will try to be brief and not repeat what has been said before, but please bear with me because I’m extremely nervous and I’ve never done this sort of thing before. I’ll give you an outline of our road, my reasons for living in Ickenham and what we would like to happen. Can I have slide A1115(2), please?

135. This is my bungalow, where I have lived for the past 16 years. I moved here after

my husband died suddenly 17 years ago. It’s intended to be my last home, in a quiet no-through road with a nice garden. Next slide, please.

136. The next three slides you can run through are of the bungalows around my end of the road, which you probably didn’t see on 15 January, taken without consent. These are mostly detached bungalows, some being extended into the loft space, but most have the same footprint. Go to slide 10, please.

137. I’m using this Google map to show you the way that the road works. You come in here and most of the houses on the left are houses. There are a couple of bungalows on the right and then, when you get around the corner, all of the properties on the left are bungalows and on the rail side they’re bungalows as well, up to the top end here, where we’ve got a new development called Buckland Court, which are one-bedroom flats, and along the top here are purpose-built flats and duplex, which back on to Ickenham High Road.

138. There’s a good mix of residents, most single people and couples in the flats and Buckland Court, families in the houses and a very large percentage of older and retired people in the bungalows. Being kind, I would estimate the average age of our road is definitely over 55. There are a couple of younger families in the bungalows, who are renting the properties. Can I have slide 6, please?

This is my back garden, taken in the summer. I planted the bottom of the garden with several trees to mask the railway embankment, which also has trees on it, together with far too many brambles. Next slide please? This is my back garden, taken in the winter when you can see more of the division of the trees. You can see here the leafless trees at the back are the ones on the golf course. Next slide please? The next two slides show my bird visitors who come. The jay visits quite often; the parakeets not quite so. We get green woodpeckers, which are difficult to photograph, and the lesser-spotted woodpecker, which I haven’t managed to photograph at all. We see red kites swooping about. We are also visited at night by foxes and a badger. Can I have the Google slide back again, I think it was 10? Okay, when the construction takes place on the golf course, all of these trees along here will be taken out while they turn it into a construction site. This will affect a lot of the birds who live in the area and will also spoil the view that I have now, as with the residents who live on my side of the road.

139. Can I have the next slide please? The next two slides I really wanted to put together but I’m not that clever. This one shows the end of The Greenway with the construction site, and where it affects Hoylake Crescent as well. Then, the next slide please, shows you more of The Greenway. I did want to put them together but they’re on different scales so the lines didn’t match up. They also show the compensation bands as proposed, which I will come back to a little bit later, but not in as much detail.

140. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: You’re a bit below the big ‘W’ of West Ruislip, isn’t that right?

141. MS WATSON: Yes, rather to the left of that. The utilities work to be done at 105 and 107 will be covered by Gayle Metcalfe and Pauline Woodham later this afternoon.

142. I did attend a meeting with HS2 on 4 June, with two of my neighbours, and we weren’t given any satisfactory answers to the anticipated noise levels of conveyer belts, nor of the light pollution, except they referred us to section 61 of the Code of Practice, repeatedly, which said that it would be monitored by the Council, which I was a bit disappointed about, because as a taxpayer, I am paying for a railway scheme that I do not want or need, and as a Council Tax payer, I’m paying my local Council to monitor the pollution levels, noise levels, of a scheme that I don’t want either. So I’m getting paid twice.

143. My last slide, please? My last slide was difficult to procure and not quite what I wanted to show. When this railway is finished, there will be overhead gantries with power cables replacing the trees. I think the birds will know the difference and won’t nest in there, and I’m sure that an artist’s impression of the way it will look will look much better, but not necessarily the way it will look. I moved to Ickenham with my husband and son in 1986, from Harrow, to live in a more rural area, but with good transport links to London. My husband worked for London Underground until his death. It’s a lovely area, with local shops, easy access to the motorways, plenty of country walks and places to go. In fact, a couple of Sundays ago, I was on Ickenham Marsh with other volunteers, to try and get rid of the Himalayan Balsam, which is very invasive if not kept under control. There is a great community spirit here; we celebrate Ickenham festival every other year, which is very well supported; people open their gardens during festival week to make money for their favourite charities, ending on gala

day with a fete which is always well attended, and ending with an evening open air concert full of live fireworks. I play tennis at Swakeleys Tennis Club; I am Membership Secretary of our local horticultural society, which has over 600 households as members. Phil Taylor covered graphically on Thursday what the noise levels are likely to be on the golf course construction site. He mentioned specifically about the noise levels for the residents of The Greenway as well as the traffic chaos gridlock for all the residents of Ickenham and surrounding areas. Unfortunately, it won’t just be the construction noise that will be heard by residents of The Greenway. When the railway is operational, there will only be seconds of silence before the next train – if the 14 trains an hour does actually happen.

144. When this railway scheme was first announced, I was concerned about the noise level of the trains and the frequency that they would be passing my garden. However, when in June 2013, I found out that there would be this construction site on the golf course, I was treated by GP for depression for six months. I then bucked my ideas up and decided to do something to try and change it, rather than just let it happen. I have got to say that what I heard from – I can’t remember whether it was Mr Mould or Mr Strachan – last Monday, it made me feel that it might be better to drop a bomb on The Greenway rather than expect us to live through this construction. Several of my neighbours will have to put up with the noise to the end of their lives, as they will not live long enough to see it finished. Indeed, if it gets completed on time, I will be 80 when it is completed. We will not be able to sit in our gardens and enjoy the birdsong, see the butterflies on the flowers, because of the anticipated level of noise and dust, will keep us indoors with the windows firmly shut, and when it is operational, in 2026, due to the anticipated frequency of the trains.

145. The compensation scheme, as Jeff said, has some restrictions on it. He didn’t mention that, actually, you need to be an owner occupier in order to claim the benefit. If I wanted to move, I would want to stay within Ickenham. If I wanted to get away from this, there is nowhere else to go within Ickenham and I could not afford, even with the full price of my bungalow, to find an equivalent bungalow, in Ickenham. As Jeff said, I would have to pay the stamp duty, and removal fees. And no house, even if it’s brand new, that you move to, always has to have changes; there’s always money to be spent. Everyone in Ickenham will be affected by the construction with the extra traffic, poor air

quality and just the inconvenience of not being able to get to the local shops as easily. But with no compensation payable, unless you’re within 300 metres of the line, this particularly affects those residents, in my opinion, in Breakspear Road South and Harvil Road.

146. Finally, I would like to say that I have been to several of the petition hearings, but was amazed last Monday afternoon – I think it was Mr Mould who was here – tell us that we should consider it a benefit that we will be able to Old Oak Common to visit Birmingham via HS2. Old Oak Common is nowhere near Ickenham, or Hillingdon for that matter; it’s close to Wormwood Scrubs Prison, and the nearest tube stations are East Acton on the Central Line; and Willesden Junction on the Bakerloo Line. I think that HS2 is clutching at straws to try and find any benefit to the London Borough of Hillingdon residents. I am relying on the fairness of the Select Committee to ensure that our village will not be permanently damaged by these construction works. I feel that HS2 is not listening to the pleas from Ickenham and Harefield, to extend the tunnel, because they don’t consider the possible extra cost is worthwhile. They don’t live here, nor will they have to put up with the years of noise and dirt unnecessarily. What we would really like is to have the tunnel extended so that we would not have all these construction sites all over Ickenham. Thank you for hearing my petition.

147. CHAIR: Thank you. You did very well. We have had worse lawyers in front of us! Right, Mr Strachan, can we see where the property is?

148. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Yes, just while it’s on the screen, because it will save me coming back to it, can I just point out that this is a Crossrail construction crane to deal with the concrete segment plant. You can see the concrete segments, if I just show you stacked up. It’s the sort of crane used to move those around, not the sort of crane that’s proposed in use, in the location of The Greenway.

149. MS WATSON: Can I say something? I’m not interested in the crane, I’m interested in the overhead gantry.

150. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Okay.

151. CHAIR: Will the gantry be visible from The Greenway?

152. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Sorry, this is what I was referring to. The white overhead gantry is what I was referring to. It is part of the – as I understand it – it is part of the concrete segment plant for Crossrail. It’s not the sort of gantry proposed in the location of The Greenway. Just while that was on the screen.

153. If I put on the screen P6687? We have a little bit more detail. Ms Watson –

154. MS WATSON: Mrs –

155. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Sorry, Mrs Watson is here to represent a number of the residents in The Greenway, so what we’ve done is to seek to give you an idea of the locations along The Greenway. I showed you a cross-section before, but I’ve got another slide which shows you various cross-sections of what’s happening during the construction phase, and the effect on The Greenway. So, I have just shown you where the sections are taken – 1, 2, and 3 – and if we can go to the next slide, 6688, and if you recall ‘3’ is closest to the Northolt Tunnel section and so there is quite a deep excavation into the Northolt Tunnel, so at the lower end of The Greenway, the construction activity, once it’s reached its depth will be confined to this considerably lower level, and the excavated material conveyor which Ms Watson was raising an issue about in terms of noise, you can see that right on the right-hand side, it would be serving the tunnel boring machines. So it’s going to be very much lower level than ground level.

156. As you come west, you would – I think this is somewhere, two-thirds along The Greenway – you get to section 2, the line is coming up, rising up, but it’s still considerably below ground level in terms of construction activity with the conveyor similarly at ground level. Then, section 1 is I think similar to the one I showed you a moment ago, from further up The Greenway. Of course, it’s starting to come up towards ground level. It’s still below the Chiltern Line at this point, opposite The Greenway, but this is during the construction phase.

157. So, I know – I am slightly reluctant to find reassurance for Ms Watson, bearing in mind she wasn’t reassured from what she heard last week. But if one looks at what is actually going on in terms of construction, Mrs Watson can see from this that the level of construction where it is occurring is actually quite considerably below existing ground level, hence our predictions in terms of construction noise and the effects of the conveyor on her property.

158. Can I go to P6699? Sorry, just before we do that, 6690? Again, this is once the scheme is constructed, so the line is in operation. The same sections, but showing the effect of the line on the area. Slide 3(a) and 3(b) which is towards the bottom end of The Greenway, close to the tunnel, you’ll see that the tunnel is in existence there, and the line is effectively concealed by the portal, and it’s quite a deep level going into the Northolt Tunnel. It comes out of the tunnel itself in section 2, but it’s still considerably far down in the ground. Then at section 1, of course, it’s starting to come up to ground level, and then we have the introduction of the noise barrier, five metres, that I indicated before. Just on that point, can I just go to P6699, because I think I jumped the gun slightly on the last presentation in referring you to the remodelled noise effects, and this is a slide I showed you a moment ago. The principal change as a result of the five metre noise barrier is actually towards Hoylake Crescent in this area, which draws in the noise contours for that area, because that’s where the principal omission was for the five metre noise barrier. In The Greenway, the noise effects are effectively the same as were shown in the environment statement; and so there isn’t actually – if you compare the two there isn’t actually a change in the noise effect. So I just wanted to clarify that; it’s slightly further towards Hoylake Crescent where the main reduction in noise occurs, from the –

159. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: That’s because the noise barrier comes towards the west end of your road?

160. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Yes.

161. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: And that’s because the line is rising up?

162. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Exactly, so it’s Hoylake Crescent where that main effect, and I apologise for jumping the gun. It doesn’t have a particular effect on The Greenway.

163. So that is the both the construction effect and the noise effects of the scheme – sorry, the construction and the operational effects of the scheme once constructed. It is a line that clearly will have some effects which, running along to the north of the Chiltern Main Line. I dealt with the traffic effects on Ickenham High Road, so I won’t repeat any of that, but I’ve shown, broadly speaking, the levels of traffic there would be.

164. Can I just deal with the compensation schemes? Again, I’ve shown you P6646 – actually, to give you the full flavour, P6700 gives you a better perspective of the compensation zones for The Greenway. The red line is simply marking the properties, which Mrs Watson, I think, broadly speaking, is representing. You’ll see because of the proximity to the line, that a number of the properties in The Greenway – indeed, the vast majority of them – are within the rural support zone. As one moves further away from the line, into the pink area, there’s a homeowner payment zone one, which you’ll recall is subject to the eligibility criteria, that it’s a payment of £22,500. Then, green is zone two, where it’s slightly less. Those are homeowner payment zones that can be applied for once the Bill becomes an Act, and offer cash sums in relation to those who are eligible. There is an owner-occupier qualification but we’ve just, on a number of occasions, discussed the reasons for that, which I won’t go over again.

165. CHAIR: Mrs Watson mentioned trees also on the construction site which were being cleared. Is it possible that we could keep some of those trees?

166. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): I understand it was principally the trees on the golf course side, where the tunnel portal area is? That is, obviously, quite intensive construction site for the creation of the tunnel portal. So I think there will be some trees lost from that area.

167. CHAIR: But some saved?

168. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Well, we’re certainly happy to look at retaining those we can, to construct the tunnel portal, but I think it’s unrealistic for me to say that many could be, because that’s the principal area where the tunnel portal is being constructed. But as you come in – because the access is in from the golf course, as you’ll recall – there are some trees in relation to the access, and no doubt if those can be retained, that would at least have some beneficial effects. But, there is – can I just put that in context? In relation to The Greenway residents there is a considerable amount of vegetation currently – I think you saw the back of Mrs Watson’s garden, but in between The Greenway and the Chiltern Mainline, there is a considerable degree of vegetation already and we’re not proposing to affect that in any material way. There are some utility works that we’re going to look at a little bit later on this morning just in that location; there might be some minor effects there. But broadly speaking, the main

screening of the works is going to be achieved from existing vegetation on the north of The Greenway.

169. So far as monitoring is concerned, in relation to noise effects during construction, HS2 will monitor the noise, with the local authority having the ability to step in, if there is considered to be a problem under the Control of Pollution Act.

170. CHAIR: The local authority can prosecute, as with any other activity in their area? So if it gets noisier, Hillingdon can…

171. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Whilst I think it’s realistic to recognise the effects that you’ve mentioned in relation to trees during construction, if I can just show you P6389, or 6689 if that’s easier? The systems aren’t responding. If it comes to light, what you will see is the operational scheme with the mitigation in place, and you will have seen this from other plans before, but you’ll recall that on the golf course side, there’s quite a significant area of planting that’s put into the golf course area, mitigation planting, and a series of planting running alongside the railway. I hope it will come up on the screen shortly.

172. CHAIR: Say again what the number is?

173. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): It’s 6689 in Mrs Watson – in the response to Mrs Watson which was in Tab 8 of the bundle. You’ll see on the north side of the railway there is mitigation planting running alongside the railway, but there’s also an area of mitigation planting that goes into the golf course area, which is mitigating the effects of the railway for – the permanent effects of the railway. So, yes, there will be a construction phase, but in the operational phase, when the railway is completed, there is quite considerable mitigation planting in the area. I think I have covered most of Mrs Watson’s points.

174. CHAIR: Okay. So because it’s coming out of a tunnel into a deep cutting and then rising, that will mean the noise will not be as bad – because there’s a sound barrier as it’s coming out, that will reduce the noise as well. And those in this section will mainly be able to get access to compensation if they wish?

175. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): That’s essentially it. I think the context – I

appreciate there are effects which Mrs Watson is concerned about. The context of HS2 in this location is that construction rising, but with the Chiltern Mainline between The Greenway and vegetation, the effects are – as I have sought to indicate, ones which are not perhaps as bad as the perception when one looks at the cross-sections and sees precisely what is going on. I am not trying to downplay Mrs Watson’s concerns, but if one looks closely at the plans, one can see the context of what’s being proposed here.

176. CHAIR: Mrs Watson, some brief final comments?

177. MS WATSON: I understand what’s being said. You haven’t alleviated any of my concerns, and I will leave it to your good judgement to help me out with this.

178. CHAIR: Okay, thank you very much for your contribution on your behalf and those of your neighbours. We now move on to Mr J Coombe, petition 1745?

179. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): I am informed the system is not responding at all at the moment. That may create some problems for Mr Coombe, who has got some slides to refer to. We are trying our best to have it sorted out.

Mr John Coombe

180. CHAIR: We’ve got copies of your slides, Mr Coombe, are you happy to continue, although the system is playing up a bit?

181. MR COOMBE: Yes. May I – I’ve already mentioned – my hearing is not 100%.

182. CHAIR: Okay. We will try and speak up.

183. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Mr Coombe, when you are going through your slides, if you just mention the number in brackets at the end, we will then be able to turn over and keep up with you.

184. MR COOMBE: Okay. I have a list of them here. I am the lead petitioner, number 1745, covering Milton Court. Milton Court is a road of 40 houses, around a grassy area which leads off Long Lane, nearly all residents are active and need to leave their homes for their everyday lives. I understand that Milton Court is outside the compensation area, but it will still suffer in the construction phase, and the same is true in relation to noise. This petition covers numerous issues – in some cases, HS2 Limited

say our concerns will be met by compliance. I hope the relevant authorities will carry out their duties effectively.

185. The main issues they do not deal with satisfactorily are, firstly, the excessive traffic which will use Long Lane, which is the main road to the A40 and M40, and connects with the southern part of the London Borough of Hillingdon. Secondly, we are most unhappy at the loss of open space alongside the River Pinn near Chiltern Railway, and the public footpath between Breakspear Road South and Harvil Road which eventually leads to the Grand Union Canal, and in Buckinghamshire, the Denham Country Park.

186. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Mr Coombe, can I just draw my colleague’s attention to 6489 which is behind tab 12 which gives where Milton Court is? Carry on please, I was just helping them in showing where Milton Court is on the map.

187. MR COOMBE: Thank you. Sorry, I was talking about the loss of the public footpath between Breakspear Road South and Harvil Road, which eventually leads through to Buckinghamshire. As a result, the residents of Ickenham may well take less exercise, which I believe is contrary to agreed public policy. The alternatives offered, which incidentally are incorrectly called diversions, are not realistic. These major concerns would be dealt with by extending the tunnel beyond West Ruislip. I understand the case for a tunnel has been made by the London Borough of Hillingdon, and I urge this Committee to pursue this alternative with HS2 Limited.

188. HS2 Limited had supplied at the last minute a large batch of papers, which unfortunately I have been unable to absorb in full, and I do apologise to the committee if any of my comments have failed to recognise matters raised in this latest batch.

189. I now turn to the slides. That’s the one, number 1.

190. CHAIR: I think we are still having problems with the monitor, so we will just – have you got a copy of your own slides?

191. MR COOMBE: I was hoping it would come up on the screen?

192. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): There’s a problem with the system so we can’t get them up on screen, but the committee have all got hard copies of your slides. So if you

just refer to the numbers.

193. MR COOMBE: Oh right, we go on from 1 to 2, concerns we have about the environment, about health, which I’ll come onto later; the effect on the community. Ickenham is a very active community. And I think individuals – you’ve got it, individuals will have some financial problems, and I am sure that property prices, even though outside the compensation zone, will suffer. Okay, next one please. I think I will just pass that one on, that’s not a matter, strictly for the committee. This is where you were going to put some spoil. It wouldn’t look so attractive afterwards, so I would refer to it later.

194. CHAIR: Can I ask, Mr Coombe, there are a number of spoil sites in Hillingdon. Whereabouts is that one?

195. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Where was that slide?

196. MR COOMBE: That slide is not far from West Ruislip station.

197. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Okay, thank you.

198. MR COOMBE: Spoil dumps do – it’s an area that can get flooded, so it is a problem. I think that the construction works may also cause a problem. The area beyond West Ruislip station, at present, if you have heavy storms, already has a bit of flooding. There’s something to be sorted out there.

199. The next please? Next please? This was an idea put to me by a fellow resident. You get spoil and other people need it. Now, in one case, spoil from Crossrail got taken over to an RSPB reserve. Whether you want to go that far I don’t know but there must be some way, I would’ve thought, of those with spoil being able to do a deal with those who need it. Next one please? Well, we just call there, it is an issue and would HS2 please take care to assess the risk properly. Next please? The landscape around Ickenham is an attractive area, do please not spoil it. And if the rail head at West Ruislip is built before going beyond, then it might make life a bit easier.

200. Next please? Now this shows a picture of a rather busy road at a busy time near West Ruislip. I think there is a risk during the construction period, less recreation; people who are already suffering from health problems will find they get worse.

Emissions – and I come onto that later – noise, will be a problem, must be problem. And more traffic, more risk of accidents; and exercise, effectively, I’ve covered under recreation.

201. Next please? British government are I understand required to respond to the Supreme Court ruling on excessive pollution in the air. I would hope that they would be able to do this before HS2 get started; and in fact, come out with a positive result. Can’t blame HS2 for it, but it is something that needs to be solved. And air pollution, I’m told – I’m not a doctor – air pollution is linked to stroke and anxiety plus the statistic on premature deaths.

202. Next please? Did you miss one? Well, I’m told that high speed rail will have significant emissions: the higher the speed, I gather, the higher the emissions. So, if something can be done about that, well and good.

203. Next please? I wasn’t too happy with this map, because all though it does show where HS2 goes, and it does show where Milton Court goes, to the south it –

204. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: If you want to point to the screen, it will miraculously come up?

205. MR COOMBE: I’m pointing to the screen.

206. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: There’s a slight delay in the computer technology.

207. MR COOMBE: Long Lane, which I have referred to before, starts at Swakeleys Road and goes down southwards towards the A40 and then very shortly would lead on to the M40. It’s also the main connection between the northern and southern parts of the London Borough of Hillingdon and it’s a road often used by emergency ambulance vehicles, because they come from Hillingdon Hospital which is down on that side, and also, you get a lot of police cars going there so it is an important road. You’ll see also, Douay Martyrs School, for some reason Douay Martyrs is on both sides of Long Lane. So there is a bit of difficulty crossing there, even with the benefit of a crossing. So, that would also tend to cause blockages. And, on the other side, on the west side you’ll see it says ‘To A40’, well, A40 bends around there and then joins up with the A40. So you can either get to the A40 along Long Lane, or along Swakeleys Road. Well, if you’ve

got all these heavy goods vehicles going along, you’re going to go along Long Lane. But it just gives an idea of the picture. I think the problems I had with the map have been altered, have been dealt with by putting in the school – Breakspear Junior School – which has pupils both sides of Swakeleys Road, and also just under where it says ‘A40’, you have Viner’s School – a secondary school – where pupils come, again, on both sides of Swakeleys Road. So, Swakeleys Road is going to be a difficult one to deal with, with children crossing, both primary school and secondary school.

208. Next please? Number 14, is that right? That shows what Long Lane can be like?

209. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Mr Coombe? Now that we have the slides on the screen, you don’t have to speak through every one of them, you can just say ‘next one’, we’ll pick it up.

210. MR COOMBE: Yes, thank you. Well, that’s just an example of Long Lane. Next please? And I think I seem to have covered this already.

211. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: You have.

212. MR COOMBE: This is another picture of Long Lane when the traffic has been a bit heavier, as you can see, mainly cars, actually isn’t it? Next please? Yes, this is actually – this picture here shows Swakeleys Road going across and there is a route, promoted by the London Borough of Hillingdon called the Celandine Way. It goes through there, and it leads to and beyond the Chiltern Line, and that is going to be closed off, which is most unfortunate because it’s a very much used route and also, even if you don’t want to go on the Celandine Way, at the side it’s close to a river, it’s very attractive area, just for a bit of recreation and we are concerned about that one.

213. Next please? This is an example of the kind of traffic problems one could get on – it’s Breakspear Road South actually, because there’s no footway up the side; the speed limit is 40mph, although I don’t think any of those vehicles are doing that, and it bends a bit. Next please? I think the photographer was a bit worried there! That’s also Breakspear Road South. That railway bridge is the Chiltern Line. Next please? Now, you have probably already heard from the –

214. CHAIR: Yes.

215. MR COOMBE: Well, I think you’ve got the message haven’t you? Next please? Ruislip Golf Course which is owned by the Council is right alongside the Chiltern Line. I don’t know what’s going to happen there; it’s not purely a golf course. As it says, it has a wide range of community activities, there are sort of physical exercises, physical exercise group, there’s comedy sessions and there’s also a jazz club there. It would be a pity if we lost them. And, the golf course – by the side of the golf course area, is a pedestrian and cycling route, which takes you up to a number of houses, and obviously, a bit of golf is a bit of recreation. Next please? That is the golf course car park.

216. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: We’ve been to the car park.

217. MR MEARNS: We’ve been there.

218. MR COOMBE: You’re in the car park, yes. It’s a large car park, yes. Very good. HS2 goes to the left-hand side, and so does the Chiltern Line. Okay, next please? Yes, by using the footpath they’ve referred to between Breakspear Road and Harvil Road, it not only leads to the canal, it does lead to the Colne Valley; it’s a good walking area.

219. Next please? We would hope that one way or another there is a proper health impact on noise pollution etc., and also if the golf course is to be closed, please can an alternative one be found before closure?

220. Next please? This is another picture of Long Lane, as you can see, it’s pretty busy. And also, it encourages – a busy Long Lane plus a busy Swakeleys Road will encourage a lot of vehicles to go along the back streets, which isn’t necessarily a good thing. Next please? Now, this one here is – this may well have been taken earlier in the day or later in the evening, but that is like that all the time. It just is very busy. It’s at the southern end of Long Lane, near what is known as Hillingdon Circus – which isn’t a circus, but it was! Then of course, you get the bus routes along there. The bus routes are very important in the area, and I think HS2 said that they would talk about – if there is a problem with bus routes, they will talk about alternatives with Transport for London. I don’t think the discussion will last very long, because the answer is: ‘There ain’t an alternative’. There are three bus routes and they all come through West Ruislip. I think one of them, which goes to Harefield, you could by going through Rickmansworth, make an alternative but I don’t think anyone would suggest that seriously.

221. Next please? That actually – Milton Court leads off there, as you can see, that’s another example of heavy traffic. Next please? Now that shows where the traffic goes. That is Swakeleys Road, this one is Long Lane leading down here. So it just gives an idea of – and there is West Ruislip station, both the Chiltern Line and Central Line, and that’s how HS2 is projected to go.

222. Next please? We would be concerned at the way Swakeleys Road, which is very close to Milton Court, would be badly affected by movements of heavy goods vehicles, and we would ask that at peak hours is it possible to reduce the number of them. And also, for the workers coming to West Ruislip, is it possible to bring them in by means of a shuttle bus, rather than everybody coming in, in their own car? We also regard it as important that the three bus routes will run effectively. One of the bus routes, which is known as the U1, is the way that people can get from Ruislip and Ickenham to Hillingdon Hospital. Don’t think that people can go to Hillingdon Hospital by car, because one thing, they do not want is people coming by car: they’ve got limited car parking space; they did explore the possibility of expanding it, and have now said, ‘No, we can’t do it’. In the last couple of years, I have been visiting Hillingdon Hospital many times, both as a visitor and as a patient and I’ve also used this bus route, U1, it’s the best way of doing it. It’s also important, as I mentioned earlier, that ambulances go, and also, it’s used a lot by the police. So it doesn’t want to get too congested by other vehicles. Yes, we are outside of compensation area, and I wonder whether we ought to be in. Local authority – Hillingdon is going to have to produce a number of extra facilities, I’m sure, particularly crossings of Long Lane, so that will be, I can see local taxes going up.

223. Next please? I think possibly, that’s not a matter for me to deal with. Next please? And that probably isn’t, although one wonders whether, you know, there might be better things to spend the money. Next please?

224. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: You keep turning pages, I think.

225. MR COOMBE: There we are; it shows satisfaction with the consultation. Next please? The next one is relevant. Any mitigation which can make life easier, and I’ll come onto the tunnel in a moment, but anything that will make life easier, thus avoiding some of the problems with the construction would be helpful. Next please? Does HS2

need to be quite such a fast route? I don’t know. It is interesting that it is a possibility that it might cost less if it was going slower speed? Next please? Now, the London Borough of Hillingdon has carried out – has had a survey conducted which does suggest that a tunnel is a suitable alternative from West Ruislip through to Colne Valley, which would cause a lot less disruption and also save a lot of noise, and we do urge – Milton Court – do urge the committee to pursue that option, because it seems to us that it is the best answer. Next please? Yes, is there any reason why we haven’t got it? There we are.

226. Next please? This, I imagine, is the last one. Please, please, before the Bill gets to the – I think I should’ve said Third Reading – please consider mitigation. Thank you.

227. CHAIR: Okay, thank you. We’ve had a wide ranging –

228. MR COOMBE: Can I just say my concluding summary? Ickenham is seriously affected in the construction phase, Long Lane will suffer – or rather – Long Lane will attract more traffic and therefore, it will cause problems, including air pollution which needs to be sorted out in any case. Opportunities for healthy exercise, that worries us quite a lot. And the tunnel is, we see it, as the answer.

229. CHAIR: Okay, Mr Strachan.

230. MR COOMBE: I don’t know –

231. CHAIR: Have you finished?

232. MR COOMBE: Yes.

233. CHAIR: Thank you. Mr Strachan, we’ve had a wide ranging –

234. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Can I suggest to Mr Strachan that you speak directly to John Coombe, and we will listen in, please?

235. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Certainly.

236. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: And we know most of the answers so you don’t have to answer most of these questions.

237. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Can I just show you P6491? It is going to come up

on screen so you will be able to see it, I hope.

238. MR COOMBE: That’s very interesting.

239. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): It is taking a long time I’m afraid. P6491. Mr Coombe has got a hard copy in front of him. It will slowly come onto the screen. It shows the construction routes for the scheme, and as we were talking earlier about Ickenham High Road and the traffic along it, you can see here that the construction traffic routes we’ve been talking about are along the green dotted lines and there is a construction traffic route, providing the order of traffic I mentioned earlier today, going along Swakeleys Road and then up the High Road. You can see Milton Court is the red area below, and Long Lane is the road Mr Coombe was referring to on a number of occasions, running down from the High Road, down to the south. That is not a proposed construction traffic route, and so many of the concerns in relation to the generation of HGVs – many of the concerns in relation to the generation of HGV traffic from construction in this area won’t directly affect Long Lane. If there’s concern about diversionary traffic, that may be an existing issue along Long Lane, but certainly there’s no proposal to add HS2 traffic to Long Lane and the areas that Mr Coombe was speaking about.

240. If I may make my points, then you’ll get an opportunity to come back in a moment.

241. MR COOMBE: That’s fine.

242. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): We’re going to look, I think, later on, in a little more detail at public rights of way, because that’s a concern raised by Mr Coombe. The short point, in anticipation of what you’re going to look at later on, is that there are some temporary diversions of footpaths during the construction phase, many of which we looked in relation to Hillingdon’s petition last week. Once the scheme is constructed, there are only very minor diversions of the existing public rights of way network. I hesitate to get it on screen because it’s not working properly, but P5269 for the record, is not in this set, but P5269 shows the public rights of way network restored very much to as it is, once the scheme is constructed.

243. Can I just deal very briefly with a number of concerns Mr Coombe raised? There

is a wealth of information which addresses many of those concerns. Flood risk, there is a slide P6404 – we don’t need to get it on screen – flood risk is something the project takes seriously and it has looked at in detail. There is a health impact assessment which accompanies the environmental statement, looking at things such as air quality and noise; and their effects on health.

244. The location of the schools, again, you’re going to hear more about, but there is a slide P6391 which identifies where the schools are, and the various crossing points used by people to get to them. Can I then come, really, to the end of what Mr Coombe was seeking, the community request. Of course, he is seeking a tunnel. I refer to our case on that in response to Hillingdon, but so far as the other community requests are concerned, and the requests about traffic, the committee will recall that in the Code of Construction Practice, most – in fact, I think more – of the things that Mr Coombe was asking for, are already covered in the traffic and transport section, section 14. I will show it to Mr Coombe. This is an extract from the code of construction practice.

245. MR COOMBE: It is not necessarily in here.

246. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): No. This is published material that came out with the environmental statement. It is a draft code, and it will be finalised with the Bill. In section 14 there is a considerable amount of detail as to the traffic management measures which go far beyond even those Mr Coombe is seeking but include travel mitigation measures to reduce the impact of the construction work force on the local road network. Therefore, consideration of how workers get to the sites and reduction of their reliance upon private car will be needed. That is already built in, as is site-specific measures avoiding school drop-off periods and things of that kind, lists of road that may be affected in the vicinity and any restrictions. All of that detail is important but it is already built into the mechanisms that will have to be agreed with the local authority.

247. I hope I have covered the main points and concerns raised by Mr Coombe. They are in large part catered for in the detail that appears before the Committee.

248. CHAIR: Thank you very much, Mr Strachan. Mr Coombe, do you want to make some brief final comments?

249. MR COOMBE: Yes. May I just make the point that traffic passing through

West Ruislip, coming down here and then seeing the construction vehicles going along will think, ‘My goodness! I might just as well go down Long Lane,’ That is why I think you will get a lot of extra traffic.

250. CHAIR: They have GPS navigation on them, so they can be tracked.

251. MR COOMBE: Also, while the green line is a route for construction vehicles, will every HS2 vehicle go along there? If they are not construction vehicles, they might come down Long Lane.

252. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Mr Coombe, it may help if I say clearly: each HGV has a monitor and will be tracked. If they go off course, that will be noticed and action will be taken, so thank you for raising it. I think we’re done.

253. MR COOMBE: I am sorry. I understand the point you are making, but not every HS2 vehicle will be taking stuff away.

254. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: We won’t be able to go further today. You are being thanked. Thank you.

255. MR COOMBE: And could I also say with regard to—?

256. CHAIR: I think that’s it, Mr Coombe. Thank you very much indeed.

257. MR COOMBE: Can I just—?

258. CHAIR: No, no, no. Thank you. Goodbye.

259. MR COOMBE: Okay.

260. CHAIR: Now we are going to Mr Raymond Snoddy, who I think needs to get away this afternoon, and his witness.

Raymond Snoddy and others

261. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: I have to declare that Mr Snoddy and I have known each other.

262. MR SNODDY: We have indeed, but not in the biblical sense. My name is

Raymond Snoddy. More than 50 years ago as a young journalist I came to work for a local paper in what is now the London Borough of Hillingdon, and I have lived in the area ever since.

263. I am joined this morning by two neighbours: Jamie Langton, an independent television director, and Martin Hillis, an international oil consultant.

264. Before getting absolutely to the point about the effects, I have two sentences. First, when I worked at the Financial Times I knew a very intelligent young journalist, but even then he was more interested in the large picture than the small practicality of things. His name was Andrew Adonis, a former Labour transport secretary. Second, a good contact of mine at the FT said this in March: ‘The Government has made no convincing case for spending £50 billion on HS2 either on grounds of rail capacity or rebalancing the economy.’ His name, as you are probably very well aware, is Lord Hollick, chairman of the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee, but we are here to talk about effects.

265. To avoid pointless repetition, we simply associate ourselves with and endorse the case put forward by Hillingdon borough council, Brian Adams, Ickenham Residents Association and some of the people you have heard from this very morning on everything from congestion, safety, noise and emissions. We support that case.

266. We will concentrate briefly on the views of some people in the road where I live, Bushey Road, bringing it down to real people. As I believe you have already heard, it is a road in which there is a 700-pupil school: Breakspear.

267. This is the first petition I have ever taken up in my life. Some things surprised me, others did not. I was not surprised that people were almost queuing up to sign the petition, but the thing that did surprise me, which is perhaps more troubling, was the unusual degree of political cynicism and exasperation that politicians were simply not listening and there was no political choice over a huge project that will affect all their lives so adversely. I hope this Committee will ultimately prove such cynicism wrong.

268. Let’s have a few views from the people of Bushey Road.

269. MR LANGTON: I have been living in Ickenham now for 10 years or so. We

moved to the area because it was quite rural in some ways. Having come from central London, it is incredibly rural, so we are saddened and very concerned about the impact HS2 is going to have on our area. I am quite shocked by the number of people I speak to in Bushey Road and the surrounding area who are also concerned. We moved there because it had a nice ‘country’ feel to it; it was quite quiet compared with working in London. We love the area, but we are now concerned that this is going to have a devastating effect, in particular traffic. I know that is coming up quite a bit. I think it will do. I would like to come up with some other alternative angle to be able to put to you and the case of other residents, but it boils down to congestion and the chaos that I think will happen in Ickenham as a result of the works being carried out.

270. We already suffer from traffic from local waste disposal, skip and all kinds of traffic and lorries coming through that area. I am not quite sure how many of those vehicles come through. I know they come through Swakeleys and the surrounding area, Breakspear Road in particular, and sometimes just that volume of vehicles from the waste sites is bad enough.

271. I know and have witnessed many times that, if there is a problem on the M40, traffic virtually comes to a standstill. Traffic will come off the M40 and look for a cut- through. That cut-through will be Ickenham.

272. I have heard this morning that, rather than the 1,000 vehicles a day I was led to believe, there would be only 20. Did I hear rightly?

273. CHAIR: On this particular road.

274. MR LANGTON: Despite how many HGVs are predicted to come through Ickenham, any increase in traffic at the moment is going to be, without any doubt, disastrous. What was a nice village, if you want to call it that, will be more congested than it is.

275. Over the past eight years we have already seen construction on the former US base near West Ruislip. We have seen an increase in traffic with more homes being built on the site. During construction of the site alone I noticed quite an increase in traffic. I can’t imagine, nor can other residents in that road, quite imagine what HS2 is going to do to Ickenham.

276. On behalf of neighbours I have spoken to, we would like you to consider where that traffic is going to go. I know that the spoil has to go where it has to go, but there must be, surely, some other way of doing this without bringing further congestion to our roads.

277. I live in a road that has a school. Three times a day that road is bad enough at the best of times. It is busy with parents dropping off children, but it is not just our road that is affected by that. The surrounding area is now affected by dozens and dozens of vehicles coming in and out of Uxbridge. Without doubt, extra vehicles will have an effect on that and will increase it. There are also proposals by the local authority to put in place parking restrictions in the area, which is going to make the whole thing even worse.

278. A neighbour has asked me to point out something, if I may. I am just reading out some quotes from a next door neighbour. Maybe they have been living in the area for only two or three years but they came to it for the same reason we did. We wanted to come to a nice rural area, or quiet village like Ickenham, because it is a fantastic place. Its lifestyle is great. It has got worse, as I have said. Aylee and Lee live next door to us. Aylee is an occupational therapist and her husband Lee is a physiotherapist and both work for the NHS at Hillingdon Hospital. They have two children and fear that HS2 will have two major negative impacts on their lives. It is really important for them to work locally and contribute to the local community, which they are very proud to do. They emphasise that there are no alternative routes to the hospital, apart from Swakeleys Road which is one of the major HS2 routes. To quote Aylee, ‘The journey is already very variable and unreliable because of traffic. There are already heavy goods lorries from the local waste centre. More lorries of that nature will undoubtedly clog up and damage our roads’, which is another point I want to raise. Already we see quite a bit of debris from vehicles in and out of the local skip place.

279. They go on to say: ‘I know we are in suburbia, but there is a sense of belonging to an area that has its own unique personality. The disruption of HS2 into the greenfield space will have an implication not just for our generation and our children. That was not our intention when we moved to Bushey Road.’

280. MR SNODDY: Thank you, Jamie. Martin, can we have your view and the view of

another neighbour?

281. MR HILLIS: May I begin with my neighbour, Mr David Poulton? I want to read out what he said, which again is on the theme of congestion: ‘I run a small business doing garden maintenance. I feel that the main impact during construction will be the major increase in traffic flow in all roads in and around Ickenham. Reduction in room on the road during work will cause congestion and parking chaos. This is already becoming increasingly worse by local authority parking restrictions. Living close to a school, this will cause further problems on the roads, which in turn makes road environment less safe for children, parents and residents. There will definitely be noise impact locally without a tunnel extension. We already live close to the train, yet outside the zone where government propose compensation. We already clearly hear the trains that currently run on the lines. This noise can only be increased without the tunnel. I am opposed to HS2 as I feel it is really a waste of public money. There still does not seem to be any true evidence to support the Government’s views on speeding links up to other areas. It seems to me that the motives have and always will be political and not beneficial to the nation as a whole.’ That is from my neighbour.

282. From me personally, I would like to continue on the theme of particular congestion in Ickenham and the effects on its residents. Earlier today, Mr Strachan kindly used the term ‘I imagine’ several times, particularly ‘I imagine smart traffic management’. Well, I imagine gridlock. The two exit routes to the M40 from Ickenham are the B466 and B467, Long Lane and Swakeleys Road. They have been discussed at length, but I would like to share a point particularly about Swakeleys Road. Like everybody else, I have to get out to the M40, whether for shopping, school, going to the office or the airport. Currently, between 7 am and 9 am it can take up to 40 minutes to go from my house through Swakeleys Road to the main roundabout on the M40. Regularly, it takes 30 minutes during those periods.

283. On the Swakeleys Road section going from where I live all the way to the M40 there are two roundabouts creating bottlenecks at the junctions with Breakspear Road and Harvil Road. These are the two main roads where lorry traffic is to be added, and those bottlenecks will become impossible.

284. Currently, Harvil Road is being further affected by the movement of additional

lorries to the refuse dump on the other side of the railway line down Harvil Road. As lorry traffic is in and out and will be constant, effectively we are going to be trapped inside Ickenham with unfair lengths of time to wait, particularly during rush hour. These traffic flows et cetera need particular examination, because there is an unfairness in the sense that the residents of Ickenham will, I believe, be affected in some ways more than others. This does not need to be the case. I would ask the Committee to re-examine spoil removal by the existing railway lines beside the staging in Harvil Road. I cannot make particular detailed comment, but the line is not used a lot at night time. I cannot see why those lines cannot be used to remove spoil.

285. MR SNODDY: There are two brief views from two other neighbours including someone who lives next door to me. First, Alex Efferey is a taxi driver and has no doubt that the construction of HS2 and heavy goods vehicle movements it will generate will affect his livelihood. This is interesting: ‘I am not against HS2. I would rather it happened than not, but they should consider residents around here, and I think a tunnel extension is something that should be seriously considered. As it is, we struggle with the traffic. A lot of my work is around here. Potentially, people might not even use me because it will be impossible to get around, and therefore I will lose a lot of work and get no compensation whatsoever.’

286. Another next door neighbour is Harry Wright. He 80 years old. He spent most of his working life in the RAF before for 16 years becoming, I believe, a legendary doorkeeper in the House of Lords. It goes without saying that what could be the last fully active decade of Harry’s life could be made a misery by the impact of HS2 construction: ‘It will affect the whole village. At the moment, traffic is so bad that if they are going to start bringing more lorries to Ickenham it will be terrible’, says Harry. ‘I ask myself: is HS2 essential or merely desirable? I do not even think it is desirable, never mind essential. I have loved railways all my life, but now I’m sorry this is a bridge too far so far as I am concerned. Extend the tunnel and get rid of the spoil by rail. That would be fine.’ I could have gone for a filibuster. I have got similar views from just about every person in our road I wrote, but those represent the views of real people in a real road in Ickenham and how they will be affected.

287. We absolutely do not rely on ‘not in our backyard’ arguments. Everyone knows that in major projects some people will suffer, though, as you heard this morning, I

believe more attention should be paid to adequate compensation. The compensation line cuts Bushey Road in half, even though everyone will suffer to a considerable degree.

288. The argument we make is one of disproportionate harm. The Ickenham community of more than 11,500 people and beyond the immediate area will suffer to an unreasonable degree with gridlock traffic from up to 1,000 HGV movements a day. Never mind the phasing and what roads they go down. The point is that the spoil has to be moved out by road and quite often gridlock will be the result.

289. It is obvious, as you have heard before, that there will be difficulty of access by emergency vehicles, pollution, injury and noise without any benefit to the local community.

290. A tunnel extension that takes HS2 beyond Ickenham will suffice as a fair remedy. Everything else amounts to little more than window dressing. We do not accept that the best engineering brains—there is a tradition of brilliant engineering in this country— cannot find a way to remove spoil from such an extension other than through the roads of Ickenham.

291. Crossrail has built a 43-kilometre tunnel under London. A lot of the spoil has gone out by rail. Guess what? There have been very few complaints about such a major project. Though it is subjective judgment, I think that the Crossrail executives have handled the impact on local communities rather better than HS2 appears to be doing.

292. If HS2 continues to maintain that a tunnel extension will itself lead to serious congestion and nothing can be done about it, as I believe it did last week, let me move into different territories of argument. Such disproportionate harm begins to call into question the overall benefits and rationale for the entire project.

293. Finally, HS2 is a 19th century solution to a problem that barely exists. Just think of the public good that could be created by an alternative spending of £50 billion on public projects. I know something about communications; it is something to which I have devoted my working life. Just think of high-speed broadband for all and the economic impact that would have, rather than getting to Birmingham a little bit faster than in the past, and even—dare I say it—paying for the rebuilding of these august premises. The spending of £7 billion is easy if this project does not go ahead.

294. For now, the residents of Bushey Road, Ickenham, are asking for fairness from government, and in the long term that can be provided by only one thing: a tunnel extension. I commend that idea to you. There is one final summing-up sentence from my two neighbours and colleagues.

295. MR LANGTON: We understand the project is going to go ahead, for the reasons you have been given, but please reconsider where you are going to send the traffic and the effects that will have on Ickenham and its residents. Without doubt, it will have a major impact on our lives. As I have heard this morning, for many this project is going to see them out during the latter part of their lives. I think that is totally unfair.

296. MR HILLIS: I believe that congestion is the biggest issue. It will last for a long time and will spoil a lot of people’s lives in the area. Can the Committee take a relook? When there are railways lines running right beside the Harvil Road site we do not understand why at night time trucks cannot be loaded and spoil be removed along those lines. I just do not understand why that cannot happen.

297. CHAIR: Thank you very much. Some of the points you raised on the principles of the project are beyond our pay grade.

298. MR SNODDY: I know, but you are Members of Parliament and this Bill has not been fully voted through, as you very well know.

299. CHAIR: I would also make the point that we share your concern about traffic in this area. We are very much aware that there is a real problem and there need to be solutions. There is no simple ideal solution; otherwise, Hillingdon borough council officers would have found one for the existing traffic problems.

300. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): Can I deal with what I understand to be a misapprehension as to the way in which the railway is constructed in this area and the concern that spoil, as it is put, is being taken out by road? I think the best way to demonstrate this—I know the Committee has heard this—is to show you the phase plan P6209, because it is important that it is understood correctly. In the course of this I will answer the question about levels of traffic on the specific roads, which I think was raised by Mr Langton.

301. I go back to the phasing slides which show what is going on at different phases of the project. You will recall from this that phase 1 is for 18 months during which the construction sites in the areas are, generally speaking, being set up. There are comparatively lower levels of traffic coming in along the roads in question. The Swakeleys Road one, which I am pointing to here, is at this stage 80 HGVs each way during the day. That is splitting off 30 up to Harvil Road, 30 to Breakspear Road South and 20 to Ickenham High Road, each going to the set-up of the sites.

302. Phase 2 is when there is a peak period of HGV movements in the area. P6210 shows the level of traffic that has caused most concern in the local community. It is wrong to treat it as 10-year construction traffic. You will see that at this point in phase 2, for a period of nine months, if we go back to Swakeleys Road, the prediction is 530 HGVs each way daily. That is for nine months only. The bulk of that—480 HGVs—is going up Harvil Road to the Northolt area. The reason for that is not exportation of spoil but importation of materials to construct the trace for the railway. That is what is occurring in that nine-month period.

303. At the same time, as Mr Smart has previously explained to you, as quickly as possible a cutting and railhead are being created so that when the Northolt tunnelling starts as much as possible of the spoil that comes out goes by rail through the railhead created. There is a misapprehension as to why so much spoil is going out by road. It is not. It is importation for a short period to create the trace, and thereafter setting up as soon as possible the railhead which, in the subsequent phases, enables the minimisation of traffic in the area. That is why in the longer period of phases 4 the level of traffic drops right down while the spoil is going out.

304. If I may show you phase 4, which is a three-year period, in 6212 you see the same plan. I am sorry for the delay in putting it up on the screen because of the level of detail in the slide. I will anticipate what it shows. At this stage the level of HGV traffic to Breakspear Road South, which is a concern to these particular residents, and Swakeleys Road towards High Road has dropped to zero because there is not HGV construction activity now taking place via the roads. At this stage in the Cotterell cutting area the tunnel support area is up and running; the railhead is in place; and spoil generated by the tunnelling goes out by rail. You have 100 HGVs coming up Swakeleys Road in one direction daily servicing the concrete segment plant. That is concrete coming in. That

would be the same in any situation. You will recall we looked at other potential situations at the TfL depot. That level of traffic is necessary to provide material for concreting. It is not spoil going out.

305. The general approach is that the project will use as many rail paths as are available to it to minimise road traffic as far as it can, but, on the worst case scenario, we are looking at these levels of traffic coming in to serve the concrete manufacturing plant for the tunnel segments. That is a three-year period while tunnelling is going on.

306. At a four-year period, which I do not take you to again, traffic drops right down to 20 or 30 HGVs on the road because it is the fit-out phase. The railway trace having been constructed, the materials to fit out the railway are brought in by the railhead that has been constructed. There is a four-year period of fit-out.

307. The reason I go through that again is that I want to make it properly understood that there is construction traffic of concern generated by the construction of HS2 in this area, but it is not over a 10-year period. The peak period is the limited nine-month period I have indicated, and it is not as a result of spoil going out but the construction of the trace while the intention is to take as much spoil as possible out by rail, which is precisely the sort of thing the petitioners were referring to.

308. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: We will come back at the end when you have finished all the rest, but what will be in our minds and those of most people listening is that, first, it does not really matter what a lorry is carrying; it is the presence of the lorry. You can say it at the end, if you are given a chance. Second, although most of the traffic during phase 2, which is the intense one, is in Harvil Road, my guess is that when Harvil Road is full people find other ways and you may get diverted traffic going on to Breakspear Road South and the like.

309. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): I recognise that people are not concerned with what is in the back of a truck when it passes by. What I was addressing was the notion that this could be cured by the creation of more railhead space. It cannot, because that is not what it is doing; it is bringing in material. It has to be brought in by road at the earliest stage. That is the only reason I make the point. I recognise the point that has been made.

310. In terms of displacement, that can occur from congestion and that is recognised in

the traffic model, but one of the reasons we are looking at these traffic junctions is to see what the effects will be and what can be done if there is a material worsening of the situation during these periods. That is at least a partial answer to what has been said.

311. CHAIR: Where the spoil is being sited in some of the areas there are off-road tracks for vehicles.

312. MR STRACHAN QC (DfT): The sustainable placement areas are located and served by hall routes within the sites. Although we have done a number of things to try to reduce the amount in the area, by using as much of the railhead area as possible, the reason that is occurring is precisely to avoid generating even more traffic by putting sustainable placement material back into trucks and exporting it through the road network. That is why those sustainable placement areas occur, but they are serviced off the main roads. That is the overall picture.

313. If I may add one little dimension to this, mention was made of the TfL depot. We have already indicated that we are going to look at that further in light of comments made. We have identified a number of fundamental problems with that, but, whatever the situation, the sorts of traffic generation we were talking about are inevitable under the Hillingdon tunnelling scheme or relocation of the depots, for similar sorts of reasons that would apply here. There is not a cure, if that is what is being suggested, by the sorts of solutions that you and other petitioners are putting forward.

314. I think the main focus of the petitioners’ concern was traffic congestion, which I have answered. As far as management of traffic is concerned, I repeat that there is quite a lot of detail in the code of construction practice dealing with things like road maintenance and wheel washing. I know that is a lesser concern, but there are a number of measures in there which cover those sorts of environmental controls of the effect of construction traffic in the area.

315. MR SNODDY: Very briefly, we were not under any misapprehension that exactly the same number of lorries would be continuing for a decade, as you seem to imply. Of course, projects have different phases, but HS2 could be under the serious misapprehension that this potential traffic problem, however many lorries go down whatever number of roads, can somehow be magicked away in a system where there are very few main roads and where, even before the start of HS2, you can be trapped if

something goes wrong, as we have heard this morning, for example a badly-parked lorry or an accident. It is not what happens on one road; it is the overall weight and density of traffic in this area. We like to call it a village, but that is an affectation. It is increasingly a densely-populated suburban area, and I am afraid that every new person who comes in brings with them two cars. It is already becoming a nightmare. We are talking about the last 5% or 10% of traffic which could flow from this project and which will damage the project. You will not be able to get your goods out or in because of the reality of the geography of roads in this area. I am not sure HS2 has fully taken on board that point.

316. CHAIR: Thank you very much indeed. I note that there are 106 other petitioners as part of your petition.

317. MR SNODDY: We are happy to leave you in peace.

318. CHAIR: Clearly, what you have told us has built up a picture, which we are very much aware of. There are going to be real problems here, which somehow have to be managed.

319. MR SNODDY: There is one other matter: these are not statistics; they are real people’s lives.

320. CHAIR: Thank you very much. We now move to petitions 728, 717, 730: John Donovan and others. Mr Donovan, I am going to adjourn at 12.30, so we will be spilling over after lunch. You have about 20 minutes to do the first part of your presentation. If you do not finish, we will continue after lunch at two o’clock. Thank you for waiting patiently.

John Donovan and others

321. MR DONOVAN: I am John Donovan. This is Beryl Upton and Rob Owen-Jones. We all live in Hoylake Crescent. Originally, we were going to present petitions individually. In order to save time and constant repetition we thought we would present them jointly, each one of us concentrating on a different aspect of their concerns.

322. Can I have slide A1109(1), please? This petition is being presented jointly by us. We live in Hoylake Crescent. When we carried out the petition for the whole road we got 264 petitioners. They signed the original petitions, and we are presenting these

jointly to save time.

323. Could I have slide A1109(2), please? This demonstrates that it is purely a residential area with a mixture of houses and bungalows, some detached and some semi-detached. It is families with children, couples and people living on their own.

324. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Hoylake Crescent is the one that goes round the area of Bushey Road and the closes we were talking about before.

325. MR DONOVAN: Yes; it is a semicircle back into Swakeleys Road. There is also a school in Hoylake Crescent that is bounded by that road and Bushey Road. The pictures demonstrate hopefully that it is a nice area to live in; it is clean; people take pride in their properties, and it is a very nice place to live.

326. Can I have slide (3), please? In the area we are petitioning for there are 321 houses in these roads, not counting Bushey Road or Wallasey Crescent. You have just heard the petitioners from Bushey Road. The petitioner from Wallasey Crescent will be speaking to you later. All of these roads will be severely affected by noise, pollution, traffic congestion and property blight during construction and also when the line is fully operational.

327. To give a very quick reminder of how we got to where we are now, the proposed route for HS2 now was not the initial preferred route. As we all know, this route was chosen to provide a link to Heathrow. Heathrow already has fairly good transport links and will shortly link up with Crossrail. One reason for not tunnelling through Ickenham was the need to have a spur to Heathrow during phase 1 or 2. It has now been shown that it could be built underground if a link is needed. The link will probably never be built, because David Cameron said some time ago that he was not in favour of an expansion at Heathrow. It seems very unreasonable that local residents are being subjected to all this noise and disruption, which will probably go on for most of their lives, for a project which will probably never happen.

328. Slide (4), please. This is my home. I am just showing it to demonstrate the types of properties in the area and how they are looked after. My wife and I are now both in our early 70s. We moved here in 1993. As many other people have said, we have moved here and stayed here. When we bought the house it was exactly what we wanted; it was

a freehold three-bedroom bungalow with open space at the back and local shops, a good, strong local community, parks and good local transport. We thought we would probably stay here until age, infirmity or death forced us to move or just go. But now, along with lots of other people, we are wondering whether we should stay or move. The prospect of living with noise and pollution, possibly for the rest of our lives, is not a very appealing one.

329. The disruption during construction between West Ruislip and Breakspear Road across the back of Hoylake Crescent will become unbearable. The noise from the two conveyor belts and light railway will continue for three years seven days a week 24 hours a day. I do not think anybody could reasonably be expected to live with that.

330. The noise levels of the conveyor belts have not really been assessed. We have been told by industry experts that the noise from them will be considerable. There seems to be some confusion over plans to prevent noise from these conveyor belts. We were told at a recent PRD meeting that no mitigation was planned, but we have seen photos in HS2 documents showing conveyor belts with covers. Beryl will be talking to you about this a bit later.

331. HS2 Ltd said that any noise or pollution from these conveyor belts and light railway would be the responsibility of the contractors. We think that it should be their responsibility, because once the contractors start work it is going to be too late to do very much about it.

332. Can I have the promoters’ ex.P6617, please? This shows a 2.4-metre fence on both sides of a line called the on-site traffic route during construction. We are not entirely sure what that is. P6727 is a similar plan. There are a number of cross-sections, but this one is taken from Hoylake Crescent. It is not identical. Here, you have ‘on-site traffic route’, and to the left of it it says ‘2.4-metre high fence’; to the right of it, it says ‘2.4-metre high fence’ and shows two fences. We cannot find any explanation as to what they are for and whether they are going to be permanent. Maybe we could have an answer to that.

333. Perhaps we can move on to ex.P6619. This shows a 3-metre noise barrier either side of the HS2 line. At a recent PRD meeting we were told that it was going to be 5 metres and it might drop to 3 metres along certain sections. We would like some

clarification as to why this barrier changes height. If there is a barrier on the north side between the HS2 line and the golf course, is any noise from those trains going to be reflected back over towards Hoylake Crescent?

334. Slide A1109(5) is King George V playing field. This is used regularly by the cricket club, football clubs and rugby clubs. It is also used by local schools and children. The existing Chiltern line is separated from Hoylake Crescent by this strip of land. My property is about 100 metres away from the Chiltern line. All residents were obviously aware of the Chiltern line being fairly close to where they lived when they bought their houses. The noise levels have never been a problem for anybody as far as I am aware, but, unlike HS2 while slightly further away, noise levels will be in excess of what could be considered reasonable for anybody to live with. When phase 1 is operational it is anticipated that there will be 28 trains an hour, which is 14 in each direction or one train every 2.15 minutes. When phase 2 comes into operation this will increase to 36 trains an hour, 18 in each direction, or one train every 1.6 minutes. These will be operating from 5 am to midnight Monday to Saturday and from 8 am to midnight on Sunday, so the constant noise from these trains will obviously affect everybody living nearby. It will spoil their enjoyment entirely; they will not be able to used their gardens; they will have to live indoors with windows closed. There will be virtually no break in the noise if you have trains passing every 1.6 minutes.

335. One point that we feel is extremely important is that the noise levels predicted by HS2 seem to be based on average levels which are far lower than actual levels. The noise levels created by an individual train are going to be much, much higher than those based on an average level. Therefore, it should be revised and taken into account. The noise will increase as two trains pass each other and no account seems to have been taken of that, so noise levels will increase. No consideration has been given to that whatsoever.

336. In the environmental statement HS2 itself says there will be significant adverse noise impacts as a direct result of the overground high-speed railway. Obviously, this is going to affect everybody’s life: their health and sleep. It will totally ruin people’s lives.

337. Can I have slide (6), please? This gives a visual indication of the impact HS2 will have as it starts to rise to clear the River Pinn and Breakspear Road South. The overhead

gantries will be clearly visible. What you are looking at now is the Chiltern line as it rises on the embankment to clear Breakspear Road South. Therefore, the HS2 train will be to the north of those behind them, possibly 3-metre or 5-metre high, but above that the gantries will still be visible. Therefore, we will end up with what is now a relatively open, unobstructed view being totally ruined.

338. The noise levels and pollution during the entire construction period, which, according to the environmental statement, will last for 10 years, gives no clear undertaking of how they propose to eliminate the risks to the health and wellbeing of residents on a range of issues, from the noise of the conveyor belts between West Ruislip and Breakspear Road South taking away waste material, operating 24 hours a day seven days week, to how the polluting HGVs will be able safely to travel on local roads, which are already heavily congested, without bringing the whole area to a standstill.

339. There has been talk of remodelling the traffic figures, but it seems to us that all that is going to happen is that you keep putting in the same basic information, each time hoping for a different result. Good luck with that.

340. There are many issues which will affect the residents of Hoylake Crescent and the surrounding area. The environmental assessment did not fully assess or understand the impact on the area. We feel that it may be fine as an academic exercise, but it has little in common with the real world.

341. One point we raised with HS2 in the PRD consultation was the benefits. There are no benefits for local residents. The reply we got was very similar to the one they gave to Jill Watson. They said, ‘You can always go to Old Oak Common.’ To get there you need to go on the Central line from West Ruislip. I checked the timetable. It is 19 minutes from West Ruislip to North Acton, and then a half-mile walk from North Acton to Old Oak Common. That is probably a benefit most of us feel we could easily live without.

342. Working on the assumption that HS2 may go ahead, we ask that the tunnel be extended to the other side of the Colne Valley. It is the only truly effective mitigation for Ickenham. As you are obviously aware, the London Borough of Hillingdon commissioned two independent reports, both of which show that a tunnel extension is a

better option environmentally and technically.

343. One of the arguments against it was that it was going to cost an extra £580 million. We feel that that needs closer examination and it should not just be accepted because that is what HS2 say. Even if it is an additional cost, surely some value must be placed on the effect of putting this railway overground on people’s lives. The constant noise and the effects on health are quite well known. Maybe they should have considered the problems that would arise by putting it overground and built into the original budget some kind of allowance for putting it through a tunnel if the overground route was rejected. It seems that in some cases money matters and sometimes it does not. They say that £580 million is too much, but there was an article in the Wolverhampton Express and Star on 19 June in which Chiltern district councillor Seb Berry submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for figures. HS2 replied saying, ‘We do not hold this information.’ The Department for Transport said, ‘I’m writing to advise you that, following a thorough search of our paper and electronic records, I have established that the information you request is not held by this Department because we have no business need to examine the cost of HS2 at 2015 prices.’ Therefore, money either matters or does not matter.

344. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: It is only £500 million.

345. MR DONOVAN: If they say they do not even need to know what it would cost in 2015 and they set the budget five years ago, I imagine the budget is going to be wrong.

346. The tunnel is the only effective form of mitigation we can see. What is being proposed will not stop the noise, and HS2 admit this. Apart from anything else, it would disfigure the landscape, not be terribly effective and the gantries will still be visible.

347. If HS2 still refuse to extend the tunnel we have to look at some form of mitigation. We would ask that the contractors work uniform hours: eight to five Monday to Friday across the system. I guess that is unlikely to happen.

348. Could I have slide (7), please? There are lines of mature trees across a certain part of King George V playing field. The trees are at the edge of the field and between the field and Chiltern line with another row between the Chiltern line and the proposed HS2 line. We would like these trees to be kept because they would partly obscure HS2 and

also hopefully slightly reduce any noise from it.

349. Could I have slide (6) again, please? This shows the Chiltern line beginning to rise as it approaches Breakspear Road South. There is no screening at this point, because all the trees were cut down in 2013 when Network Rail carried out work on the embankment. We would like to see mature trees planted there now so they have a chance to grow before HS2 comes into operation, partly to obscure the view and perhaps cut down on the noise.

350. We feel that any mitigation that is put in place must be inspected and maintained to ensure it remains effective. Monitoring systems should be put in place during construction to prevent structural damage to properties close by and, if any damage is caused, it must be immediately rectified and steps taken to ensure it is not repeated. As time goes by and no doubt mitigation methods to combat noise and vibration are developed these should be brought in to replace any existing mitigation measures.

351. On compensation, can I have slide (8)? The compensation being offered, as others have said, is totally unsatisfactory and unjust. The number of residents affected will be fairly high. The compensation bands should be widened to allow more people to be compensated. £7,500 or £22,500 for those outside the rural support zone is inadequate for having your life changed for the worse by noise, disruption, pollution and property blight. Residents in all bands should be offered the option of the voluntary purchase scheme. There should be no means testing and no restrictions. Residents should be free to move as and when they wish and not become trapped in their homes.

352. The compensation proposed will not cover the loss between pre-HS2 values and current values once this gets Royal Assent: legal fees and removal costs. There is no allowance for any upset and distress being caused by being forced to move. I give an example of how unjust the compensation levels are. I have worked out that if I were to move and suffer just a 10% reduction in the value of my house, combined with the estate agent’s fees, legal fees, survey fees and removal costs, the loss would be about £80,000, which I could not stand. Similar losses would apply to any other resident trapped within those zones.

353. The potential loss in the value of homes due to difficulty in selling as a result of HS2 has not been fairly or properly assessed. We believe that the number of homes in

the rural support zone, which is 60 metres to 120 metres for the area covered by these petitions, is eight. They are marked with white crosses on the top of the diagram.

354. It seems to us that houses adjacent to it and within the 120-metre to 180-metre zone will be as badly affected by noise as those in the rural support zone as shown now. That is another argument for expanding those bands.

355. There is already some concern about living and moving to the area. Ickenham Residents Association had an e-mail at the beginning of May from Gillian Baines. It said: ‘We’re in the process of buying a house in Hoylake Crescent, but after reading the Ickenham Residents Association website stating that vibration and noise affected 200 properties, we are a little concerned. Also, can you tell us what work is being done at the present time on the far side of the Chiltern line?’

356. I personally received an e-mail on 13 May from another lady, Caroline Blackmoor, who said: ‘We are considering the purchase of a property on Hoylake Crescent…’—she gives the house number—’but have come across your details during our HS2 research. Would it be possible for you to provide your insight into how Hoylake Crescent will be affected both during and after the construction, and what is the likelihood of extending the tunnel so Ickenham is not affected so much after completion?’ I will not read the rest of it, but you can see from that that people are already very concerned about moving to the area. As time goes by, it is going to make it much more difficult for anybody living there to sell and move, if they need to or want to.

357. CHAIR: Do you have much more, or are you almost there?

358. MR DONOVAN: I do not mind stopping there. There is not a great deal, but I am quite happy to carry on afterwards.

359. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: How much more do you need?

360. MR DONOVAN: A couple of minutes.

361. CHAIR: I think we had better adjourn, because Mr Mearns has a meeting with somebody outside. We will see you again at two o’clock. Thank you very much, Mr Donovan.