PUBLIC SESSION

MINUTES OF ORAL EVIDENCE

taken before

HIGH SPEED RAIL COMMITTEE

On the

HIGH SPEED RAIL (LONDON – WEST MIDLANDS) BILL

Monday, 2 November 2015 (Afternoon)

In Committee Room 5

PRESENT:

Mr Robert Syms (Chair) Mr Henry Bellingham Sir Peter Bottomley Mr David Crausby Mr Mark Hendrick

_____________

IN ATTENDANCE

Mr Tim Mould QC, Lead Counsel, Department for Transport

Witnesses:

Mr Tim Guy Ms Yvonne Bone Ms Jennifer Bolt Mr George Rivas

Mr Howard Andernahr Mr Derek Jones

Mr Anthony Harper Mr Peter Martin

Ms Mary Anne Stewart Mr Anthony Bobroff Ms Denise Bolland Mr Timothy Taylor

_____________

IN PUBLIC SESSION

INDEX

Subject Page Wendover Chamber of Trade and Commerce, Yvonne Bone and others Introduction from Mr Mould 3 Submissions by Mr Guy 4 Response from Mr Mould 13 Jennifer Bolt Introduction from Mr Mould 18 Submissions by Ms Bolt 18 Response from Mr Mould 22 George and Gillian Rivas, and Howard Andernahr Introduction from Mr Mould 24 Submissions by Mr Rivas 25 Response from Mr Mould 34 Closing submissions by Mr Rivas 37 Sowdown Ltd, trading as Tobermory Consulting Submissions by Mr Jones 37 Response from Mr Mould 46 Anthony Harper Submissions by Mr Harper 47 Response from Mr Mould 53 Closing submissions by Mr Harper 54 Peter Martin Introduction from Mr Mould 54 Submissions by Mr Martin 55 Response from Mr Mould 59 Closing submissions by Mr Martin 61 Mary Anne Stewart Submissions by Ms Stewart 62 Response from Mr Mould 63 Closing submissions by Ms Stewart 64 Anthony Bobroff Submissions by Mr Bobroff 65 Response from Mr Mould 67 Denise Bolland Submissions by Ms Bolland 68 Timothy Taylor and Patricia Taylor Statement read by Mr Mould 71

3

(At 14.10)

1. CHAIR: Order, order. Welcome to the HS2 Select Committee. We start off with

449, 280, 450 and 446 and Mr Tim Guy.

Wendover Chamber of Trade and Commerce, Yvonne Bone and others

2. CHAIR: We’re going to start off as we were earlier in the proceedings. I’d like

the promoters just to give us a short introduction please.

3. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Yes. Thank you.

4. CHAIR: And then we’ll go to the petitioner.

5. MR MOULD QC (DfT): If we put up P1004(7) we have Mr Walsh’s property

shown here. You can see Wendover itself to the east of the HS2 line. You’ll recall that

under the Bill scheme a green tunnel proposed as the line runs immediately to the west

of Wendover. As a result of the hearings in July, further work commissioned in

response to the Select Committee’s interim recommendation, resulting in a decision by

the project to promote an additional provision which will encompass an extension of the

green tunnel by some 100 metres southwards, will also encompass a range of noise

mitigation measures, including a six metre high extension of the noise mitigation

structure on the eastern side of the line as it passes south from the green tunnel, some

further noise mitigation works within the A413 itself and the possibility of some further

works at the church.

6. On the northern side, the additional provision will promote a noise mitigation

fence on the eastern side of the railway line, again at six metres extending northwards

from the portal. And the work that we’re doing with a view to promoting that additional

provision, which will obviously be published later this year, is indicating that as a result

the noise contour will be drawn further away from the settlement of Wendover than was

shown on the Hybrid Bill scheme, so some further noise mitigation achieved as a result

of those measures. The details of that will be published, as I say, as part of Additional

Provision 5, but that’s a brief resume of the position, and there is a letter on the system

written to you, sir, on 29 October, if anybody would wish to see it.

7. The other properties within this petitioners’ group are commercial properties

4

actually in the centre of Wendover. I won’t put up slides now but they’re broadly in this

location here, and of course the Chamber of Commerce speaks, no doubt, as the name

implies, for other commercial concerns within the town.

8. CHAIR: Okay. Thank you very much, Mr Mould. Welcome back, Mr Guy.

Pray continue with your presentation.

9. MR GUY: Thank you very much indeed. Good afternoon. I’m here representing

the Wendover Chamber of Trade and Commerce, and also three other businesses who

are all members. If we can move to slide two please. Here we are. The Chamber of

Commerce has been in existence for nine years and represents the interests of 65

member businesses from builders to HR consultants, from restaurants to high end

fashion boutiques, from hairdressers to solicitors. We are run by a group of member

volunteers who give their time freely to support the continued prosperity of what has

been a prosperous and successful business community. I am privileged to be here

representing so many businesses in our town. Personally I have been on the committee

for the last nine years, since I purchased my business in the town. Slide 3 please.

10. The ‘I Love Wendover’ loyalty card scheme was started by the chamber in 2012

as a vehicle for member businesses to promote their services and products. We

currently have about 4,000 card holders. Of these 1,200 have registered to receive

offers on a monthly basis via email campaigns. We also use the local press and also

sites around town. Cardholders are not only in Wendover or from Wendover; a number

of them are from across Buckinghamshire and further afield, encouraging customers to

return to many of our successful businesses. In fact I think we’ve even seen a card

photographed at the Taj Mahal. For cardholders in Wendover the initiative has added

benefits of increasing community engagement. Slide 4 please.

11. As well as promoting the members’ businesses we also provide support through

lobbying over local issues, hence my attendance before you today, and via other

channels such as training workshops, supporting events such as ‘Wendover Celebrates!’

As you can see in the picture, this was the celebration from five years ago I think, we’re

– sorry, three years ago, we’re about to have another one next year, so we have it every

other year, and we’re very involved in supporting that. There you can see what a

thriving town Wendover is. We’re here because we know the massive disruption during

5

the construction phase is likely to adversely harm each and every one of our member

businesses. Slide 5 please.

12. During the construction of the 1997 Wendover bypass, Wendover businesses

found a significant loss of trade and consequently profit, and it took a considerable time

to rebuild the confidence and the diversity we lost. However, the town did gain from

the bypass. HS2 will have a far greater detrimental effect because the proposed

construction phase is so much longer than that of the bypass and the disruption will be

on a colossal scale by comparison. We feel there’s an economic inconsistency. In HS2

Ltd’s evidence, in a report called ‘Advice on the Assessment of Wider Economic

Impacts: a report for HS2’ by Daniel Graham and Patricia Melo, one of the props it

leans on is the economic theory of agglomeration. The claim is that HS2, by shortening

journey times between London and Birmingham, effectively brings these economic

powerhouses into closer proximity. The closer proximity is beneficial to both, and that

as a result they will both prosper. Clearly nothing moves. The benefit is purely

achieved by shortened journey times.

13. If this is true it sets up a question: is the opposite true? If journey times are

lengthened is there a detrimental economic effect? HS2 Ltd promises Wendover

significant increases in delays and major adverse effects for year after year during

construction, effectively through delay moving our clients further away. Why is this

attack on the macro economy of the southern half of Britain, excluding London and

Birmingham, considered fair?

14. Last month we undertook a survey of our membership. 21 businesses responded.

The results underline why we are so concerned about HS2. 52% of our customers travel

five miles or more to get to Wendover. 42% are so worried about the impact that they

have delayed planned investment or cancelled it totally. One business was looking to

move to larger premises on the High Street. Instead they’ve moved to another town.

86% of businesses use the road network to visit customers, which in turn results in 36%

of their business. These are very significant percentages, and I hope you’ll please take

those on board.

15. The majority of those businesses, the roofers, the landscapers, the other service

industries, need freedom of movement on the roads. A major part of their costs are

6

transport based. Traffic delays increase those costs. They travel a considerable distance

from Wendover to pursue opportunities therefore will be affected by HS2 many times in

each working day. I recently spoke to a photographer who had not any clue as to the

effect on the 413, and when I told him the level of delays he was absolutely horrified.

Sadly too late to petition you. Slide 6 please.

16. Mr Hendrick asked when I was here last if there were any benefits to Wendover

with the construction project, and we’ve obviously looked at those. The retail winners

from big construction projects are generally food and drink orientated, petrol stations

particularly for cigarettes, snacks and soft drinks. Cafés and takeaways we think might

well do well. Pubs can also prosper, although usually my understanding is that

contractors, understandably, living in a camp will pick one local pub. However, that is

often a two edged sword and local people often then desert the chosen pub so it becomes

dependent on the transient labour force for its trade. The pub enjoys a boost while the

construction – constructors, rather, are in town, but when they leave it’s a real challenge

to get the locals to come back. We think car washes may well do well – might do well if

there’s a lot of mud on the roads from the construction project, and also we think

probably the post office and the bank ATMs may need to add further funds for the

people on site. However, few of the construction workers will buy clothes, furniture,

antiques, specialist foods or gifts near the site. It’s just the staples we think they really

want. So I hope that answers that question. Slide 7 please.

17. I now come onto the three businesses I’m petitioning on behalf of. The first is

Plantscapes Local, which you mentioned at the beginning. As you can see from the

slide, Plantscapes is an established family business with a very specific market across

the south and Midlands. It offers a service that requires a reliable road network,

something HS2 is going to make virtually impossible during the very lengthy

construction phase. Slide 8 please.

18. For us there’s a flaw in the way the petition has been considered by the CFA

system. It treats all problems as being local problems. It doesn’t account for the

economic effect of construction, the needs and methodology effectively putting a brake

on traffic using roads parallel to the whole line of construction, and effectively

strangling east west traffic through traffic control measures and road possession. HS2

Ltd hide behind the general, as enshrined in the CoCP and the ES, but the devil is in the

7

detail. They can’t know the detail at this stage but they continue to act like they’re

dealing with absolutes. The loss of broadband to the business would cost £250 a day.

The loss of power also puts a risk to the stock of plants, a nominal value of £1,500, as

the greenhouse is heated and ventilated by electrical appliances. Slide 9 please.

19. This slide shows in the orange highlighted areas where the construction of HS2

conflicts with Plantscapes routes, and you can see our notes on there. For example, the

worst affected route goes from Wendover to Bicester, to Banbury, Warwick, Coventry,

Lichfield, Warrington, Stone in Staffordshire and then all the way back to Wendover. It

is substantially affected by HS2 for most of its journey length. The company also

deliver to Milton Keynes, Thame, Risborough, Wokingham, Reading, Snodland,

Guildford, Hildenborough, Welwyn Garden City, Witham, Colchester, London,

Amersham, Beaconsfield, Stoke Poges, High Wycombe, Maidenhead, St Albans and

Hemel Hempstead, I’m assured, amongst others. Lost time for the business is costed at

£1 per minute per van. This will impact on prices or profitability or both. Clearly it

won’t be just Plantscapes affected but millions of business journeys along the planned

route. Number 10 please.

20. These are the specific asks of Plantscapes, which again are there for you to see,

but specifically the tunnel obviously, to reduce the impact on the business and transport

links, dramatically reducing the amount of need for heavy goods lorries to be

transporting on the roads. On traffic we think that we’ve already established to the

Committee that Wendover is on a well-used local and regional route and offers no

diversions, it is very difficult to get to Wendover any other way, and that the diversions,

we feel, would double journey times. Claims for damages or losses caused by HS2

traffic managed to utilities are currently to be dealt with by HS2 Ltd, according to what

we’ve read. We would very much like that to be an independent ombudsman, and

therefore it would, we think, be a lot fairer to be covered by that. Slide 11 please.

21. I’m also delighted to welcome Yvonne Bone, who is sitting by the side of me and

is the owner of Scruples, another of the very successful businesses in Wendover.

Scruples hair, body and beauty salon is situated halfway down the High Street. This is

another unique business driven by a very special woman, Yvonne Bone, who is pictured

here with some of her wonderful team, former chairman of the Chamber of Commerce.

Scruples has enjoyed a 52% growth in the last five years. She told me if I look at the

8

last 10 years the figure is so frightening I daren’t tell you. Scruples has just celebrated

its 30th anniversary. The team numbers 21. This is made up of seven fulltime and 14

part time. They work on average three days a week.

22. The business is considered a local centre of excellence. Over the last 14 years

they have trained 25 young people, who’ve gained a total of 48 NVQ qualifications.

Currently Yvonne employs three trainees working towards NVQ level 2 and three

trainees in hairdressing. In addition, many other professional training courses have been

run, and the latest one in hair extensions. The business made a very significant

investment of £90,000 two years ago. This investment had been planned over the

previous three years to coincide with a new lease. The investment included the addition

of a clinical treatment room, which houses a new state of the art hair removal laser,

which cost £40,000. This year Yvonne has invested in new hair extension services. Her

customers number – a number of whom have been coming to her for the entire 30 years.

In some cases she’s now onto the third generation. One customer makes a 60 mile

round trip every eight weeks for beauty treatments. Slide 13 please.

23. Sorry, we missed that one, my apologies. Yvonne undertook a review of where

her customers travel from to visit the salon. 329 customers travel on the 413 or the

Ellesborough Road, both of which will have significant disruption or diversions.

Yvonne is concerned that the considerable number of these customers will be put off

visiting her salon and will find other salons without the same disruptions to the journey.

Yvonne feels the biggest impact will be to the beauty part of the business. During

facials, massage and other treatments nobody wants to be disturbed by major

construction noise or have difficult journeys home after paying for a relaxing massage.

No one wants to have their hair washed and styled only to leave the salon and walk into

a building site with all the dust and noise etc in the atmosphere.

24. 19 of her staff drive to Wendover. They must be in the salon for 8.50. It’s an

appointments business and therefore the stylists have to be on time. The rush hour

traffic is already very busy, with the slightest incident causing significant delays.

Anything that adds further to this will impact on the excellent service that they offer.

Yvonne also sees the overwhelming case for a fully bored long tunnel to minimise travel

disruption, and obviously some of those – the effects of the dust and the dirt in the

building particularly of the green tunnel. However, even with this, the scale of HS2 is

9

so large that it is bound to impact on the business, and she therefore would like adequate

compensation for loss of earnings.

25. MR BELLINGHAM: Can I just ask on that point, the major disruption and

challenge to staff and customers alike will come during construction. If the project goes

ahead and once it’s built, what would the consequences be then? Do you envisage

ongoing problems and difficulties?

26. MR GUY: I don’t know. I suppose –

27. MR BELLINGHAM: In terms of particularly, you know, the relaxing

environment, I mean, once it has been built presumably everything would settle down,

so it’s the construction phase in particular that is of great, great concern.

28. MR GUY: The issue is the length of that construction phase.

29. MR BELLINGHAM: Yes.

30. MR GUY: That’s the trouble. If we go to bed tonight and wake up tomorrow and

it was all built, yes, and some miracle had happened then I’m sure an awful lot of –

obviously with a fully bored tunnel, and awful lot of the problems would be resolved,

but the problem is that it is such a huge length of time and over such a massive area.

That’s the problem.

31. MR BELLINGHAM: Would I be right in saying that we have heard quite a lot of

arguments for and against the fully bored tunnel, against obviously from the HS2 team,

but one of the arguments they used was that in the case of Wendover a fully bored

tunnel exiting to the north west of Wendover would actually create more disruption than

a green tunnel? We have had that argument put, and it may well be put again, so is that

something that you’ve had a chance to consider?

32. MR GUY: Well, I don’t profess to be an expert on tunnelling, but I do understand

that you’ve had a number of different potentially – I haven’t listened to every tunnelling

expert that you’ve heard, but I do understand that you have heard tunnelling experts.

I’ve heard certainly when I was here previously there was some talk about the tunnel

could be done just from the southern end, dug from the southern end. Certainly the

huge advantage as far as we’re concerned is that you won’t have the enormous blot on

10

the landscape which affects the AONB, you won’t have the scar affecting Wendover as

a tourist destination and you won’t have the amount of spoil and everything having to be

removed. The advantages again, you know much better than I do, are that potentially

they can work 24/7 because it’s underground, and that spoil can be removed back to

centres where it’s not affecting a local, very minor, road network. I mean, you know,

the 413 is narrower than the road I live on. If it was a motorway or even a dual

carriageway you could potentially close one side and have the transport link, you know,

the stuff removed.

33. MR BELLINGHAM: You’d have a contraflow, yes.

34. MR GUY: But the problem is –

35. MS BONE: And once it’s built the unknown quantity of how noisy it’s going to

be in the High Street.

36. MR GUY: Precisely, yes, hence the reason for the fully bored tunnel.

37. MS BONE: Yes.

38. MR GUY: But certainly I think, you know, there are ways, and, as I say, I don’t

profess to be an engineer or with tunnelling expertise, but you’ve heard all of that.

There are ways that a tunnel could be made, as I understand it, from the south and

potentially from both ends. I don’t know, but you would presumably have the area

where the spoil was removed could be removed by railway rather than by road, and that

really – there’s such a massive concern from every business. I don’t know whether I

can really get it across to you. I’m trying to get it across.

39. MR BELLINGHAM: You’re doing very well. You’re doing very well.

40. MR GUY: It’s sleepless nights. It’s worry. There is also genuinely, I would say,

from the people of Wendover, they are a lot of them in denial. They just don’t imagine

this is ever going to happen. They can’t imagine that it could possibly happen, and I

keep telling them that sadly I think it probably is.

41. MR BELLINGHAM: Yes, and I take on board your point as far as Wendover is

concerned, we went to the town centre, but part of its attraction in terms of the café

11

culture there, some of these maybe what are, you know, fairly specialist businesses,

thrive in what is a relaxing environment, as you say.

42. MR GUY: Indeed. Absolutely. I very much appreciate your points. Did we get

to that? I did, so I’m onto slide 14, which is my business and absolutely is along the

lines that you’ve just talked about. Fashion by Design Ltd actually trades under the

name Andrew Gardner. The business was founded in 1976. I personally grew up on the

Isle of Wight, fifth generation to go into the retail trade. My mother, 89, still has a

business there, which I also run. After 25 years in Harrods, in January 2007 I purchased

the business and the building that we trade in from Andrew Gardner himself, who still

lives next door. Our team is made up of 10 men and women with an average service in

the business of 13 years, and nearly 20 years retail experience each. I haven’t included

my retail experience, the fact that I was probably on the shop floor as about an eight

year old. Slide 15.

43. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Where was your business?

44. MR GUY: We did have a business in Seaview, which I know you know well.

The business was called Pack & Culliford.

45. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Indeed. Rather more for women than men.

46. MR GUY: Absolutely. That business very much, apart from the yachting tailors

business in Cowes, which was called Morgan & Sons, but yes indeed, and I have to say,

as I was just saying, my family send their very best regards to your wife.

47. We sell a huge range of high quality mens and ladies clothes, shoes and

accessories sourced from the UK, Europe and the US. We regularly have events with

the Canali tailor visiting from Milan to take our customers measures. Canali have 1,000

stores worldwide. They launched their Milanese based company, they launched their

made to measure programme in Milan, they took it to New York and they brought it to

Wendover. So we nearly put on the windows Milan, New York, Wendover, but decided

not to. My customers travel from all across the country, saying how wonderful it is to

find a proper shop with stock, service and expertise. We offer a full alteration service.

We also provide a high quality shoe repair service. We have over 3,000 customers on

our mailing list. About 2,300 of them are me, 700 women. These are spread across 28

12

counties in the UK as well as the cities of London, Birmingham and Manchester. We

also have customers who travel from Singapore, New Zealand, the US and, closer to

home, six European countries, including one customer from Geneva who flies over on a

day trip to shop with us. He does that about once a year.

48. All of these customers visit the store for one to one service. We have no web

business. We don’t even have a website at the moment. It is the personal service, the

very point you made, it’s the specialist service. It’s people coming out of London who

drive – I mean, I’ve even got three customers who live in Knightsbridge who shop in

Wendover. So, you know, people travel because they can get something which is quite

unique. The store brings many high net worth customers to the town, who go on to visit

other specialist shops and local eateries. Andrew Gardner is a destination store of

choice for many customers. All these customers use the road network to reach

Wendover. We see the construction phase of HS2 as acting as a giant tourniquet,

preventing our visitors reaching the town and therefore starving us of customers, with

all the consequential effects this would have on any business. I can’t just pick up my

business and plant it somewhere else. Slide 16 please.

49. So on behalf of all our members, Wendover Chamber of Trade would like a fully

bored tunnel to go right across the AONB. This, we believe, is the only way we can

mitigate against the many years of disruption HS2 will cause. This will at least give us

a chance to survive, stop the destruction of the High Street, maintain Wendover as a

unique and very special town. It will also allow many tourists to keep visiting, as the

beautiful countryside which makes up the AONB will not be scarred forever. In

addition, whilst the construction phase is in progress we would like a business rate

rebate of up to 80%. I understand that the Chancellor’s more recent announcement

taking rates back to local government may make that easier or more difficult, depending

on how tight things are in local government, but certainly it’s something that we would

like. And a hardship fund of £500,000 to support businesses in the greatest difficulty. I

actually think that’s a very small figure in comparison to the number of businesses in the

town. And a fully funded marketing campaign to promote Wendover as a centre for

business and tourism throughout the construction period. Slide 17 please.

50. As stated in the HS2 P7540(5) titled ‘Impact of the proposed scheme on the

AONB, special qualities’, it states that the setting of the settlements at South Heath,

13

Hyde Heath and Wendover will be permanently affected. However, following your

welcome announcement on 28 August that the long tunnel will be extended 2 kilometres

past South and Hyde Heath, this means now that only the settlement of Wendover

within the AONB is left permanently affected. And I certainly have spoken to people in

both those areas and they are very much in favour of the long tunnel being extended

because they can see that although it gets past them it’s still creating a huge amount of

disruption in their local area.

51. Our members and many hundreds of local people who work in these successful

businesses should not have to pay with reduced incomes as hours are cut, the likelihood

of business closures, job losses, as customers simply can’t reach the town or are put off

by the prospect of a difficult journey and therefore go elsewhere. These businesses will

pay dearly for the economic advantages that HS2 may bring to the cities of London,

Birmingham and Manchester. Unfortunately there is no upside for the communities

along the HS2 construction corridor, only massive upheaval. Why should the city’s gain

be the country’s loss? Why should our members suffer? The simple answer, surely, is

they should not.

52. As you know, the business case for HS2 is far from compelling. We therefore

believe that as the independent arbiter this Committee must see that the communities

along the route are not simply sacrificed or, worse, destroyed in order to build what so

many feel is an almighty folly. Slide 18 please. On behalf of the three specific

businesses and the Wendover Chamber of Trade and Commerce, I want to underline one

more time that these are real, living, breathing and successful businesses, employing

hard working, tax paying local people, just the same as you have in your own

constituencies. Please don’t allow this massive undertaking to do more harm than good.

Thank you.

53. CHAIR: Thank you very much. Mr Mould?

54. MR MOULD QC (DfT): We are expecting to report in AP5 that the works that I

briefly outlined at the start of proceedings this afternoon will address all residual

significant adverse effects from the operation of the railway past Wendover, save for

one matter that we continue to work on, which is a programme of works to contribute

noise insulation at the church itself in relation to the Lmax question. That work is in

14

progress. We are looking to report further progress in relation to that as well, but I

thought I would say that to you because it would be wrong to draw too strong a

distinction between the effect of extending the tunnel northwards at South Heath with

the effect of the works that the Committee has asked us to take forward in relation to

Wendover. There is relatively little distinction to be drawn between them in terms of

the ability to overcome the residual significant effects.

55. So far as the construction phase is concerned, we’ve made clear to you repeatedly

that we do not propose to route HS2 construction traffic through Wendover itself.

Traffic will be taken on the A413, which bypasses the town. The level of traffic that we

expect to be running along the A413, from south of the town through to the north, where

HS2 lorries will be unloaded on to a railhead at Nash Lee Road, is of the order of

between 3% and 5% addition to the existing flows of traffic on that road on the primary

route network. The highest prediction, which is just to the north of the town,

approaches 10% to 12% on our current numbers. For those who want to look at it, it’s

in P8143 in the slides that the Committee has seen.

56. So far as noise is concerned, we are not predicting any significant noise effects

during construction on the town centre of Wendover. The reasons for that will be

obvious to the Committee. The main HS2 construction works in the vicinity of

Wendover are taking place to the west of the existing rail line and to the west of the

A413, the construction of the green tunnel. We do not expect there to be any significant

effect on the continuing activities within the town centre.

57. Utilities works, for those who wish to see our approach and policy on that,

information paper D9 makes clear, amongst other things, that we will expect through the

nominated undertaker to manage utilities works, firstly in relation to the timing of those

works, so that if there is a need for any outages, those can be planned as far as possible

to take place at night or during weekends, when there is less demand for the services in

question. One of the responsibilities placed upon the nominated undertaker and through

that person to the contractors will be to establish community liaison arrangements

locally, so that local businesses which rely on access to utilities will have advanced

warning of any works that are going to be undertaken as part of the HS2 project. That

will form part of the broader arrangements, which will be enshrined in the local

environmental management plan, which you have heard about. Further details are set

15

out in relation to that information paper.

58. The question of fund, I’ve explained to the Committee in the context of the

petition by Buckinghamshire County Council, the current thinking in relation to the

development of the Business Community Fund initiatives is set out in information paper

C12. Just very briefly, I told you two or three weeks ago that arrangements were in

place to appoint a Chair for the relevant body. It was expected that that would then be

followed, during the course of the early part of next year, by work to develop criteria for

eligibility and applications for funding.

59. That fund, which as you know is combining the community and business

elements, in a total route-wide fund of £30 million, is specifically designed to enable

local bids to be put forward, under paragraph 4 of the information paper I’ve just

referred to, to address local economies, to support local economies that are

demonstrably disrupted by the construction of HS2. In 4.2 in that information paper, a

number of examples are given of initiatives that local bids might seek funding for under

that initiative. I won’t read those into the transcript. They’re set out in that public

document.

60. That is the approach of the Secretary of State. That is his policy and that fund will

be brought into operation in accordance with the timescales set out in that information

paper. There will be further announcements about that fund as we go forward during

the course of the coming six months or so.

61. Overall, we do not expect any significant disruption to the town centre of

Wendover during the construction of this railway and we are not predicting any

significant effects on the local economy. What I would suggest is that, that being the

case, it would be sensible for both the project and for the local community, including

those who represent its various interests, to look to reassure the local community of

those facts. The AP5 publication will help in that process. Let us go forward and seek

to plan for the delivery of this railway, rather than, as has been the case hitherto, feeding

fears about its effects, which I think I can safely say are, to a large degree, exaggerated.

62. CHAIR: Final comments, Mr Guy.

63. MR GUY: Is it possible to come back?

16

64. CHAIR: Yes, you have brief final comments.

65. MR GUY: There are three areas. First of all, is HS2 then saying that, despite

their statement that Wendover be permanently affected, it won’t be permanently

affected?

66. MR MOULD QC (DfT): I’ve told you that our current work, in developing the

enhanced mitigation measures that will be published as part of additional provision 5 is

suggesting that the one outstanding area where a significant residual effect is still

possible, which we’re looking to work on to overcome, relates to noise impacts on the

church.

67. MR GUY: The church is one thing. Obviously all the people may not be getting

that same treatment. That was one thing. The other thing is all businesses are users of

local utilities. You’re talking about some businesses, but actually every business uses

the local utilities. As far as the 413 is concerned, I’m really sorry but, as somebody who

drives up and down it every single day, twice a day, even a small shunt between two

cars will maybe delay traffic by five minutes, while they get out and exchange

addresses. In that five minutes, you’ve got a tailback that is goodness knows how long

in rush-hour time.

68. MS BONE: The 413 is the main artery into Wendover. Everything comes in

through that from the south.

69. MR GUY: What you really need is to find a difficult route.

70. MR MOULD QC (DfT): At the risk of prolonging things, it is because we value

local intelligence about these matters, and the contractors will value that, because the

last thing they want to do is to run their lorries at a time when they’re likely to be stuck

in stationary traffic, because they lose money when they do that, that’s why we are

promoting traffic management plans for these areas through which we do need to run

construction traffic, which we will be developing in close cooperation with your local

highway authority. The local environmental management plans provide an opportunity

for the local community representatives to participate.

71. All of that takes place under the aegis of course of the statutory regulatory regime,

17

under schedule 16, which we have referred to repeatedly in Committee. It gives the

local highway authority a statutory regulatory role to approve, subject to any appropriate

conditions that it considers to be necessary to preserve the free flow and safety of traffic,

under the aegis of schedule 16.

72. MR GUY: All I would leave you with is, as somebody who actually uses the

route every day, as my customers use the route every day, even a minor problem will

mean basically people go, ‘Oh, we won’t go today.’ We’re talking about this going on

for year after year after year.

73. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Four years is the predicted main construction period.

74. MR GUY: There are different periods for different areas. My customers come

from Chalfont St Peter, from Chalfont St Giles, from Beaconsfield, from Amersham,

from Great Missenden, from Hyde Heath, from South Heath, all the way to Wendover.

Any disruption down that route and they don’t come, as I’ve explained. We can’t fly

them in by helicopter. We really, really do need to express upon you the essential

element of the fully bored tunnel.

75. Finally, if I can just say to you one thing, then I shall shut up and go away, there

was an enormous amount of surprise and, I think, disbelief when your announcement

was made on the 28th, because you hadn’t at that stage heard any of the petitioners. The

announcement was: we’re minded that we’re not going to do a fully bored tunnel.

76. CHAIR: We had heard quite a lot of petitioners, the main petitioners, the county

councils, district councils and some of the proposals.

77. MR GUY: There were many thousands of us behind or hundreds of us behind.

Those groups felt, ‘They haven’t even heard us yet.’ I would just leave you with that

one thought. Thank you very, very much. I really do appreciate your time and thank

you for listening.

78. CHAIR: Thank you very much, Mr Guy. We now move on to 1759, Jennifer

Bolt.

18

Jennifer Bolt

79. CHAIR: I wondered whether you were here for a minute.

80. MS BOLT: I didn’t realise that. My apologies. I’ll turn my hearing aid up.

81. CHAIR: Thank you very much, Ms Bolt. Mr Mould, do you want to do a quick

introduction, then we’ll move to Ms Bolt.

82. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Yes. Ms Bolt lives at number 12 Ellesborough Road,

Wendover. You can see the location of her property on the screen in front of you,

relative to the line of the railway. The project has accepted an application from Ms Bolt

for acquisition of her property under the voluntary purchase scheme. We are currently

in negotiation as to the price to be paid and there is a disagreement at the moment

between her and ourselves as to what is the open market value of that property.

83. CHAIR: Okay, carry on.

84. MS BOLT: Thank you so much. Hello and good afternoon. As you know, I’m

Jenny Bolt and I’m very aware that you’ve heard a number of petitions like mine, so I

do intend to keep this brief. Obviously in terms of the tunnel, that would obviously

solve a lot of the problems, but that’s all I’m saying about that.

85. Just a quick couple of background facts about me. Firstly, I’ve been in Wendover

for seven years and actually envisage staying there for a good many more. Mine was

one of the properties on Ellesborough Road, which you visited earlier in the year. I’m

one of the cottages just by the railway bridge, which actually would mean I’m very, very

close to the exit of a new road, to the side of me about 10 metres, and right at the back

of me about 20 metres. That obviously is affecting me in addition to the construction.

The announcement of HS2 basically really has made it for me totally untenable to

continue living there.

86. I do live alone. I’m 67 and therefore will be in my mid-70s, I hate to say that,

when HS2 is built. In the last year, I’ve received cancer scare and have just received

radiotherapy. I’m still having a bit of tiredness from that. I also have a three-year-old

granddaughter in child protection, who has been for over two years. There have been a

number of emergencies involving police and various things for safety reasons. She has

19

to stay with me so, working with social services, I have to provide her with stability and

support at short notice, if any crisis arises. The support is actually more imperative,

because my son has slight learning difficulties, so I do need to be around quite a lot.

87. What’s this really to do with HS2? Well, for this reason, I investigated extending

the property and/or moving. As you say, I’ve got a thing in about that, which I’ll speak

about later. I was unable to do this. Neither of the options is great, because the

mortgage companies and/or bank loans would not allow any borrowings against it,

because of the close proximity of HS2. Doing anything to the cottage was not viable.

88. CHAIR: May I ask if you have that in writing?

89. MS BOLT: No, I don’t actually. It was actually one of my neighbours who asked

them. I went through a mortgage company. Yes, probably I can provide that for you.

90. CHAIR: If you’ve got anything from a mortgage provider that basically says that,

we are going to do a little bit of enquiry into the Need to Sell and a few other things.

We may well have the Council of Mortgage Lenders come have a chat with us and the

Building Societies Association.

91. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: There may not be a solution, but it is clearly

ludicrous that a building society or bank, which is in the business of lending, if it start’s

saying that property affected by the railway has no value they’re wrong and they ought

to learn to wake up and be sensible.

92. MS BOLT: I’d concur with that. I’m saying that, actually, I did it from the point

of view of – my neighbours immediately did it, and people went to buy the put property

and the mortgage company would not – this was next door but two – offer a mortgage

on it at all, because of HS2. It was unsaleable in that respect.

93. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: It’s like the worst kind of redlining that used to go

on 40 years ago. They woke up to that and they need to wake up to this, in my view.

94. MR MOULD QC (DfT): I do want to re-emphasise that we have accepted an

application to purchase this lady’s property under the voluntary purchase scheme.

95. MS BOLT: Yes, I’m coming to that, thank you. During the construction phase,

20

my property will be surrounded on all sides by construction, as you will probably recall

from your visit. The road starts from that corner where we were all standing and

looking at where the tunnel would be coming out, and you could see it down the back.

That’s leading to considerable noise, vibration and dust, as well as the obvious stress

and visual impact of being surrounded by a building site, with close proximity, and for

several years to come.

96. I understand from HS2 that I would have to move in and out of my home at least

twice during this time, during the construction works. HS2 is aware of these serious

impacts and offers a number of interesting remedies, like outside wall insulation, double

glazing, an extractor fan to purify incoming air, all of which in my view would make

pretty little difference, because of my closeness to the construction works. Indeed, then

I’m concerned about the outside as well. If all this is being done to protect me from

being inside the house, actually what’s it like when you step outside to the garden.

Indeed, I’m concerned about the car as well, dust and things going into that, because

that’s parked not in a garage.

97. Initially, for the first two years, I was told by HS2 that the train was due to go

through my property, so fell into the compulsory purchase zone, then the line was

moved 60 metres and it is now in the rural support zone. I’ve had an application to sell

and been accepted by HS2, after having had feedback from local agents that actually

they wouldn’t put it on the market. They couldn’t market it for the very reason that HS2

was being there. They were unable to sell it. I did that over a couple of years. That was

an issue, so I had that valuation done.

98. Honestly, at the moment, I just feel that life’s been quite rough underneath me.

It’s been pushed and pulled about, basically, by each stage that HS2’s made for me.

Having had the initial statutory blight offer pulled out from under my feet, resulting with

thousands of pounds made up of the costs and 10% compensation, etc., I then thought I

was happy just to be able to move out. I was planning to drop this petition and get on

with my social and working life, and supporting my family.

99. I was shocked to discover that, unlike other individuals in my road – and I’m just

mentioning what you were saying there, Mr Mould – I was given an appallingly low

figure offer of £247,500. This is completely out of line with the values given to me by

21

the local agents, as well as the comparable properties in the road. I would particularly

draw your attention to a comparison with number 18, which is almost an identical

property to mine, slightly smaller if anything, in a less marketable state than my own.

After valuations, they were offered by HS2 £280,000 earlier this year.

100. After appealing my valuation, the offer was improved to around £253,500, but this

is still £26,500 less than the valuation of the very similar property, number 18. This

extraordinary low value means I can’t find comparable property in Wendover. This is

because house prices in Wendover have risen 12% in the last year and, in the second

quarter of this year, by 3.2%, leading to a situation that, if I was forced out of my home,

also out of the village and area, away from my family, my work as well but my family

who need my support. For the sake of 25 metres outside the compulsory purchase zone,

I’m penalised 10% of the house value plus moving costs, plus the under-valuation of the

house and, together, these amounts currently come to £52,350.

101. My key ask is that the Committee directs HS2 to make an offer for my property at

market value, at current market prices, starting possibly with number 18 as a

benchmark. Secondly, I’d ask that the Committee directs HS2 to go some way to

providing more compensation, in line with what I would have received under statutory

blight.

102. I understand that HS2 Ltd does not now need to compulsorily purchase and

bulldoze my house for the line, meaning that I do not receive full compensation.

However, if I stay, they would be compelling me to move out of my house at least twice

and have considerable lifestyle upheaval from the encompassing construction works,

because of the earth movers around the back doing the roads and in front. Indeed, the

road in front is also close to HS2, so presumably there are lorries going up and down

there as well, so it’s rather like being completely boxed in on a roundabout.

103. I understand HS2 don’t need to do that, meaning I do not receive the full

compensation. If I stay, they’d be compelling me to move out at least twice. Therefore,

I perceive part of the value of this compensation, moving costs and stamp duty would be

fair and would reflect not being penalised for being shy of the 25 metres from the

compulsory purchase zone, when all the construction work would still be of such close

proximity and thus dramatically influencing how I live.

22

104. If I’m forced to stay in the house, because the low valuation leaves me unable to

move, I would ask that HS2 Ltd guarantees that expenses would be paid for structural

damage – the house is approximately 1840s/1850s, so I’m kind of concerned about that

– dilapidation, removals for moving in and out twice, storage costs and any necessary

rented accommodation, in addition to what is offered under the rural support zone. I

hope you agree that these are not inconceivable.

105. What possibilities are there that you perceive that these asks are also not

unreasonable and, indeed, proportionate to a dramatic upheaval and negative effects on

my life that HS2 is causing and looks like it will continue to cause for the future. For

me, I’d just like to have minimal disruption and continue to give emotional and practical

support both to my son and granddaughter, whilst still able to work and have ease of

access to the current local amenities that I enjoy so much now. I would ask for your

assistance in this to more easily enjoy life for me. I’m very, very grateful. Thank you

so much. I appreciate your time and the consideration you’ve given to me. Thank you.

106. CHAIR: Thank you very much. Do you have anything to add, Mr Mould?

107. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Only this: that the petitioner mentioned that she had

previously been within safeguarding and had therefore been eligible to serve a blight

notice. That doesn’t accord with my instructions, but I’m going to have that checked. If

it turns out that, in fact, she was within safeguarding and, therefore, blighted land, then

it may well be that she would qualify under the extended homeowner protection zone,

which we’ve explained to you, for those who were previously within safeguarding, but

then came out of it as a result of changes to the safeguarded zone; if that is right, then

her sale of her property to the project would be at full statutory compulsory purchase

terms, as opposed to the voluntary purchase zone which, as you know, pays the

unblighted open market value, but does not pay the costs of moving and so forth. I will

have that checked and I will let her know what the answer to that is.

108. As things stand at the moment, she is being acquired under the voluntary purchase

zone. The valuation dispute arises following the procedure that is laid down in the

voluntary purchase scheme. That is to say two valuations – one from a panel of valuers

selected by her, paid for by the project, and those valuations were within 10% of each

other. The offer so far has been on the basis of the midway point between those two

23

valuations. I understand she’s unhappy with that and that is the subject of a continuing

discussion. There is a complaints procedure and, if she wants to make a complaint

about it, obviously she’s entitled to do so. As things stand at the moment, the valuation

that has been ascribed to her property simply reflects the application of the published

policy on valuation of properties that are to be acquired under the VPS.

109. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Could I ask a question?

110. CHAIR: Yes, Sir Peter.

111. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Mr Mould refers to a complaint. Is that, in effect, an

appeal?

112. MR MOULD QC (DfT): No.

113. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: It can’t change the value.

114. MR MOULD QC (DfT): No, there isn’t an appeal route here.

115. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: If the petitioner says that number 18 had a value that

is out of line with her value, is there any way of checking whether that’s so and whether

that makes a difference?

116. MR MOULD QC (DfT): It has been checked and the advice that the project has

received from the valuers is that that is not correct. It is not out of line. I believe we

may have explained to her why that is but, if we haven’t put that in writing, I’m very

happy to do so. Essentially, there are differences between those properties, which are

the reason, on the advice we have had, for the differences in value. I think it would be

invidious of me to go into the details on that publicly, but that is the position.

117. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Obviously it’s down to the Court of Appeal on

valuations. It looks as though your best hope is the review of the blight. Were you at

one stage blighted, it could make a difference or would make a difference, I think we’re

told.

118. MS BOLT: I was originally being taken out.

119. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: I think that’s a matter of fact to be looked into and

24

report to you. If they have explained to you or do explain to you why they think that the

comparison that you’ve put to us isn’t quite right, and if you’ve got information that

might get them to consider whether in fact their view is correct, that is mainly between

you and them. We aren’t, I’m afraid, the valuers.

120. MS BOLT: No, I appreciate that. Thank you very much. HS2 was in fact as

puzzled as I was. They actually actively encouraged me to reflect that.

121. CHAIR: Thank you very much.

122. MS BOLT: Thank you very much for your time.

123. CHAIR: We now move on to petition 57, George and Gillian Rivas, and 130,

Howard Andernahr.

George and Gillian Rivas, and Howard Andernahr

124. CHAIR: Welcome.

125. MR RIVAS: Good afternoon, sir.

126. CHAIR: Good afternoon. We’ll ask the promoter to give a brief introduction and

then we will turn to you gentlemen.

127. MR MOULD QC (DfT): We’re now in South Heath. As you can see, the

petitioner’s property is on King’s Lane. The notation on this plan is showing green

tunnel, but clearly that’s now been superseded by the promotion under AP4 of the

northern extension of the Chiltern Tunnel, so that the bore continues to this point at the

northern portal of the previous green tunnel. This petitioner and others whom you’re

going to hear from this area this afternoon will benefit from the changes, which will

mean effectively that the construction works to construct the green tunnel are no longer

part of the scheme, assuming AP4 is taken into the Bill.

128. Obviously there is the reduction in construction traffic along the roads. The one

construction route of note on the existing highway is the construction traffic associated

with the construction of the vent shaft, just adjacent to Annie Bailey’s, on the Chesham

Road broadly in this location here, which will generate a certain amount of traffic over a

peak period of about three to four months, I think. The increase in flow is of the order

25

of about 3%, isn’t it? It’s an increase in overall flow of about 3% during the course of

that peak period. Those are the basic facts in relation to these petitioners.

129. CHAIR: Okay, thank you. Gentlemen, could you say who you are just before you

start speaking, so the official report could pick up which one is which?

130. MR RIVAS: Okay, lovely. Thank you very much indeed. Thank you very much

indeed for allowing me to be here.

131. CHAIR: Are you Howard?

132. MR RIVAS: I am going to be in total contrast –

133. CHAIR: You’re Howard.

134. MR RIVAS: Sorry.

135. CHAIR: Are you Howard?

136. MR RIVAS: Mr Rivas.

137. CHAIR: You’re Mr Rivas and you’re Howard, right.

138. MR RIVAS: Sorry. Slide number 1 is Howard Andernahr, who is petition

number – oh, it’s not on there. He’s petition number 130, and Margaret and Ron

Gordon, I’m also a roll B agent for him, at number 32 King’s Lane, number 131.

Myself, Gillian and myself Rivas, number 57; we live at 22. If you just go through

those, 1 to 4, you will see the next slide, 2, is where Mr Andernahr lives. Number 3 is

Brian Smith; 4 is where he lives. Number 5 is myself; number 6 is where I live.

Number 7 is where I live as well. You can see the ‘for sale’ notice. Number 8 is the

next thing, access and travel.

139. Might I just start off by saying I watched the Ickenham presentation on Friday and

my presentation to you will be virtually diametrically opposed to them, because I’m not

representing 400 people. I’m only representing six very local people, who live within

150 metres of the centre of the line, as per the letter I’ve received from HS2 Ltd. We

are talking very personally, as opposed to professionally or otherwise.

140. We all travel, all of us travel, daily on the local rods to Amersham, Chesham,

26

Great Missenden and Wendover to visit local shops – banks, post offices, mainline and

underground stations, medical and dental practices, libraries, garages, restaurants, pubs

and other things.

141. Number 9. Turning right out of our road, out of our houses, your petitioners are

very concerned regarding the access of King’s Lane down to the Amersham-Great

Missenden road, the B485, once they are building the new auto-transformer stations and

the vent shaft, making it, as you say, turning right impossible to make these essential

journeys for shopping, cycling, walking and visiting doctors, chemists, the post office

and hospital appointments. This is one of the joys of living in the countryside. We

can’t get anywhere without actually driving anywhere, and we don’t have a very good

bus service either. Past our houses, I think it’s once or twice a day.

142. We’re pleased not to have a roundabout placed halfway along King’s Lane, which

I see the map didn’t necessarily show that, between Annie Bailey’s and Wood Lane, but

there’s obviously going to be a deal of disruption during the construction of that vent

shaft.

143. Turning left out of our houses, we’re a bit concerned as well, because entry to the

Chesham Road from the left there, we would also meet the same problems at Annie

Bailey’s, but also bigger problems turning right down to the A413, where we will meet

the first roundabout, which is no problem, but the second roundabout, the link road

roundabout, we have this new feeder road where we’re going to have so many lorries

suddenly feeding into the A413. That will disrupt us quite considerably, one would

have thought.

144. Why? Because the construction traffic that will be entering the A413 at the link

round roundabout from the new road, linking the end of the tunnel to this point, will

cause the already severely congested A413, at peak times, to be even more congested,

adding to the frustrations already experienced by us and all those drivers. At those peak

times, as I think has been mentioned already by the Wendover crowd, there is already a

traffic jam extending from the first roundabout – that’s the link road roundabout – most

weekday mornings from 6am to 9.30 or later, which is again reversed in the evening,

back again from 4.30.

145. The traffic on this road has – and this is worth noting, I think – increased

27

substantially over the past few years, due to the construction of 10,000 new houses and

dwellings in Aylesbury. May we point out that the trains from Aylesbury arriving at

Great Missenden used to be about quarter- full? Now, they are arriving three-quarters

full and there’s still a considerable number of buildings still to be built in Aylesbury,

which are going to add to the problems all along. This is going to be during the

construction of the HS2 traffic, etc., if it’s allowed to go through as it is proposed at the

moment. The situation for the next three to five years, as I say, is obviously not going to

be improved.

146. Your petitioner, yours truly, is particularly concerned about the ability of

emergency vehicles to have access to South Heath and the A413, as your petitioner,

only eight weeks ago, had to be taken as an emergency into Stoke Mandeville Hospital,

hence my being here today and not eight weeks ago, when I was supposed to have been

here. Thank you for allowing me to delay.

147. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Congratulations on being here.

148. MR RIVAS: You may have to carry me out; you don’t know.

149. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: I’m not licensed.

150. MR RIVAS: This brings me on to number 11, health, and the next one, 12. Over

the past four years, your petitioner and his wife, Gill, Mr Gordon and Mr Andernahr,

and their partners, have lost a great deal of sleep due to the anxiety, stress and worry

caused by this project. Mr Gordon apologised for not being here. He just has gone into

so much stress that he couldn’t face this room. Mr Andernahr also is under stress

because of it, and my wife has urticaria at the moment, which we don’t know the cause

of. I know she’s extremely concerned about the whole project. That’ how it is affecting

most of us down King’s Lane. I wonder if you realise what effect it’s having on this and

other folk down the lane. I think we’ve actually heard some of it this afternoon already.

151. Please understand the devastating effect this whole project is having on so many

individual citizens like ourselves, up and down the proposed line, especially in villages

like South Heath, and the effect it will have on their dwellings. We would point out the

latest proposals do marginally ameliorate the impact.

28

152. Also please ensure – I’m not sure that I hear that you’re going to do this – please

ensure that the work be restricted to daytime only. If it is allowed to continue for 24

hours, all of us will be affected, because it’s a very quiet area. Any 24-hour noise will

affect all of us and our sleep.

153. MR ANDERNAHR: Just on noise, if there’s an event going on in Great

Missenden, we can hear it as clear as crystal. It’s as though it’s happening in the next

garden. What I was worried about, these so-called sound barriers, they may protect

laterally, but the noise will be radiated in the air and it will be reflected by the hills and

trees. It is really noise. Thank you.

154. 13, please. Staying with our health, your petitioners are gravely concerned by the

very strong likelihood of this increased noise and the dust and the dirt and the other

pollutants, such as chalk dust as we live on chalk here in our Chilterns, and light

pollution during the construction of HS2. I’ll come back to that in a moment.

155. It will turn the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty into an industrial wasteland.

Material stockpile sites, major construction satellite compounds, cutting excavations,

major soil and spoilage excavation, dispersals, removals, construction traffic and the

actual high speed track building and the electrification will all lead to excessive noise,

dust and light pollution. In dry weather, stockpiles will be a source of airborne dust and

impact on the lives of the residents close to the stockpiles and your petitioners and other

residents. Please kindly ensure these stockpiles are managed throughout their existence

such that the dust does not be emitted.

156. Have you ever seen the pictures of the dust that was created in the building of

HS1? They are horrendous pictures of dust clouds going everywhere. I would refer to

them if you can find them.

157. Has adequate research been made to ensure the safety of our water supply? We in

South Heath drink water drawn from the local wells which is often our own water which

is filtered through the soil into the underground rivers from which they draw our water.

If not dealt with carefully, this will also affect our health.

158. Now I come to number 14, coming off that subject, and we come into the

blighting. My co-petitioners, Mr and Mrs Gordon, have recently had their house on the

29

market. In April 2014 they placed 32 Kings Lane on the market at the blighted price of

£665,000. Pre-blight they understood the price to be £750,000. Whilst the information

was disseminated widely, only five viewings took place between August and October of

2014. On further investigation, the potential purchasers withdrew their interest due to –

guess what – HS2.

159. In January 2015, they reduced the asking price to £625,000 and remarketing

resulted in four viewings. All but one withdrew due to HS2; the remaining interested

party submitted an offer of £600,000 which they rejected. They believe they have a

strong case under the Need to Sell criteria. I think I’ve suggested that from what I’ve

said about them today. They regard the level of settlements and compensation as being

unjust so have withdrawn from the market and will consider their situation in the future.

160. 15, please. Your petitioner, George Rivas and Gill, will be… Well, she won’t be

but Mr George Rivas will be 82 at his next birthday and is now in need of downsizing

from a six bedroom house and half an acre of garden to something smaller but finding it

impossible, due to the blighting factor, to find a buyer.

161. For example, number 16, please. We also placed the house on the market in April

of this year.

162. Number 17, please. Don’t worry about these tiny figures. Just look at the bottom.

Because these are the figures sent direct from the estate agents; they’re not my figures.

So I’m just copying that slide. Up to the week commencing 3 September 2014, we had

had 35,242 summary viewings of the estate agent’s site. That’s not a bad going, I don’t

think. 2,334 – the next figure along on the right – are people who wanted further details

of the house. And then the 2,702 were the extra details on top of that. Making a total

viewings for the sale of our house in those six months an extraordinary – I just can’t

believe this – 40,278. If they were higher figures you wouldn’t believe them, but they

are.

163. Another set of figures – number 18 please – was sent from Rightmove, which is

another website for selling houses. And there you see… If you go right to the end, I

think you can have a quick look at them if you like. Last seven days, 124 on Kings

Lane; branch average would be 85. So our house, which we’re told is a very sellable

house and a type of house that’s in big demand. And there you have over the last 14

30

days from 8 September, 218 people with 170 being the average. And then for the last 28

days to September, 434 viewings with 329 being the average. So, again, it shows we

have a very sellable house.

164. With the exception of sales to HS2 Ltd, no house along Kings Lane has sold to a

private buyer over the last four years. Three of the sales have been under the

Need to Sell scheme, one having been sold under the compulsory purchase scheme

before the tunnel extension. All now rented out by HS2. One sale was under the

compulsory purchase scheme only days before the announcement of the tunnel

extension. I don’t think I’d be happy about that somehow.

165. My wife and I well remember from our younger days, when we lived in the

western suburbs of London, visiting Great Missenden and Wendover on the Met –

Everyone knew about Metro Land in those days – for a day in the beautiful countryside

of the Chilterns, frequently walking the beautiful Misbourne Valley between

Great Missenden and Wendover along with many others. An area enjoyed by many

people visiting from London and all over the country. With the population rapidly

rising in the UK, it is our duty to preserve as much countryside as we can, especially

Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

166. Your petitioner, Howard Andermahr, sitting next to me, moved to South Heath 32

years ago to find a property in the Chilterns in order to enjoy the rural country

environment and carry on his activities in astronomy because of the air quality and dark

skies and now in his retirement. Additionally, the area was chosen by him as property

development appeared to him most unlikely. The effective destruction of this AONB by

a major infrastructure project will ruin its tranquillity, serenity, its ambience, its

aesthetics, its overall natural beauty. This will be a tragic loss, not only to your

petitioners personally, but to all current and future generations.

167. Number 20. Your petitioners urgently request that the line through the Chilterns

Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty is a bored tunnel to the Aylesbury Plain in order to

mitigate the overall impact and protect the irreplaceable, preserving it for posterity and

future generations to enjoy.

168. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: That’s number 25.

31

169. MR RIVAS: Sorry?

170. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: That’s number 25.

171. MR RIVAS: No, 20.

172. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: 20? Okay.

173. MR RIVAS: I should be on… Number 19 was there. Yes, we should be on 20.

Did I say something else?

174. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: No, you didn’t, but I thought you ought to have

done.

175. MR RIVAS: That’s very kind of you to think my thoughts for me so thank you

very much. May we now respectfully refer you to an email unsigned for the System and

Projects Control Team, Hybrid Bill Delivery Directorate dated 13 August 2015 referring

to the main changes from the Hybrid Bill Scheme? And we quote from that email

which I received: ‘First, on the long tunnel options we have kept in mind the potential

non-quantifiable effects of the project on the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural

Beauty. On the evidence heard, we are strongly of the view that the case for a long

tunnel is not made out. Without prejudicing the arguments we may hear from future

petitioners’ – and thank you for hearing further ones; that’s very kind of you – ‘we

believe it is unlikely that an overwhelming case will be made out for the long tunnel

options as we move forward into further hearings.’

176. Surely, for a quantifiable item, one has to know first the method you are to use in

such a case. For example, the method used to assess the quantity. Quantity of what?

Quantity of how much acid rain it takes to damage ecosystems? How would you

quantify the effects of a beautiful painting? How would you quantify a beautiful

sculpture? How would you quantify a scenic view in Switzerland? How would you

quantify the beauty of the Lake District? How would you quantify the Chilterns? The

quantity of something is the aspect of something that is measureable by number, weight

or such. Surely this terminology can never be applied to something like the Chilterns.

It is indeed impossible to judge or measure the Chilterns in a quantifiable way, even

potentially.

32

177. No wonder the case cannot be made out by these suggested erroneous judgements.

Surely the more appropriate term would be to ask about the aesthetics, quality or how

beautiful, how attractive, how pleasing, how lovely are the Chilterns. Is it an area very

pleasing to the senses, the mind, the spirit? Is it an area with beautiful scenery? Has it

attractive features that would be damaged? Is it impressive? Has it grandeur? Is it

arresting? Certainly at this time of year when driving along that section of the A13 just

coming into Wendover where the horrendous viaduct is going to be put – an absolutely

hideous thing – is most arresting. Or in other words: are there principles here that

underline the outstanding beauty of the countryside involved? Obviously so. Otherwise

it would not have been designated an area of Outstanding Natural Beauty in 1947,

together with 45 other AONBs around the country. Aesthetics are concerned with the

beauty and the appreciation of beauty, or does it have qualities that are pleasing to the

senses or the mind?

178. A farmer friend of mine who cultivates some of the acreage at Duns Farm, just

coming along the A413 before you get in to Wendover, bordering on to Road Barn Farm

which is the farm nearest to Wendover just before you enter it, north of the A413 where

the famous Chiltern Ridgeway National Trail dating back to the bronze age passes… I

mentioned before Great Missenden / Wendover when we used to visit it, all passes.

Also known as the Chiltern Link and National Trail. The new proposed viaduct will

traverse this area by passing right over this latter farm and destroy the view from the

Chiltern Ridgeway. This, we are assured, you are well aware of already though. My

farmer friend has described arriving to cultivate these fields as arriving in an area where

one feels no man’s footprint can be seen, apart from on the path of course, because it’s

so wonderful. Surely such an area of outstanding beauty could, and indeed should, be

avoided by providing us, hikers of the aforementioned pathways and the nation with a

tunnel through to the Aylesbury Plain.

179. Can I have number 22, please? Thank you for saving Sibley’s Coppice just

behind our houses. Thank you for saving that by putting in the tunnel that you’ve

suggested. We do really appreciate that. Thank you very much. Which was, of course,

an ancient registered woodland. Some suggested we could replant it somewhere which

is absolutely rubbish. Protected, again, by law from permanent destruction.

180. 23 and 24 just give you a view of the beauty of those woods. 23 is one. I think

33

you’ll agree it’s the most lovely view of woods to walk through. And they were going

to be destroyed by HS2. And number 24 is another view. I think you would agree that

it would have been such a shame to destroy it and I hope they’re not going to destroy

other woods of this nature.

181. 25. The Chilterns is an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. May your

petitioners respectfully… oh, sorry about the spelling mistake.

182. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: It’s not the first or the last to be seen.

183. MR RIVAS: I’m sure not. Not the last I’ll make either. The AONB is a statutory

designation: the legal framework for Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty as provided

by the Countryside Rights Act of 2000. An area to be legally presided therefore maybe

be so bold as to enquire if HS2 Ltd is above the law. Cheryl Gillan agrees with me

about that statement. Please, please ensure the whole of the Chilterns, an Area of

Outstanding Natural Beauty, is preserved for our grandchildren and posterity. Please,

please.

184. Number 26. We totally agree that we have to put in place the transport

infrastructure that our young people will need. We have no problems about that. We do

have to think of the future and the future of this country. If in Japan they have the

Maglev train travelling at more than 600 kph, 373 mph, linking Tokyo and Osaka on a

route that is 85% tunnel, if you believe that, why can’t we do just that for a few more

kilometres in the Chilterns, please?

185. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: You’ve picked up a typo. I’m not sure, when I went

from Osaka to Tokyo, I went on a Maglev; I thought it went on a high speed wheel on

rail train.

186. MR RIVAS: I’ve never done it so I take your –

187. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: It may come in the future but I don’t think it’s there

at the moment.

188. MR RIVAS: It may be in the future then, yes. Thank you very much indeed.

And then 27… Oh, no.

34

189. CHAIR: We need more time and more patience, do we?

190. MR RIVAS: It’s just has proper thought been given to local businesses –

191. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: How many more pages are there?

192. MR RIVAS: That is it: we’re at the end.

193. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Thank you.

194. MR RIVAS: So thank you very much for your time and patience. Your

petitioners standing here or sitting here humbly pray this Honourable House that the Bill

may be not be allowed to pass into law as it now stands and that they may be heard by

their counsel, agents or witnesses in support of the allegations of this petition against so

much of the Bill as affects the property, rights and interests of your petitioners and in

support of such clauses as provisions as may be necessary or expedient for their

protection, or that other such relief may be given to your petitioners in the premises as

your honourable House shall deem meet. Thank you very indeed, sir.

195. CHAIR: Thank you very much, Mr Rivas. Mr Mould.

196. MR MOULD QC (DfT): We’re going to put up P10155(1). Whilst that’s going

up, I’m going to say that the promoter is not above the law but neither the law nor

national planning policy rules out major infrastructure development in an Area of

Outstanding Natural Beauty. It requires a careful balance to be struck between the need

for such development, its impact on such an area and the opportunities that exist for

avoiding or mitigating any such impact. And that was the framework against which we

debated the case for a long tunnel in July.

197. Turning from the general to the specific, what I have here is the noise contour map

showing the LOAEL zone for the area of South Heath with the extended tunnel scheme

in play. And if we can just zoom in please and try and focus on… If we can just get to

here where we have Kings Lane. And take it from me: this assessment point is 376, 750

on Kings Lane. You can see that the LOAEL contour extending northwards of the

tunnel portal is well away from properties within Kings Lane.

198. If we then turn to P10157(4), we can see the numbers. And if we can just find

35

376, 750 – which I’m putting on the cursor now – you can see that the proposed scheme

is only less than 30 dB during the day and less than 25 at night. A maximum of between

53 and 56, depending on the type of train; so significantly below the LOAEL threshold

for LAMax. And the combination of existing and proposed noise leads to no change.

199. So we are predicting, as you might expect, that with the extension of the tunnel

past South Heath that this and other properties in the vicinity of Kings Lane will

experience now significant noise impact from the railway.

200. Turning to the question of traffic, P814(2). Can we just show you the relevant

parts of the road network? Here is the A413. Here is the Chesham Road, the B485 and

the vent shaft work site just adjacent to Annie Bailey’s. Here is South Heath. No traffic

now proposed to go through South Heath. If we can just look at the numbers.

Essentially what you have here is on the A413 north-south… Sorry, A413 south of the

junction with Chesham Road. Without the scheme you have about 18,300 vehicles

two-way during a daily weekday flow. North of the junction with the Chesham Road

without the scheme you have about 17,000 vehicles two-way daily weekday. And on

the Chesham Road itself without the scheme you have some 9,500 odd vehicles

two-way without the scheme. In each case we’re adding around 400 to 600 vehicles

during a daily weekday to those flows. So you’ll see that although the HS2 traffic will

not be negligible, because a daily weekday flow of between 400 and 600 vehicles is not

negligible, it is a very small component of the overall flow that will result from the

addition of the HS2 traffic.

201. And that’s the message which I would ask petitioners to take from the traffic

impact assessment that we have now under AP4. It is that in this area the contribution

of HS2 under the AP4 extended tunnel scheme, in terms of numbers of vehicles, will be

pretty small compared to the then existing flows. And it will require management

because there are difficulties with the capacity of those roads during the peak hours to

accommodate traffic, which this petitioner and others have mentioned. That is the

principal challenge for traffic management, and the way in which that will need to be

managed will be careful management of the timing during the day of HS2 traffic

deliveries and so forth. And that is something which, as you know, is a key component

of the work that we will be doing ourselves and in collaboration with the local highway

authority to ensure that, as far as possible, HS2 traffic is able to flow freely just as

36

existing traffic on the road is able to flow freely.

202. So that’s that. In relation to water, P758(3). You’ve seen this letter before: a

letter of 22 June from the water company, Affinity Water. I’ll just draw your attention

to the heading ‘Water Supply’: ‘We’ve identified solutions to ensure our supplies

remain unaffected by HS2 and are currently reviewing these in more detail. For

example we believe that additional treatment of our sources and a possible additional

import of water from one of our neighbouring water companies will be necessary for the

duration of the construction works.’

203. If we just go down to the next page, the second and final page of the letter: ‘We

have made it clear we expect these provisions to be implemented in such a way as to

prevent spillage and pollution rather than just to provide a procedure for remediation

after an event. We will be monitoring construction activities very closely to ensure best

practice is applied to minimise the risk of pollution.’ In other words this is very much a

work in progress between ourselves and that statutory company. And the protected

provisions under Schedule 31 of the Act, as the name implies, are there to protect the

interests of these key statutory undertakers who provide such essential services to the

local community as water, flood protection and so forth.

204. Finally, in relation to the impact on property values. I think I’m right in saying

that the values that you were shown were largely historic in the sense that they came

before the announcement of the decision to promote an extension to the Chiltern Tunnel

to the north of South Heath. The promoter would certainly hope and reasonably expect

that the market in the area of South Heath would now be responding and respond

quickly to that announcement precisely in the light of the now public assessment of the

benign effect of the AP4 scheme in terms of noise effects, the impact on traffic and

other matters. And whilst the market obviously doesn’t respond directly and precisely

to changes of this kind, experience with previous schemes has suggested that, provided

that once these changes become better known in the market, the market should react

positively and quickly and any impact on property prices should fast diminish. In the

meantime, the Secretary of State’s policies including Need to Sell remain in place and

so these and other petitioners are of course able to make application under those policies

if they wish to do so.

37

205. CHAIR: Okay, thank you. Brief final comments, Mr Rivas?

206. MR RIVAS: Yes, thank you for your comments. I don’t actually agree with them

all and I think we’d need another two hours if I actually debated them with you. So I

don’t actually agree with a lot of what you just said. But certainly the decibel readings

you’ve given are high. 25 decibels when we have no sound at all is very high indeed. I

run a children’s holiday week for 1,000 children and we’re not allowed to go over 80

decibels on the site. And so if we bring that down to 60 and bring it down to 25, it’s still

quite a noisy… 25 decibels is quite a high noise. And I know it’s quite a high noise and

I’m not going to sit here and accept you telling me I’ve got to put up with 25 decibels

because I know 25 decibels is quite loud, especially at night.

207. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Mr Rivas, if I was offered the opportunity to live in an

environment where I was only exposed to 25 decibels, I would pay very handsomely for

that privilege I can assure you. That amounts essentially to silence.

208. MR RIVAS: Well, that doubles the price of my house then.

209. CHAIR: Thank you very much.

210. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Having seen the letter from Affinity Water, I want

to go on the record that a long time ago I was the honorary president of the Water

Companies Association in succession to Bill Elliot, Lord Elliot. It’s not relevant but it’s

just in case somebody says ‘he knows about water’. I didn’t: I was just an honorary

president.

211. CHAIR: If you’re around in politics long enough you’ll end up with an

association to something.

Sowdown Ltd, trading as Tobermory Consulting

212. CHAIR: Okay, right. We now move to 565, Sowdown Ltd, trading as Tobermory

Consulting, in person. Are you Mr Derek Jones?

213. MR JONES: I am Derek Jones, yes.

214. CHAIR: Okay. Welcome. Mr Mould, can you give a brief introduction to this

petitioner?

38

215. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Yes, this is P10084. It’s actually just beyond Kings

Lane. Broadly speaking the same location. This is Lappetts Lane, isn’t it?

216. MR JONES: Yes.

217. MR MOULD QC (DfT): And you can see here we were talking about Kings Lane

just a moment ago; we’ve now moved round the corner to Lappetts Lane.

218. CHAIR: Okay, thank you. Mr Jones.

219. MR JONES: I’m ready for the first slide, if you would. Thank you. Okay, so my

name is Derek Jones and I’m an engineer. I run an engineering company in South

Heath.

220. If we can move to the next slide please. Thank you. So I live at 37 Lappetts Lane,

which is where the red dot is and where we’ve previously seen. Approximately

400 metres or so from the beginning of the cutting for the tunnel exit for AP4.

221. I’m a mechanical engineer. I’m chartered with the Engineering Council. I have

some working knowledge of sound and how it affects me and how decibel readings

should be taken.

222. If we can move to the next slide, please. Thank you. So I both live and work in

Lappetts Lane in South Heath. And we chose Lappetts Lane from quite a wide and

extensive house search when we were ready to move because of our expanding family.

But we chose Lappetts Lane for its quiet and tranquil setting. In fact, we sat in the

garden at Lappetts Lane and listened to no sound at all in the afternoon, and decided that

it would be, one, a lovely place to live but, two, a good place to continue running my

business because I need to concentrate on technically demanding projects.

223. The other nice thing about Lappetts Lane is that we do have good transport links.

If you do avoid the main rush in the morning and in the evening, then you can get out of

Lappetts Lane and get wherever you need to without too much traffic congestion.

Which means I can get to see customers and suppliers and I can receive deliveries,

which is one of key parts of my business.

224. Can I have the next slide, please? Thank you. So what do we do? We carry out

39

engineering design and engineering simulation and prototyping. So design. We design

for small and medium enterprises but we also design for big business as well. Our main

industry focus is on nuclear, medical and defence. So we have on our customer list big

businesses and organisations such as AWE, GE Healthcare and various other large

establishments. And we undertake quite serious pieces of work for them requiring a lot

of concentration, a lot of detail and a lot of quiet and focus required.

225. Engineering simulation we run in conjunction with the design side because we

need to make sure that from a stress point of view things don’t break, and we also run

fluid dynamics simulation and we look at airborne particle studies for nuclear particles

contamination.

226. Rapid prototyping is a big part of the business. We’re not just designing a

solution and giving it to a customer: we actually like to build it and test it before we pass

it to our customers. So there’s quite a lot of rapid prototyping going on with our work.

And in order to turn those round in fairly short time scales, we need big deliveries to be

made on a timely fashion. And they’re usually within a few days. So we’d be turning

round a small assembly of components within 5 to 10 days, having tested it, refined it

and rebuilt it. So that’s quite an important part of our business.

227. Can we have the next slide please? So our main concerns regarding HS2 and the

impact on business are noise and delays, both in the construction phase and also in the

operations phase.

228. Can I have the next slide please? I just thought I’d put down a few notes on my

limited understanding of noise and its interpretation. So in general the noise in our area

is very low. So on a decibel A scale, which is a weighted scale, we’re looking at values

between 30 and 40 generally during the day, for the majority of the day. But every

increase in 3 decibels from your background figure doubles the sound pressure. And

then every 10 decibel increase doubles perceived noise.

229. Moving on to HS2’s noise estimates. I have a question for HS2. All the noise

values that I’ve seen on noise maps and stated in tables have the units ‘decibels’ and not

‘decibel A’ which is the weighted measure. I have been told by various people that

those values are in decibel A but the stated unit is actually decibels. As an engineer, I’d

get hung, drawn and quartered for putting the wrong units on one of my reports. So I’d

40

like to have that clarified if that’s possible.

230. MR MOULD QC (DfT): They are decibel A.

231. MR JONES: Good, okay. Thank you. Next slide please. I’ve put down some

figures just so we get a brief understanding of those numbers that have been bounced

about.

232. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Are we talking about figures at Lappetts Lane?

233. MR JONES: We are talking about figures at Lappetts Lane, yeah. And also

Kings Lane because you’ll see from the previous slide of our house position we are

Kings Lane side of Lappetts Lane.

234. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: And this is where we come to 10157(3). The

figures show ‘0’ and ‘0’ and ‘0’ and ‘0’ for Kings Lane and Lappetts Lane.

235. MR JONES: Sorry, I don’t –

236. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Just to help you get through what you want to say

relatively briefly. About 7 or 8 down, I see Kings Lane and I see Lappetts Lane.

237. MR JONES: Yes.

238. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: And Mr Mould would normally bring this in but I

think if you’re aware that we will see this when you’ve finished.

239. MR JONES: Yes, that’s right.

240. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: I think you don’t need to spend too much time on

this –

241. MR JONES: No. In fact, I don’t want to. I just want the figures to be there so we

are aware of the values being stated. As a matter of fact, to me the values are

meaningless, because what is important is whether or not the noise is disruptive.

242. Can I have the last slide, please? Obviously, the noise levels are subject to a band

of error. As an engineer, I would be stating worst possible cases and so the minima and

maxima of the entire range of expected noise, day time and night time.

41

243. Can I have the next slide, please? During the working day I am in my office,

which is at the back of my house. It backs on to my garden, which is very nice. I am

lucky that that is the case. The frequency of noise incursions will be in the order of

every two minutes, so there will be a train to London and a train going away from

London to Birmingham every two minutes. That frequency will increase, reducing the

period between trains to approximately one every 100 seconds. There is nothing we can

do about that. Every two minutes, day and night, we will have an incursion.

244. Can I have the next slide, please? To recap on why we are there in our business, it

is a calm and relaxing atmosphere at the moment. It is very quiet, especially during the

day when everybody has gone to work and children are at school. You can sit in the

garden and contemplate difficult problems to solve. I quite often sit in the garden with a

cup of tea trying to work through some challenging problems. The quiet, still

atmosphere promotes concentration so I can properly focus on the problems I have been

given and how to solve them.

245. Ten years ago when we moved house we chose Lappetts Lane over the Welsh

borders. The Welsh borders were our preferred area to move to, but, after sitting in the

garden of 37 Lappetts Lane before we bought the house, we decided that that was the

place for us. The fact it was in an AONB was great because it gave us the feeling of

security that it would not change and would not affect the way I ran my business. To

live there we paid over the top for our house. We were lucky we could do that, but that

was the choice we made.

246. Sound travels further in the Chilterns for some reason. I know that other

petitioners have discussed this. They have mentioned the layering of the air, the

inversion of temperatures and other things. On some days at quiet times you can clearly

hear the sound of the A413. You can also hear the trains going along the existing

Chiltern line, which is more than two miles away and approximately 140 metres lower

than our position. Therefore, the sound has to go up and then drop down again so we can

hear it. It also happens at night. If there is a concert, party or something going on at the

Black Horse pub at Mobwell, quite often we can sit in the garden and quite happily

enjoy the music. It is very loud. You would think it was in the house next door, but it is

not.

42

247. Can I have the next slide, please? What does this noise mean for us? It will be a

sudden noise, in the order of 50 to 70 decibels, every two minutes. That is the max, but

that is similar to someone having to listen to my voice while I am sitting here. Every

two minutes will be the same as someone sitting next to me talking. That will be

disruptive. I know that average noise levels are stated quite consistently, but I am

interested only in the peak noise because it is that noise which will be disturbing my

concentration at work. It is also that peak noise which will wake me up at night. That

noise will have a detrimental effect on my ability to work and perform the functions that

I currently carry out. Therefore, I will be unable to concentrate or focus properly and

that will reduce the quality of the solutions I provide to my customers. It will increase

mistakes and errors in my designs, which means that when they build one of my designs

they will find things that are wrong. As an engineer, I know there are always things that

are wrong, but there will probably be more of them. That will be damaging to our

business reputation, which will mean I may not get a job or piece of work, and in turn

that will be damaging to our financial situation and so our lives.

248. Can I have the next slide, please? I reiterate that it is the maximum noise, not the

definitive noise value, that I am worried about. I am worried about the disturbance that

will create, in the same way that someone sitting next to me will try to have a

conversation with me. On occasions my children try to disturb me when I am working in

the office. I know how hard it is to concentrate when they keep asking me questions. I

do not want to answer them because I am concentrating on what I am doing. I get cross

with them and shout at them.

249. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: How loudly?

250. MR JONES: Probably 70 decibels.

251. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: I bet it is higher than that.

252. MR JONES: How loud am I?

253. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: That is about 80.

254. MR JONES: It is quite loud. I am concerned that I do not get disturbed. I do not

want to lose concentration and my ability to perform in running my business as I

43

currently do.

255. Can I have the next slide, please? This shows you quickly the circle of destruction

from increased stress and my inability to work.

256. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Do not go through that in detail, please.

257. MR JONES: I am not going to.

258. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: We have had a year and a half of this.

259. MR JONES: I am sure you have. A point I would like you to note is the SOAEL:

the significant observed adverse effect. I know HS2 quotes a value for this, but the

NPPF and planning guidance says it is not possible to have a single objective noise base

value. If you can show that quality of life is diminished due to the change in the acoustic

character of the area, that is a significant observed adverse effect. I believe that will be

the case for where we are at South Heath.

260. Can I have the next slide, please? My other concern is delay. I must admit I am

not quite as concerned about delay as I am about noise, although it will have a

detrimental effect on the business. I understand that this will be more transient than the

operation of the line, but obviously for a significant period of time. At the moment our

main route out of South Heath is down the B485 to the roundabout near where the link

road is located. At peak times this road is congested and backs up a long way along

Frith Hill. If I need to get out to see a customer around these times, I am concerned that

it will take me a lot longer to get to them. If I am working on site, which I do quite

often, because some of my work is restricted, I need to get to my customer’s site to

perform my work. I am paid by the hour, so every hour I lose in traffic is an hour’s lost

income. Therefore, additional HS2 traffic along these roads may make them impassable

at peak times; it may make them slow moving at others, but it will have an effect on my

ability to get to work, see my customers and earn money.

261. Can I have the next slide, please? What do the delays mean to our business? If we

have a customer coming to see us it is annoying to the customer. They do not want to sit

in traffic for periods of time. They may get so annoyed that they end up not giving us

business in future because they can never get to us, and we will have HS2 construction

44

traffic for a considerable period of time.

262. I do not want to have late or missed deliveries for parts I am ordering to build

prototypes and test them, because that will increase the time it takes for us to deliver a

completed solution to our customers. That will end up damaging our reputation. Our

customers are used to us performing in a particular way, and if we start delaying and

taking longer to finish these pieces of work that will affect their business. In a sense, lost

time from getting to and from our customers and suppliers does cost us money.

263. Can I have the next slide, please? I would like to touch on blight and house prices

in Lappetts Lane and South Heath. Over the past four years 18 properties have been

sold, of which seven have been extensively modified. For the 11 unmodified houses,

current indications are that there is a 13% to 22% decrease in value. These are the

projected current market prices given to us by local estate agents. The market is also

dysfunctional. Of the nine properties up for sale recently, in respect of seven buyers

pulled out due to the proximity to HS2.

264. I will pop in this slide. This is a definition taken from the Government’s

recognition of our AONB. It is just there to remind me why we moved to where we are

and why we enjoy it.

265. The next slide, please. This is what we are asking for. We thank the Committee for

AP4: the tunnel extension. It does have an effect on us, but it is quite marginal. We do

not believe that it will change the blight, and we see that at the moment with the houses

for sale around us. We are still impacted by noise. It has had a marginal effect on noise,

but it certainly has not had a big effect. Our lives will be affected because I will not be

able to concentrate as much; work will be affected due to that loss of concentration, and

our home and my place of work is blighted.

266. Can I have the next slide, please? We ask that you extend the tunnel to the edge of

the AONB. This will effectively save the AONB for future generations. We moved there

because we really loved it; it is really quiet, and we want other people to enjoy it as

well. You will leave the AONB as a peaceful and tranquil place in which to live and

work and enjoy, as well as all the people who visit during the weekends and evenings. It

is the only solution that properly addresses all our concerns. If you cannot see your way

to extending the tunnel to the edge of the AONB, we ask that the tunnel be extended to

45

Leather Lane because that will have a much bigger effect on South Heath, Lappetts

Lane and the surrounding properties.

267. Can I have the next slide, please? We ask that throughout the route there is a fully

independent body to monitor noise levels and the environment during the construction

and operational phases of HS2. But, most importantly, we ask that the body be

independently funded and has enforcement powers, including the power to ensure

rectification measures are put in place in the event that HS2’s noise estimates or the

environment as a whole are found not to be correct or unacceptable.

268. The next slide, please. We ask that a business fund be available to businesses that

can no longer operate in the Chiltern AONB, or anywhere along the proposed line

because of HS2. We ask that the cost of moving businesses be covered, and that any

increase in business running costs are covered, and that it is made available for the years

of construction and for a time after HS2 becomes operational. As to business

compensation, we ask that delays and loss of business caused by HS2 be chargeable to

HS2 Ltd.

269. Can I have the next slide, please? We ask that some small changes be made to the

need to sell scheme to make it less complicated and faster to administer, and that it be

extended beyond the first year of operation. In particular, at the moment we and many

other young families in Lappetts Lane are trapped in our houses. We do not want to

move our children away from the schools; they are settled in their schools. Until they

finish their schooling we do not feel we are able to move, and we do not want to have

the feeling of being trapped because of HS2.

270. In essence, everything I have spoken about boils down to two things: we would

like to be able to continue to live and run our business as we do currently and be

unaffected by HS2; and we would like to have no financial burden imposed on us by

HS2.

271. Can I have the last slide, please? This is a quote from Ansel Adams, who was an

environmental photographer. I think it is very poignant for HS2 and the Chilterns

AONB.

272. CHAIR: Mr Mould, we have heard quite a lot in this area already.

46

273. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Yes. I will not say any more about traffic because that is

very much the response I gave to Mr Rivas. I just pinpoint the predicted noise effects on

Lappetts Lane. In P10155(1) the most useful prediction location is 377084, which is just

here. That dot is on Lappetts Lane. If we turn to P10157(4), we pick up location point

377084 here. You can see for the proposed scheme only that those are the day and night

time predictions for ambient noise. The Lmax prediction is 51 to 53, depending on the

train. If you compare that with the predicted Lmax environment without the railway,

you see that the corresponding figure is 47. That gives you an idea of the degree of

change on the Lmax index between the baseline predicted and the effect of the trains

themselves.

274. I just remind the Committee – it is not a matter for debate now – that the LOAEL

threshold for Lmax is 60 dB at night time. The reason for that is that the World Health

Organisation guidelines for community noise identified a 60 dB Lmax outside threshold

as the value for sleep disturbance with windows open; in other words, the evidence base,

on which the WHO guidelines are based, suggests that, if noise assessed on the Lmax

index is at or below 60 dB outside, no observed adverse effects are likely. As you can

see, if you translate that to this particular prediction location, we are well within that

threshold. It is 51 to 53 as against 60, so the expectation is that, if that prediction proves

to be realised through the design, as is our intention, there should be little prospect of

observed adverse effects either to residents or local businesses.

275. To respond on the question of compliance, I want to make it clear again – this is

set out in information paper E20 – that this railway depends upon a series of specified

design objectives for the operational performance in terms of noise. Those are

commitments which will be enforceable through the contractual arrangements under

which the railway is delivered. They will be enforceable at the behest of the Secretary of

State, on whose behalf I gave an undertaking way back on the first day of the

proceedings of this Committee. As I think you have observed from time to time, if

people are concerned that the railway is not performing in accordance with the stated

design objectives, one way in which people can take practical measures to have that

matter dealt with is by getting in touch with their MPs, or alternatively their local

authorities will raise the matter with the Secretary of State. He will then take such steps

as he considers necessary to investigate it and, if necessary, secure compliance.

47

276. Finally, the recently published information paper F4 sets out the framework for

the operational monitoring of the performance of the railway on which we have been in

discussion with Chiltern District Council, from whom the Committee is hearing on

Wednesday.

277. CHAIR: Do you have any final comments, Mr Jones?

278. MR JONES: Only that measurement position 3765750 in King’s Lane, South

Heath, may be more appropriate for our house. Our back garden faces towards King’s

Lane, and in the position previously mentioned that will be sheltered by our house in

terms of noise.

279. CHAIR: We move on now to petition 1502: Margaret Scott Hannah and Amelia

Boyd. Not present. I call petition 1517: Sophie and Timothy Wye from Hyde Heath. Not

present. I call petition 1220: Lindsay Macdonald from Little Kingshill. Not here. I call

petition 1217: Little Kingshill Village Hall Management Committee. Not present. I call

petition 55: Anthony Harper.

Anthony Harper

280. MR MOULD QC (DfT): I have put up a map showing the location of Mr Harper’s

property in South Heath. You can see the railway line in an extended Chilterns tunnel

and his property being pointed out with the cursor now.

281. CHAIR: Welcome, Mr Harper. You know roughly the format. Perhaps you would

like to take us through your slides.

282. MR HARPER: I am a long-standing resident of the village of South Heath. As you

will be aware, the non-technical summary within the environment statement singled out

South Heath as a community in Buckinghamshire to suffer community-wide adverse

effects, whereby a substantial number of local residents are significantly affected by the

construction of the project.

283. I would like to start by thanking you for the opportunity to present my petition

today. In my written submission I covered a significant number of adverse effects HS2

will have on the lives of my wife and me. Subsequent to the submission of that petition,

the adoption of the C6 tunnel proposal, with the short extension of the fully bored tunnel

48

to Bury Farm, has reduced some of the adverse effects, for which I would sincerely like

to thank the Committee. It has made a difference, but it has by no means eliminated our

issues.

284. I have no doubt that the promoters of HS2 may argue that this or that impact

individually is not so bad or can be mitigated, but what I want to get across to you today

is the overall cumulative effect of all those issues, large and small.

285. Next slide, please. Mr Mould has effectively done this before me. You can see my

home and the portal. We are approximately 1,000 metres apart.

286. Next slide, please. This is the house where we have lived for over 25 years and

where we have raised our family. We originally moved to South Heath because of its

tranquil nature and the environment in which it sits, which we felt was a good, safe

place to raise our children with a semi-rural aspect and access to the countryside and

nature. Basically, it is a nice, quiet, safe place in which to live. In doing that, we

accepted that there was a trade-off. We do not have easy access to the facilities common

in a more urban environment; there is little or no public transport; we have to go on a

long walk or drive to get to shops, the library, doctors and so on. There is no mains gas

in the village, and to this day the mobile phone signal is poor and often non-existent.

But we felt the trade-off was worthwhile as we highly value the peace and quiet and

lack of light pollution, the absence of noise and the amenity of having the area of

outstanding natural beauty to walk in and enjoy.

287. Next slide, please. To try to give you a little more context about my concerns, I

have marked on this map some of the relevant features. My home is in the top right-

hand corner. The rather erratic red squiggly line, which I am afraid I had to draw by

hand, shows basically the route that my wife and I take respectively to our places of

work. My journey is through the village of South Heath, down Frith Hill, on to the B485

and down to the A413. Then I turn right and get to the link road roundabout and turn left

and go through Great Missenden towards High Wycombe. My wife turns left at the

roundabout and goes down to Chiltern Hospital, slightly further down the A413, where

she works.

288. You will see where Great Missenden and all the local facilities are. I have also

noted on this slide the direction of Stoke Mandeville, which is our nearest A and E

49

facility, and, on the left-hand side, the routes that we have to take to go to my father-in-

law. He is in his eighties, is recently widowed and suffers increasingly from dementia.

That means my wife in particular needs frequently to visit him and be able to get to him

quickly in case of emergency. Effectively, all of those journeys require the use of the

B485 and A413.

289. Next slide, please. I come to my specific concerns. My wife and I are already, and

will be on an ongoing basis, affected by a whole variety of issues. I could go through

each of these impacts at length, but, respecting the Committee’s request for individual

petitioners such as myself to be concise, I shall be brief. I trust the Committee will not

interpret this brevity as any lack of passion or importance. This is hugely significant to

us.

290. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: We will not, and we are grateful.

291. MR HARPER: Rather than focus on individual things, I have tried to map it all

out in this table. I will give a quick overview of how some of these have affected our

lives, but you can see there is a current impact which is largely to do with property

blight. The worst impacts are during the construction phase, and there is a series of

issues once the railway is operational.

292. The next slide, please. Starting with the construction phase and the adverse

impacts we think there will be on our day-to-day life, there is a longer commute time. I

commute every day down Frith Hill, then go briefly on to the A413 and then through

Great Missenden. My wife also uses the same two roads. The huge number of

construction vehicles you have heard about from numerous petitioners will inevitably

cause additional congestion. I noted that in response to a previous petitioner Mr Mould

said there were about 400 to 600 HGVs per day.

293. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Vehicles.

294. MR HARPER: I apologise. That is in the context of something like 9,000 or

12,000, is it?

295. MR MOULD QC (DfT): On the main road, it is about 9,000.

296. MR HARPER: It sounds a relatively small percentage, but if a road is operating at,

50

say, 30% capacity it has lots of capacity to absorb it; if the road is operating near

capacity that little bit can be the straw that breaks the camel’s back. My experience is

that on those roads in peak times it is not a rush hour; it is more like a two-and-a-

half-hour rush. It is already pretty much operating at capacity. I fear those additional

vehicles will be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.

297. I do not have the expertise to quantify that impact, but, to give you a flavour, if

congestion were to add just five minutes each way to my commute it would result in my

losing 42 hours every year of construction. The value of that time, unlike the time saved

for HS2 passengers, I do not believe has been factored into the business case.

298. There will also be noise and light pollution. Noise from construction and

construction traffic, light from construction compounds and our access to local facilities

will also be impacted. The nearest shops, pharmacy, library, restaurants, pubs, train

station, newsagent, post office are all located in Great Missenden. During the lengthy

construction phase in particular access to this local centre will be made more difficult by

car and on foot.

299. There is also the softer side of things: the loss of amenity and enjoyment of the

areas of outstanding natural beauty. My wife and I love walking in the beautiful

countryside of the AONB. Footpaths will be closed and the environment polluted by

noise.

300. The next slide, please. These are two pictures I took of the road leading to the link

road roundabout on the A413 at about 4.30 in the week before the clocks went back,

which is why there is still some light. As you can see, there is quite an extensive queue

up to the roundabout leading from Great Missenden to the A413. That is just an

example.

301. The next slide, please. I have grouped on this slide what I perceive to be risks to

health, personal safety and property during the construction phase. There will be slower

emergency response times. Being a small village, we already suffer slower response

times than larger conurbations.

302. As I said, my wife works at Chiltern Hospital. She has been told in the past by

paramedics that, if one had to give somebody CPR, one could expect to be doing it for

51

20 minutes before an ambulance arrived. The significant extra traffic and potential for

congestion will inevitably increase those response times. By the time construction starts

I will be well over 60 and at greater risk of conditions such as stroke and heart attack

where every minute is vital. My wife is not far behind me on the age scale.

303. There will be increased risk of road traffic accidents. It is a simple consequence:

more traffic on the roads and more congestion. There will be an increased risk. This is

what I am not sure about. It is a fear rather than a certainty. The influx of a significant

number of temporary construction workers into a relatively crime-free area must pose a

risk, and it will certainly increase the fear of crime and consequential stress levels.

304. Next slide, please. Moving on to the post-construction world, there will be

continuing impacts. The two most obvious ones are noise and damage to the AONB. I

have just been listening to a couple of petitioners who have made the same sort of

points. Trains will be travelling at over 200 mph on exiting and entering the green

tunnel approximately 1 kilometre away. The noise level each time may not be

tremendously high. I simply do not know. I do not understand what LOAELs, SOAELs

and all that stuff is about, but I am certain that I will be able to hear it and, at a

frequency of about one every two minutes, it will be a continuing pulsing irritant which

will detract from our enjoyment of the garden and its surroundings.

305. Then we have damage to the AONB. Parliament saw fit to recognise the special

environmental value of the area by assigning it the designation of AONB. The HS2

project as proposed will cause irreparable damage. This will reduce our quality of life

and enjoyment of the area in which we live. It will also diminish the value of a national

asset intended to be protected in perpetuity for future generations.

306. I fully support the analysis presented in support of the Chiltern long tunnel that

most recent government guidelines for valuing non-market effects should be applied to

balance the additional costs of a longer tunnel.

307. Next slide, please. We then come to reductions in property values. I fear that HS2

will permanently change the nature of the village of South Heath and make it a less

attractive destination for prospective house purchasers. I doubt very much that you get

much of a chance to watch television programmes like ‘Location, Location’, but if you

do you will see that most property searches start with the selection of target areas, such

52

as a town or village. People decide roughly where they want to live. The presence of the

HS2 portal so close to South Heath will inevitably mean that the village will not be

selected by as many prospective buyers as a place to consider, regardless of the merits

of individual properties. It simply will not be on the shopping list in the first place.

Simple economics tells us that if there is less demand it will adversely affect the market

value of our home, which is our major asset. The impact is already there. It will be more

marked during construction, but we believe it will continue at a lesser level permanently

thereafter. While we have no specific plans to move, we are conscious that the time will

come when we need to downsize and move closer to facilities and amenities. When this

happens we will suffer financial loss compared with where we would have been without

the HS2 project. As far as I can see, the impact on the capital value of properties like

ours is not factored into the HS2 business case. I would respectfully ask that when

looking at the cost of mitigation the Committee takes that into consideration.

308. Next slide, please. There are consequences for all these impacts. I think the easiest

way of summarising it is that there will be an impact in three different dimensions. One

is the reduction in our quality of life. I think I have covered that. That is to do with time

and the environment. There will also be an adverse impact on our health and wellbeing.

Both my wife and I are already showing signs of stress and anxiety. I cannot claim that

HS2 is the only source of stress in our lives, but it is certainly a factor. I have recently

been diagnosed with a gastric condition, which is exacerbated by stress. My wife is

having counselling under the NHS for anxiety. HS2 is like a black cloud hanging over

us. Finally, we believe there is and will be a loss in the value of our home which will

crystallise at the point we choose to sell it, whenever that may be.

309. Next slide, please. I would like to remind the Committee of something the

Prime Minister said shortly after coming into office in 2010. He said: ‘Today the

Government are asking the Office for National Statistics to devise a new way of

measuring wellbeing in Britain, and so from April of next year we will start measuring

our progress as a country, not just by how our economy is growing but by how our lives

are improving; not just by our standard of living but by our quality of life.’ He went on

to say: ‘Your happiness, contentedness and wellbeing partly depend on your

surroundings.’ If we take the Prime Minister at his word – I would hope we can – our

quality of life has value, and the impact on that quality of life should be weighed in the

53

balance alongside more easily quantifiable economic calculations.

310. I have tried to get across in this petition that it is the cumulative corrosive impact

of the myriad ways this project is and will impact us that is the issue; it is not just traffic,

noise, property blight or access to amenities. It is all of the above and more. We cannot

get away from it, and it is set to dominate our lives for years to come. I hope you will

agree that HS2’s impact on my wife and me in our surroundings and quality of life will

adversely impact our wellbeing and that should have weight in any calculation of the

cost and benefit of mitigation.

311. Next slide, please. You will not be surprised that tunnelling is the requested

remedy. As I said earlier, the decision to adopt the short extension of the tunnel to Bury

Farm is less bad than the original plan, but it is still bad for South Heath. A tunnel right

through the AONB would be the best solution, but even an extension as proposed by

REPA to Leather Lane would mitigate many of the worst impacts of our situation.

312. I recognise that I come from a prejudiced position, but I feel that the business case

is weighted towards HS2 by including all the possible upsides but excluding some of the

downsides: the disruption to local communities; the loss of the value of the AONB;

longer commute times; reduction in property values; and the impact on the wellbeing of

people up and down the route.

313. I recognise that the incremental cost of a tunnel throughout the AONB is large. I

would argue that the benefit is larger, but the incremental cost of extending the tunnel to

Leather Lane is, in the scheme of things, relatively small. I hope that the Committee will

see fit to recommend some further extension to a fully bored tunnel.

314. I promised that I would try to be concise. Thank you very much for your kind

attention.

315. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Mr Harper’s request is for a further extension to the

tunnel, ideally so it extends throughout the AONB. Mr Harper owns and lives on

Marriotts Avenue in South Heath. Mr Harper will receive no significant further benefit

in terms of noise effect, impact on traffic or any other of the environmental impacts he

mentions from extending the tunnel further, whether to Leather Lane or throughout the

Chilterns as a whole, because the noise we are predicting on his property shows no

54

significant effect. Traffic on Frith Hill will now be unaffected by the railway because

there is a proposal to provide a link road to take construction traffic to the northern

portal; and in the event of a more extended tunnel, or a tunnel going all the way through

the AONB to come out beyond the boundary at Wendover, there would still be traffic on

the A413 because we would still need to construct vent shafts, an intervention gap and

there will also be traffic associated with the railway going on that road. Therefore,

through the Committee’s intervention in July, Mr Harper has the remedy he seeks.

316. CHAIR: Do you have any brief final comments?

317. MR HARPER: I disagree with that on several fronts. If the tunnel went further, the

traffic would be further away and would not be coming into the link road at Great

Missenden, which is the main problem for us because that is what cuts us off from our

amenities in Great Missenden. That is what affects our commute. I cannot agree with

Mr Mould that there would be no benefit to traffic in moving the tunnel portal further

away from us. Once the thing is built, by HS2’s definition we are not affected by noise

but we will be able to hear it. If you move the tunnel further away, we will hear it less.

On blight, if the portal is further away that effect will be lessened, so I cannot agree with

Mr Mould that there will be no benefit to us in moving it.

318. CHAIR: We have already moved the tunnel and people keep telling us that it has

not had any impact on the blight.

319. MR HARPER: When people are looking to buy a house they do not look at the

house first; they look at the area. Although you have moved the tunnel, which will

benefit us, look at the map, HS2 and the portal is still extremely close to South Heath, so

people will screen out South Heath.

320. CHAIR: Thank you very much for your presentation. We now to go petition 560:

Peter Martin. After that we will hear from David and Mary Stewart, Anthony Bobroff

and Denise Bolland, who will be last.

Peter Martin

321. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Mr Martin lives in Great Missenden, and you can see the

location of his property shown on the plan in front of you. The line is shown with the

55

usual green notation. I think his property is in Grimms Hill, Great Missenden.

322. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Roughly, how far from the line is it? What is your

guestimate of the distance to the line?

323. MR MARTIN: It is about a mile.

324. MR MOULD QC (DfT): I was going to say a kilometre, but maybe it is a little

more.

325. MR MARTIN: My name is Peter Martin and I live in Great Missenden with my

wife Vanessa. If we could move to slide 2, please, in previous petitions you have heard a

lot about the Chiltern hilltop villages, and during the two visits you made to this location

the majority of your time was spent in the villages. However, as you can see from the

population figures on that chart, Great Missenden and Prestwood represent roughly

10,500 residents, whereas the hilltop villages represent 2,500. My concern is with Great

Missenden and Prestwood.

326. If we move to slide 3, our MP, Cheryl Gillan, has consistently campaigned against

HS2. In response to her concerns, the Prime Minister wrote a letter to her in June of this

year. It contained the phrase on my slide. What we would ask is that those words are

fulfilled. Please do not think we are ungrateful for C6. As has already been mentioned a

number of times this afternoon, the residents are grateful for that, but the local

petitioners did not really ask for C6. Their minimum request was C5. For

Great Missenden, C6 is worse than the previous proposal. In particular, the haul road

into the link road roundabout looks like it will be a significant problem for local

residents and commuting traffic. The best mitigation is a full tunnel in the view of

residents.

327. Slide 4, please. HS2’s approach has been viewed by some local residents as

making concessions but without fully mitigating the damage that the project will do.

Again, you have heard from some petitioners this afternoon comments along those lines.

I think it is indisputable that this project will cost billions. Some estimates put it at

50 million, some at 80 million, some even more when it is all costed at current prices.

Our request for a full tunnel is relatively modest in that context, but it would transform

the project. In addition, from the Government’s and HS2 Ltd’s point of view I am sure

56

most of the petitions would miraculously disappear if a full tunnel was agreed.

328. CHAIR: That is not our experience.

329. MR MARTIN: Sir, you have not proposed one yet.

330. CHAIR: No, but every time there are changes and improvements people come and

ask for something else. A lot of people have come before us and said, ‘We’re glad about

the tunnel, but …’, and something else comes up. I do not think that if it was granted

everybody would go away.

331. MR MARTIN: Not everybody, but I think the majority of people from this area

would go away. I know it is a big ask, but the project itself is a very big ask of residents.

332. If we could go to slide 6 briefly, this is a chart from HS2’s AP4, Ex.5: the Chiltern

tunnel extension. You can see the construction traffic on the A413 between the Chiltern

tunnel north portal and Rocky Lane under the AP4 scheme.

333. If we go back to slide 5, at the recent forum in Ballinger in the constituency some

inquirers were told that construction traffic would principally go north from the haul

road into the link road roundabout to avoid cutting across the predominant traffic flow.

However, that would involve the HGVs turning around the link road roundabout, which

is small and narrow. That in itself would no doubt add to the congestion.

334. As you can see from the slide, a quick calculation indicates the volume of HGV

traffic coming into that link road from the haul road to access the tunnel portal. With

that volume of traffic and potential delays, I suspect problems are looming.

335. In paragraph 3.3.41 of the AP4 environmental statement, vol.5, page 76 of the

technical appendices, it says: ‘The modelling results indicate that the junctions of the

A413 with the B485 Frith Hill, and the A413 London Road with the A4128 link road are

predicted to operate over theoretical capacity during both the am and pm peaks, with the

B485 Frith Hill at 135% and the link road at 128% of capacity during construction.’ I

accept that those are at peak. However, these two junctions are extremely close together,

and I suspect the compounded impact of that traffic density on our main artery, the

A413, will be dramatic.

57

336. This contrasts with HS2’s statement in AP2 that these junctions were predicted to

operate well within capacity during the construction phase. Therefore, the changes that

have been made by the latest proposal, C6, will have a significant impact on these two

roundabouts and the A413. I hope you can see the problem.

337. In terms of parking, at peak – this is the real peak – I understand that 155

construction workers will be coming into the area for the various construction sites each

day. We are unaware of the arrangements for that transport. How will they travel? Will

they drive? Where will they park? There is a great deal of concern about that, and when

residents asked questions at the recent Ballinger forum an answer was not forthcoming.

338. CHAIR: If it is any consolation, we have had the answer quite a lot of times in this

Committee.

339. MR MARTIN: I hope there is. We would ask that a system is properly considered

with something like a park and ride scheme that would be consulted on with the

community and parish council, rather than having unwarranted parking imposed on the

community.

340. Could we move to slide 7, please? I just want to talk about three impacts, first the

impact on Great Missenden village. You have heard before in previous petitions

comments from Great Missenden Parish Council and Cllr Berry from Great Missenden

about the congestion and effect that will have on local businesses and shops, attractions

like the Dahl museum and Missenden Abbey, among others. In terms of the community,

HS2 could damage the linkage of the community as people use local businesses all

across the main arterial road, the A413. As a gardener, I use South Heath garden centre,

Peterley Farm and Hildreths of Prestwood at the other end of the constituency, where

you can buy just about anything you would conceivably want for DIY or gardening.

HS2 will seriously hinder this cross-movement around the area and restrict people’s

access to the facilities.

341. We have several schools in the village. I think you heard previously from the

headmistress of Great Missenden primary school who talked about the impact on her

school. I would also mention Prestwood Lodge School which is allied to Wendover

House, which you may also be aware of. This caters for about 200 children with social

and behavioural problems. These children are driven into the school each day by taxis.

58

They are brought by taxi because of their behavioural issues. Speaking to the

headmaster, he has expressed serious concern about the impact of any extended traffic

delays on the behaviour of these children when they reach school and when they go

home in the afternoon. He may well wish to make representations himself later. Without

a tunnel, HS2 will literally divide the community and restrict access by children to their

schools.

342. As to my family, my in- laws who live in Little Chalfont are in poor health. As we

heard from a previous petitioner, this requires frequent visits to offer help and

assistance. They need carers each day; they need regular trips to hospital for medication

and assessment. All of this involves the A413. Our principal A and E facility is at Stoke

Mandeville, which also requires the A413. We are very concerned about the impact of

the likely congestion on access.

343. My wife works in and travels to London every day, and because of the risk of

transport disruption her journey is likely to be made much more difficult, so she has a

concern in that regard. She is also a parish councillor and needs to travel round the

district on occasions to carry out that role. That, too, could be impacted.

344. As to myself, I need to travel across the district and county in my role as a district

councillor living in Great Missenden. I frequently have to travel to meetings, both day

and in the evening, and so will suffer from the extra congestion that will inevitably

result from the C6 proposal. My colleagues will no doubt suffer in a similar way.

345. From a domestic point of view, we use the A413 for access to shopping and for

socialising, as the previous petitioner mentioned. Again, HS2 will significantly hamper

us in our daily lives.

346. If I can go on to slide 8, please, in summary, the requests have been heard, Mr

Chairman, no doubt, by your Committee many times, but please forgive us for repeating

them. We’re repeating them because we feel passionately about our area. We want to

fight to defend it, in the way that HS2 fight for their proposition. We believe it will

blight our area for our children, our grandchildren and future generations. We believe

that the best mitigation possible is an extension to the fully-bored tunnel.

347. As I believe John Bercow, your Speaker, said when he gave evidence, if the cost

59

of what is relatively modest mitigation cannot be afforded, then one has to question the

project. This is a flagship project for the country. This is something we should all be

proud of. Our residents are not against progress, but they do want it to be done in a

sustainable and appropriate way, and not have something of this nature just thrust upon

them, without the opportunity to do anything about it and to properly mitigate this

action.

348. John Bercow also praised the work of the Select Committee, and may I humbly do

the same? We are very much in your hands. We’re very grateful to you for listening to

us and hearing our petitions. Some of our residents feel that you are our last hope on

this project, so, from me, thank you for listening. I do hope that you can help our

residents.

349. CHAIR: Thank you, Cllr Martin. Mr Mould.

350. MR MOULD QC (DfT): I certainly acknowledge that there will be significant

traffic effects from the construction of the railway along the A413, and the

environmental statement for AP4 makes that clear, but it’s important, of course, to

remember that we are comparing – we’re in the comparative exercise here, not an

absolute exercise, and the comparison here is with the traffic effects of constructing a

long tunnel. As you have heard previously – and I needn’t to repeat the detail now –

those traffic effects themselves would be likely to be significant.

351. Just to give you an example of that, which you’ve heard of already, a long tunnel

scheme would require an intervention gap, broadly speaking, in the location at which the

viaduct is proposed to be under the Bill scheme, and I think you’ve been given the

estimate that the construction of that intervention gap would generate 400 two-way

HGV movements per day for a period of at least one and three quarter years. That

traffic would have to be accommodated on the A413. It would have to turn off the A413

into work sites and turn on to the A413 from work sites.

352. And so the case for a long tunnel is not a case for freedom from significant traffic

being drawn on to the local road network as a result of the construction of HS2. It is a

case for a different traffic effect, rather than no traffic effect. For that reason, that is not

a clear-cut advantage of a long tunnel or an extended tunnel over the AP4 scheme.

60

353. CHAIR: We’ve already discussed the roundabout with the haul road and those

other issues.

354. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Yes. There’s a challenge there, which has to be met.

There’s no doubt about that.

355. CHAIR: Yes.

356. MR MARTIN: If I could just say, we’re not asking for the complete absence of

traffic. As local residents, we well know that the 413 and the link road currently have a

lot of traffic. What I’m concerned about is, in this document, the technical appendices

that I referred to earlier, that on the A4128 link road it quotes a figure for maximum

queue with HS2 construction traffic of 87 vehicles. The link road not a long road.

357. MR MOULD QC (DfT): No, I know.

358. MR MARTIN: I challenge Mr Mould to fit 87 vehicles onto the link road.

359. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Let me be clear. Of course you won’t be able to, and

that’s one of the –

360. MR MARTIN: So is that sustainable?

361. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Just allow me to finish.

362. MR MARTIN: Well, you interrupted me.

363. MR MOULD QC (DfT): You asked me a question. I’m going to give you the

answer. Of course, you’re right. You can’t contemplate a real situation in which that

volume of HGV traffic is waiting on that link road, and, for that reason, plans have to be

developed under the transport management planning system which accommodate those

vehicles in a way that is realistic and deliverable, but that is not something that is

confined to this project. I’ve been involved in a whole host of projects over the years of

my professional practice in which the modelling of junction performance with major

construction schemes throws out that kind of nonsense. That’s just a consequence of the

model, but it’s reported in order to be transparent. It shows us that something has to be

done in order to make the project deliverable. That is what it tells you.

61

364. If you look at environmental statements for other major schemes, you’ll find

exactly the same sort of results, and yet those schemes are delivered without destroying

the local road network for five years. You know, that’s just the reality of the way in

which these things are done.

365. CHAIR: Brief final comments.

366. MR MARTIN: I will. Finally, very briefly, I’d just like to say that I accept what

Mr Mould says. This is transparent, and I’m grateful to HS2 for publishing it.

Unfortunately, when local residents read it and see that we’re talking about 87 vehicles,

which can’t physically be accommodated on the link road, it does rather cast doubt on

the accuracy and the genuine nature of the proposals that are being submitted. I’m

afraid people don’t really accept it. There may be other solutions that HS2 are working

on, which we’ve not been told about, but I happen to know the leader of Bucks County

Council quite well and I think he’s spoken to you on a number of occasions, Mr

Chairman. I don’t think he’s convinced by these proposals either.

367. CHAIR: The point is Buckinghamshire County Council have to agree a scheme

with the promoters to deal with road movements and traffic, so Bucks have a big say.

Anyway, thank you very much for your contribution. Thank you.

368. MARTIN: Thank you very much.

369. CHAIR: We now are 1793, David and Mary Stewart, in person, from Little

Missenden.

Mary Anne Stewart

370. CHAIR: Are you on your own, Mrs Stewart?

371. MRS STEWART: Yes, I am.

372. CHAIR: You’ve been delegated or –

373. MRS STEWART: Yes, my husband is in Singapore.

374. CHAIR: In Singapore? Okay.

375. MR MOULD QC (DfT): I’ve put up the usual plan and I’ve also got the distance

62

from the line. It’s 489 metres, by our calculation.

376. CHAIR: Okay. Carry on, Mrs Stewart.

377. MRS STEWART: Thank you. My name is Mary Anne Stewart and I’m a

resident who enjoys the privilege of living in the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural

Beauty. I appreciate the right to present to you, the Committee, which is at the heart of

the democratic process, in this, the 800-year anniversary of the signing of the Magna

Carta. I recognise that this is an incredibly complex project, involving state of the art

technologies. I also recognise that the future economic health of the country is

dependent on enabling commerce to thrive and the economy to grow. I understand the

need to improve the infrastructure, especially in the light of the projected population

increase. However, in the future, with even greater pressure on population in the cities,

the value to them of unspoilt, beautiful landscapes will be ever more critical.

378. I have followed the proceedings of the Committee and am aware of the complexity

of some of the arguments which have been put forward. The nature of the petitions has

ranged from individual and specific mitigations to the very general. Today, my main

focus is the need for a full-bore tunnel extension through the Chilterns AONB and the

fact that it stands today the only AONB on the route between London and Leeds which

will be irreversibly damaged by current plans.

379. In the interim report, dated 21 July 2015, the statement was made that the case for

the extension of the tunnel throughout the Chilterns AONB had not yet been made.

However, I cannot find any minute or report which states the grounds on which this

decision has been taken. In the cases where other changes and alterations to the HS2

project have been proposed, the relative costs relating to the changes and the likely

mitigation have been prepared, reviewed, verified and shared with the community, so as

to justify or not the proposed mitigations.

380. In my view, the Chilterns AONB is one common integral area. To try to justify

what is planned today by arguing that most of the AONB will not be affected is to

trivialise what will actually happen to the AONB. If I may, Chairman, with apologies to

this, an all-male committee, you can’t be half pregnant. So what I would like to know

and understand from the Committee is what has persuaded them not to recommend a

tunnel through the Chilterns. Where can this explanation be found?

63

381. If the issue is one of additional cost against the value of saving the AONB, where

are the calculations that show the gap and justify the Committee’s decision? Why

shouldn’t these be made public? Then we could at least try and understand the costs of

the tunnel options and compare them to the other costs, which are gradually being

included in the overall HS2 project. Examples would be: the cost of the upgrade to

Euston Station or costs of the development of the new hub near Birmingham. My guess

would be that the cost of additional tunnelling in the Chilterns is but a tiny amount as

compared to those other additional costs, which are now being quantified, and, without

these figures and a clear exposition of the reasoning, everyone in the Chilterns will feel

that this is a waste of our time and resources.

382. The Committee is, in effect, acting as a planning authority and is trying to weigh

up the wish of the Government to improve infrastructure of the country against the wish

of local residents to preserve the AONB. The vast weight of evidence and expert

opinion is that a through-tunnel solution is the best one and that it will not delay the

project. There is a great frustration amongst the communities in the Chilterns that the

alternatives have not been properly evaluated. This is very much against the

Government’s stated aim of giving great weight to the AONB, which is, as I have

already mentioned, the only AONB up the line. Why, given this cross-party aim to want

to consult communities better, is this not being given greater weight and hearing? This

is not about being nimbies. This is a national asset that needs to be protected.

383. So what I suggest to you today is that you should commission HS2 Ltd to look

again at the full-bore tunnel options and to set out clearly how they could tunnel through

from Amersham to Wendover and what the benefits and costs are. With this

transparency, then and only then should you decide whether to tunnel or not. Thank

you.

384. CHAIR: Thank you. Mr Mould.

385. MR MOULD QC (DfT): The Committee will recall that the Bill scheme was

supported by a very comprehensive environmental statement and, as part of that

document, a careful assessment was made of alternatives, including alternatives for

taking the railway through the Chilterns AONB, and alternatives studied included not

only more extended Chiltern tunnels such as that which ultimately was presented by

64

REPA, or a variant on it, but also proposals to take the railway through the Chilterns

altogether in tunnel, as was promoted to this Committee by CRAG.

386. It is the well-established principle of the way in which Select Committees into

Hybrid Bills operate that it is for the petitioner to bring their case and to make their case

to the Committee and to produce such evidence as they feel is necessary in order to seek

to persuade the Committee of their case. It is the task of the promoter to provide

evidence in response where such evidence is considered necessary in order to respond to

that case. That is the process that was pursued before this Committee in a series of

detailed hearings supported by expert evidence from all parties who took part in the

hearings in July. As a result of that, the Committee was, I would venture respectfully to

suggest, very well appraised of both the technical and the environmental and the

economic arguments for and against the Bill scheme and extending the tunnel, and the

company had a clear understanding of where the arguments lay insofar as the relative

cost and benefit of more extensive tunnelling through the Chilterns stood. It is very

well-established that where those who are asked to make decisions on planning and

environmental matters make those decisions that they respond to the evidence that is

before them and that they do so on the basis that those who have given that evidence and

those who hear that evidence do so on an informed basis.

387. It is not, therefore, necessary for the decision-makers to spell out in detail the

reasons that they give for decisions that they make. This Committee gave clear and

succinct reasons, if I may respectfully say so, for the interim conclusions that it reached

at the end of July. I have no doubt that the Committee will say a little more about this in

its report in the light of the evidence that it has heard since, but I would certainly for my

part respectfully reject the suggestion that there has been any failure of consideration of

these matters or that there has been any want of explanation of the reasons why the

Committee has expressed the interim view that it has in relation to the these questions

regarding the appropriate way of taking this railway through the Chilterns.

388. CHAIR: Okay. Brief final comments.

389. MRS STEWART: I understand the process and I know what you have to say, but I

think practically all the petitioners that I’ve heard this afternoon have made the same

point, so I think perhaps you need to do something further to make people feel more at

ease that you really have taken these considerations. I did hear of a new tunnel

65

suggestion, which was a single-bore tunnel which would start wherever necessary and

then bore with one single boring machine out towards the M25, so that would be a

cheaper option, for example. So I’m still not sure that you’ve heard absolutely all of the

proposals.

390. CHAIR: Okay. Thank you very much indeed. Thank you for sitting through the

Committee.

391. MRS STEWART: Thank you.

392. CHAIR: We are now on 89, Anthony Bobroff please. Mr Mould, a brief

introduction.

393. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Yes.

Anthony Bobroff

394. CHAIR: Welcome, I know you’ve been sitting through the Committee all day.

395. MR BOBROFF: I thought you were trying to get me to give in with lack of water.

396. CHAIR: No, no.

397. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Mr Bobroff lives in Speen. Speen is being pointed out to

you now and his property within Speen. The line of the railway is, as you can see, on

the other side of this particular plan. He is some 6.267 metres distant from the route.

398. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: No, kilometres.

399. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Kilometres. It’s my customary facility with

mathematics.

400. MR BOBROFF: Kilometres.

401. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Indeed.

402. CHAIR: I think you’re our first petitioner from Speen. Welcome. How can we

help?

403. MR BOBROFF: I’m Anthony Bobroff. I retired from business over three years

66

ago and I’ve retrained as a family mediator at which I work two to three days a week. I

live in Speen in the Chiltern Hills some – I’ve put five miles but obviously 6.267

kilometres – from the planned HS2 route the other side of Great Missenden. I’m

therefore not a NIMBY but I do believe that HS2 will devastate the AONB, that it is an

urbanisation of a national treasure depriving future generations of the benefits of this

countryside forever. If you are to persist with this folly, the only mitigation possible is a

fully-bored tunnel under the Chilterns.

404. Mr Syms, you probably don’t remember, but we met at Annie Baileys when you

came to visit the Chilterns on 22 June, and we spoke briefly about the dangers to

cyclists of HGVs and construction traffic. I mentioned the disproportionate number of

cyclist fatalities in London involving HGVs. Ironically, that day the tenth cyclist died

on the streets of London this year, and eight of those tragedies involved HGVs. Those

drivers simply cannot see cyclists and pedestrians. I therefore strongly recommend that

you insist that all HS2 HGVs are fitted with side cameras and side beepers, and

furthermore that you restrict their movement to weekdays only, and during the summer

months they should finish by 4pm. This would protect weekend cyclists all the year

round and summer evening cyclists. There are an estimated 100,000 local cyclists plus

thousands of visitors, mostly Londoners. These people are all at serious risk, and you

do have a duty of care to protect them during the construction.

405. The plan to use Rocky Lane as a transport route for spoil to access the 413 is very

dangerous. That junction has poor visibility when joining the 413, which is a narrow

road with very fast-running traffic. I know this because it’s one of our regular cycling

routes. We cycle over Dunsmore crossing the 413 at that junction and climbing up over

Rocky Lane towards Chesham or looping back through Wendover. The present plan

will put a stop to any cycling between the 413 to beyond the HS2 line, which is at

present a beautiful, hilly, cycling route. Furthermore, we all know that the state of our

roads is a real danger. Avoiding potholes is not for the feint-hearted; it forces cyclists

into the middle of the road causing further dangers and frustrating motorists trying to

pass by. HS2 vehicles and HGVs will further aggravate this road decay and erosion. So

my first concern is for cyclists.

406. My second concern is the effect during construction on the lives of many, many

people like me living in the Chilterns but away from the route. We will all find going

67

about our normal daily business whether to work, schools, shopping, or whatever, much

more difficult due to the congestion on the roads running along the valleys around us;

that is to say the 413, and indeed the 4010 which has had little mention today. In

addition, there will be pressure on other road users to find short cuts these two routes.

The 4010 is predicted to carry HS2 traffic of 180 cars/light goods vehicles and 145

HGVs per day; i.e. 40 vehicles per hour, one every 90 seconds, in one direction or

another.

407. Princes Risborough will become gridlocked, and for those wishing to drive from

Princes Risborough to High Wycombe the journey will become a nightmare,

particularly through West Wickham village which simply could not cope with that

volume of traffic or those size of trucks. Access to the M40, particularly to junction 4

through Wickham up Marlow Hill, will be a nightmare; it’s bad enough already.

Motorists will establish rat-runs: from Princes Risborough to Wycombe avoiding the

4010, up through Speen down into the Hughenden Valley and into Wycombe; from

Risborough to Great Missenden avoiding the 413, into Great Hampden down onto the

Rignall Road into Missenden or turning right through Prestwood on the 4128; from

Terwick or Aylesbury to Wycombe avoiding the 4010 past Chequers along the Rignall

Road right up into Speen and down through North Dean and into the Hughenden Valley;

and from Terwick and Aylesbury to Great Missenden avoiding the 413, again past

Chequers along the Rignall Road and into Missenden. Basically, these are the routes

that go over the top as opposed to round the valley. I don’t believe people understand

the dramatic impact all this will have on their lives, and I’m petitioning you to install

electronic speed indicator signs along these shortcut country routes, and the villages,

and particularly in Speen. If you have to pursue your vision of building a shiny bullet

train, unconnected to Heathrow, unconnected to HS1 or our motorways, stopping

nowhere, solving little, at crazy costs, the least you could do is build a fully-bored

tunnel to protect the Chilterns. You owe it to our children and our grandchildren.

408. CHAIR: Thank you very much. Mr Mould.

409. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Just on the question of cycling, the Rocky Lane work

site is going to be operating on normal working hours, which means that it will

generally not be operational from lunchtime on Saturday and then through to early on

Monday morning. There will be some occasions when it’s necessary to accommodate

68

working outside of hours along the route but, as you know, that’s subject to the Control

of Pollution Act process for which the local authorities have the licensing role, and so

the concern that was made about whether a cycling route via Dunsmore and then across

the A413 valley, whether that’s going to be ruled out during the construction, I think

whatever the position may be in terms of traffic during the ordinary working week there

will still be generally speaking a period at the weekends when cyclists will be able to

cycle along Rocky Lane without any HS2 traffic being on the road.

410. CHAIR: Okay. Alright. Brief final comments, Mr Bobroff.

411. MR BOBROFF: Well, we’ve still got Saturday mornings when there are many

cyclists out there and of course summer evenings. I don’t know if you’ve ever cycled

up Rocky Lane.

412. MR MOULD QC (DfT): I must say I haven’t.

413. MR BOBROFF: Well, you need to try it. It’s a pleasure – at the moment.

414. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Just to be clear, the ordinary working hours do not

encompass evenings. They stop at six o’clock in the evening. So during the summer

you’ll still have some hours of daylight after the ordinary HS2 working day has come to

an end.

415. MR BOBROFF: That’s why I suggested four o’clock which, I think, would be

more sensible.

416. CHAIR: Alright. Thank you very much indeed. Thank you for your contribution

today.

417. MR BOBROFF: Thank you.

418. CHAIR: 1824, Denise Bolland, who will be the last petitioner today. Hello.

419. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Denise Bolland also lives in Speen, as you can see on the

plan in front of you.

420. CHAIR: Are you a neighbour?

Denise Bolland

69

421. MS BOLLAND: No, not really. I live across the other side of the village. I’m

Denise Bolland. First of all, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to you. If

I explain that throughout the past three weeks there have been considerable

developments in my life which have prevented me from preparing a statement: the final

week of mother’s life, the death of my mother, the loss of vision in my left eye, and as

you can hear, a quite significant infection. However, it was very important to me to be

able to come here today to support my petition, thus is my strength of feeling about

what I, as a resident of Speen and of the Chilterns AONB have experienced since March

2010, and no doubt will continue to experience.

422. I took the decision in October 2002 to take on a very significant mortgage and to

be able to move out to the Chilterns AONB. Perhaps some might have opted to do

otherwise and not therefore impose a financial burden upon themselves, but it was

important to me, my way of life, the values that I have, that I wanted to live in a more

rural area where I could enjoy that environment along with many other people who have

that enjoyment. It’s important for my mental health, for my physical health (although

you wouldn’t know it at the moment), and also from a spiritual aspect. And I didn’t

mind at that point the fact that it would involve further driving to work, it might take

more effort to access local services, hospitals, etc; that was part of my decision. I

wanted to live in the AONB.

423. Since March 2010 I’ve attended countless meetings at my own cost and in terms

of my own time, which I was willing and prepared to do because I wanted to learn for

myself whether the fears or concerns that occurred to me were founded or whether they

were based, as has been suggested, on scaremongering from other agencies. I have to

say to you that as a result of sitting throughout those meetings, those presentations,

reading any amount of documentation, I know my concerns for the environment that I

care passionately about, for the way of life that I care passionately about, and for the

way of life that I believe should be available, not for just my generation but for

generations to come... Sorry, I’m a little bit distracted by the noise at the side here. I

attended those meetings, and nothing or very little of what I have read, what I have

heard, and particularly the manner on occasions with which those concerns both from

me and many other residents of the AONB have been dealt with – I have to say to you

that for me, and this is a very sad indictment, that the experiences I’ve had throughout

70

the last five and a half years of sitting at those meetings has all but destroyed my belief

in the democratic process, and I don’t say that lightly.

424. The Chilterns AONB has been designated such for a purpose: it provides spiritual,

mental, and physical sustenance to a countless number of people, residents and visitor.

Even sitting here this afternoon and hearing petitioners and the responses to those

petitioners shows without any doubt, in my view, the huge and enormous impact that

this project will have on the AONB. As has been said, it is the one AONB on the

construction route. Throughout the five and a half years, we – and I do mean all of us –

have watched as any amount of taxpayers’ money has been spent on this project to date.

I am a taxpayer, I do care how my money is spent; I am not alone in that concern and

care. Surely it is not beyond the ability of us to protect the AONB not just for ourselves,

not just for me, but for the next generation and the next generation. Thus, the mitigation

I’ve heard so far I don’t believe goes anywhere near compensating for the loss of an

AONB, and, therefore, I would ask you from the bottom of my heart to consider

extending the fully-bored tunnel. It may not solve all of the issues that we’ve heard this

afternoon, but without a shadow of a doubt it would diminish them. Thank you. Thank

you for listening to me.

425. CHAIR: Okay. Thank you very much. We’re sorry to hear what’s gone on in

your personal life. Thank you for sitting quietly at the back listening to our

proceedings.

426. MS BOLLAND: Thank you.

427. CHAIR: I’m going to adjourn for about five minutes. There are apparently two

petitioners who want to read a statement to the Committee, who are probably fighting

their way through security as they’re coming from the HS2 offices, and then we’ll

reconvene, I hope, briefly. Order, order.

Sitting suspended

On resuming—

428. CHAIR: Order, order. Welcome back to the HS2 Select Committee. Petitioner

164, Timothy and Patricia Taylor, have been in some discussion with High Speed 2, the

Promoters, today. I understand there’s a statement to read. Is it you, Mr Mould, or you,

71

Mr Taylor?

429. MR MOULD QC (DfT): I’ve very happy to read it out.

430. MR TAYLOR: Yes, that’s fine.

Timothy Taylor and Patricia Taylor

431. MR MOULD QC (DfT): This is a joint statement on behalf of the petitioners and

the promoter in relation to this petition. It relates to Hammonds Hall Farm, which is Mr

and Mrs Taylor’s property.

432. ‘This statement is being made with the agreement of Mr and Mrs Taylor and their

legal advisers. The promoters have been in discussion with Mr and Mrs Taylor

regarding the purchase of Hammonds Hall Farm, Thistledown Barn, and other land, that

Mr and Mrs Taylor own at Potter Row, Great Missenden, Bucks, HP16 9LT. The

following principles have been agreed between the parties to inform negotiation on

detailed Heads of Terms leading to the acquisition of the above property.

433. It is agreed that the purchase of Hammonds Hall Farm and Thistledown Barn as

one transaction by private treaty on or before 2 November 2018 shall be undertaken as if

the properties had been acquired by compulsory purchase under the Bill. If Mr and

Mrs Taylor submit to the promoter detailed particulars of their estimated claim for

compensation arising from the acquisition of Hammonds Hall Farm and Thistledown

Barn, the promoter will provide in writing within three months of receipt of those

detailed particulars the promoter’s estimate of the compensation, including for

disturbance, payable in respect of the acquisition of Hammonds Hall Farm and

Thistledown Barn.

434. The parties will use all reasonable endeavours to reach an agreement on the

valuation for the purchase with vacant possession of Hammonds Hall Farm and

Thistledown Barn, with reference to an independent expert arbitration in the event that a

binding contract to purchase is not concluded by 2 November 2016, or such later date as

may be agreed. The purchase price for Hammonds Hall Farm and Thistledown Barn

will be assessed as if subject to compulsory purchase as a single unit and will reflect

payments in respect of loss and disturbance that would otherwise arise were powers to

72

be exercised to take entry on the date of completion of acquisition.

435. For the avoidance of doubt, the disturbance payments that may form part of the

purchase price will include SDLT fees for the replacement of the main residence for Mr

and Mrs Taylor. In addition, the disturbance payment that may form part of the

purchase price may include advice from Mr and Mrs Taylor’s tax adviser on the direct

taxation implications arising from the acquisition of Hammonds Hall Farm and

Thistledown Barn. Nothing in the Heads of Terms shall prevent the promoters from

exercising compulsory purchase powers in respect of Hammonds Hall Farm and

Thistledown Barn following royal assent of the Bill. In the event of the parties seeking

to resolve a disagreement as to the compensation payable by an independent expert, the

promoters confirm that costs of appointing the expert to conduct an arbitration will be

met by the promoters, but the promoters confirm that the costs of appointing the expert

to conduct an arbitration would be met by the promoters, and other costs will be a

matter for award arising from the arbitration. The promoters are confident that a

satisfactory binding agreement can be concluded in a speedy timescale but acknowledge

that Mr and Mrs Taylor may wish to come back to the Select Committee in the event

that agreed terms are not concluded by the Christmas recess.’

436. CHAIR: Okay. Are you happy with that statement?

437. MR TAYLOR: Yes.

438. CHAIR: Good. Well, that’s clear. Okay. Thank you very much indeed. We

agree that if there isn’t a suitable settlement then the petitioner can come back before

Christmas. Order, order. If you could withdraw from the room so we can now clear our

thought about the petitioners today. Thank you.