Donate
< HS2 homepage | < Previous page
March news
30 March 2010
Highlights of first HS2 public meeting
The first public meeting called to discuss the HS2 proposals on Monday 29 March was so popular that over 100 people had to be turned away. Others stood in the rain by open windows of the school hall at Misbourne School to hear a lively and articulate discussion. Other public meetings are planned to enable everyone to attend. Here, we give a resume of the main points…
Sir John Johnson, chairman of the Chilterns Conservation Board, said the Board was opposing all three of the proposed routes across the Chilterns. “Our statutory purpose is to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the AONB and to promote understanding and enjoyment of the Chilterns. The construction of any high speed railway through the Chilterns is not compatible with the aims and therefore we oppose all three proposed routes,” he said.
Steve Roderick, the board’s chief officer, showed pictures of the High Speed 1 route through Kent, which illustrated that it is not simply a case of building a very wide railway cutting with overhead gantries. There are ventilation shafts and equipment every mile all so – all with access roads, which are lit; there are security compounds, maintenance buildings, electricity sub-stations and entrances and exits to tunnels which are major engineering works in themselves.
Mike Overall, vice chairman of the Chiltern Society (§ see his full speech below), said the HighSpeed 2 company had been restrained from the start. They had to evaluate high speed route options that linked to Heathrow, making it inevitable they would recommend routes through the Chilterns. The Society included many respected technical experts among its membership, and a team was being put together to prepare a comprehensive and detailed case for opposing all the routes.
Val Letheren, the Bucks County Council cabinet member for transport, said council colleagues in Kent had described the construction of High Speed 1 as “a huge traumatic event” and said that if the route did go ahead the construction impact in the Chilterns would be massive, as would the effect on property prices. She said she knew of one property alongside the proposed route where the value had dropped from £380,000 to £250,000 in the two weeks since the announcement.
David Lidington, MP for Aylesbury, said it was shocking to him that many of his constituents living close to the proposed route were still unaware of what was planned. In parts, the line would come within 70 metres of homes in south west Aylesbury. He criticised the compensation scheme, saying it was ungenerous and unclear as to who qualifies. He urged coordination among opposition groups. “It is vital that the opposition to this route is grounded on solid evidence, giving the detail,” he said.
Cheryl Gillan, MP for Chesham and Amersham, criticised the timing of the announcement as cynical and designed to cause stress, and echoed Mr Lidington’s call for evidential opposition. “We have in this area expertise, and we need to marshal our case very carefully,” she said. If the preferred route went ahead, tunnelling under Amersham would take five years and under Great Missenden, four years she said. Two fragile chalk streams – the only streams of their kind in Europe – would be severely threatened.
Paul Francis from the Chiltern Countryside Group, outlined the importance of focussed opposition with clear messages and regular communication which kept people informed and updated. He said it was important to protect the whole of the Chilterns and the whole of the AONB, and offered the expertise his group had gained in their opposition to changes in aircraft routes to the cause.
Mike Colston, the county councillor for Great Missenden, who called the meeting, said that by preferring to plan a high speed train route through an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the Government indicated that talk of preserving beautiful landscapes were “meaningless words.” He said the plan should “send shivers down the spine of every National Park, every AONB and every wildlife protected area in the country.”
§ The Society’s HS2 strategy
Here’s the full version of the speech given by Chilterns Society vice-chairman Mike Overall at the HS2 public meeting in Great Missenden on 29 March…
As you will imagine, the Chiltern Society is opposed to any new High Speed route that crosses the Chilterns. That position was endorsed by the Society’s Trustees at its Executive Council meeting last Thursday.
The Society’s objectives, as approved by the Charity Commission, effectively require us to do what is in the best interests of conserving the character and amenities of the Chilterns and encouraging people to enjoy that beautiful countryside. The High Speed Two proposals are clearly incompatible with those objectives and therefore with our remit.
We have no remit to do what is in the broader national interest, other than, by implication, to try to support the Chilterns Conservation Board (CCB) in its efforts to protect the essential characteristics of the AONB, as the highest quality of nationally protected landscape. We are though not against the principle of high speed rail routes, where they can be justified in both environmental and economic terms.
There is no doubt that this proposal could have a devastating impact on the Chilterns AONB. Indeed, I thought it was very interesting that, in the reply that the Transport Minister gave to Cheryl Gillan in the House of Commons in the recent Adjournment Debate, even he recognised that HS2 would bring devastation to the Chilterns. His actual words (from Hansard) were – “A lot of the tunnelling will be done in order to reduce the devastation that would otherwise arise in areas of outstanding natural beauty”. Note, he said – ‘reduce’ not ‘avoid’ – or ‘overcome’!
The Society’s area of the Chilterns is, of course, somewhat larger than the Chilterns AONB. It also covers part of the Colne Valley Park, through which the so-called Preferred HS2 route will pass on a viaduct. That’s an area that we’ve always regarded as an important buffer zone for the Chilterns AONB, and a major infrastructure intrusion of that sort will also damage that important gap of Green Belt between London and the Chilterns AONB.
A lot of our 6,500 members would be directly affected if an HS2 route crosses the Chilterns but, we know that the issue is of wide concern throughout our membership, and we will be surveying all of our members to ensure that we properly reflect their views, in the forthcoming consultations.
We have been working closely with the CCB and the National Trust for some months on the HS2 issue, and with other bodies, such as the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE), with whom we had an hour’s meeting with Lord Adonis just over a week ago.
From these and meetings and, as Steve has indicated, from the HS2 documents, I think a picture is emerging of a number of weaknesses in the HS2 case.
For example, the fact that all three alternative routes proposed come through the middle of the Chilterns, stems from the HS2 company’s Terms of Reference, which required a direct, or indirect link, into Heathrow Airport. That made it inevitable that the route would have to come through the middle of the Chilterns.
However, HS2 have only gone for a conventional rail link from Old Oak Common to Heathrow, which seems to confirm that the economics of a more direct link to Heathrow, are not really viable. So, one thing we should perhaps probe, is to what extent has the Heathrow factor compromised the whole approach of the HS2 Company’s studies?
It is also becoming evident, that the economic case for the longer term high speed network proposed by the Government is highly dependent upon the economic benefits to be gained in future from traffic between the North of England, (and Scotland) and London.
As far as we can see, the economics of High Speed services between Birmingham and London just do not stack up alone!
Now this is important, in my view, because, if the real economic benefits come from those longer distance services, then the time saving that can be achieved between Birmingham and London, by cutting across the central Chilterns, becomes far less significant.
We also gather that a further Network Rail report on their proposals for the country’s strategic rail network has been held-over until after the Election, and may not now appear for some months. We do not yet know to what extent Network Rail shares the same views as HS2 . But we have picked up some vibes that they may come up with a different proposition on London terminals and may possibly favour different routeings.
So – where does that leave us?
I think that these apparent fundamental weaknesses in the HS2 case do indicate that there is everything to play for. And we must collectively tackle this threat on every front - from constructive and objective evaluation of the technical case, to lobbying and campaigning.
The Society’s strategy will be:
to maintain strong opposition to the concept of a High Speed Route across the Chilterns.
However, we cannot rely on this thing going away – So, at the same time as building up and deploying a strong technical challenge, we will also work hard with others to establish the maximum degree of mitigation measures that we can.
We are very fortunate in the Chiltern Society that, among our 6,500 members, we have some highly qualified and experienced people, such as transport planners and economists, geologists and geo-technical engineers. We have a number of concerns that need to be addressed and, for example, some of our specialist volunteers have already started to identify some of the technical issues that they think will arise from tunnelling through the type of wet chalk that we have in the Misbourne valley.
We shall be deploying all that expertise to help evaluate the HS2 technical reports and to participate in the eventual formal consultation process. I am sure there must be a lot more relevant expertise in the Chilterns that we could call on.
We shall continue to work closely with the CCB and other partners and hopefully any other networks that emerge out of meetings such as this.
29 March 2010
High Speed 2 Adjournment Debate
Aylesbury MP David Lidington managed to secure a short adjournment debate in the House of Commons on 23 March to enable MPs to hear what Mr Lidington described as “the first of a considerable number of representations” on the HS2 proposals.
Mr Lidington said: “I believe that the route that the Government have said they prefer will seriously and irreparably damage the quality of my constituents’ lives and the landscape of the Chiltern Hills. Two aspects of the proposed route caused me particular dismay… first, the plan for a viaduct to carry the railway around the western perimeter of Aylesbury, coming at the nearest point just 70 metres from people’s homes, looks certain to cause massive damage to the quality of life of many hundreds of my constituents.
“Secondly, I share the sense of outrage expressed to me in letters, emails and conversations with constituents since the Secretary of State’s announcement on 11 March that the Government plan to route the line through the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty – landscape that successive Governments, whether Labour or Conservative, have designated as of exceptional national importance.”
Mr Lidington said the Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire Wildlife Trust had informed him that the preferred route would have both a direct and indirect impact on woodland sites – predominantly ancient woodlands – and on wetland sites, including a nature reserve and a site of special scientific interest on the border between Buckinghamshire and Hertfordshire.
He urged the Government to be “open with the public.” He added: “If the project goes ahead, on whatever route, it is vital that the Government show they have learned lessons from the experience of building the high-speed channel tunnel link through Kent.
“A few hours ago I talked to Patrick Begg, regional director of the National Trust, who said that, in environmental terms, the High Speed 1 process was brutal, poorly conceived and done on the cheap… local councillors in my constituency, who have been in contact with their counterparts in Kent, were warned that the impact during construction went far wider than the immediate line of route. One was warned that he should expect every village and country lane within four or five miles of the route to be wrecked for some years while the line was built.”
Other Chiltern area MPs who attended the debate only had time for short interventions. Chesham and Amersham MP Cheryl Gillan wondered why no environmental impact assessment on the Chilterns had been produced – a point reiterated by Dominic Grieve, MP for Beaconsfield, who pointed out that in his constituency the proposed route slices through an environmentally sensitive area and a nature reserve. “In the absence of an assessment it is difficult to know what the impact will be on that very sensitive part of the Colne Valley,” he said.
In response the Transport Minister Sadiq Khan said that Lord Adonis, the Secretary of State, was not convinced that HS2 Ltd had tried as hard as it could to mitigate some of the effects on residents. “An aspect of that is the effect of modern technology in reducing noise,” he said. “That is one reason for the delay in publication of the environmental impact assessment and the appraisal of sustainability.”
He said: “I want to reassure members that the Government have not yet taken any decision of either whether a line such as this should be built or what route it should take… everything is up for grabs.
“When (his) constituents respond to the formal consultation, they should give their views about whether they think there should be a high-speed link at all, the preferred route and any additional points they want to make.”
Mr Khan went on: “The route that HS2 Ltd has recommended would be straighter and faster than the other options, maximising its benefits for the country, but it also has a number of other advantages. Roughly a third of its route through the Chilterns is in tunnel, reducing its impacts on the local environment, and for more than half of that part of its route that is on the surface in the Chilterns, it follows existing transport corridors, notably the A413 corridor which contains both a dual carriageway and the current Chiltern line.”
He added: “We have learned the lessons of previous major infrastructure projects, including High Speed 1 and Crossrail, which is taking place right now. We are learning lessons all the time from Crossrail. We are trying to ensure that in the process of building High Speed 2 we mitigate any problems caused to residents who are local to whatever route is chosen.”
29 March 2010
Proposed Exceptional Hardship Scheme
The Department for Transport, under High Speed Two Limited, is consulting with the Society, amongst others, for views on a proposed Scheme for owner occupiers of residential property who may suffer hardship from the HS2 proposals.
A summary of the scheme can be viewed here (600KB PDF), and if Society members have any comments, we would like to hear from you by May 10th as the Society must respond to the consultation by May 20.
24 March 2010
Chairman’s letter to local newspapers
People can argue about whether high-speed rail links are of national importance or not. The question we should be asking is whether Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty are of national importance or not.
By publishing a preferred high-speed rail route through the heart of the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the government seems to be indicating that it does not regard AONBs to be of overriding national importance.
The idea of AONBs was established by the Labour government in the 1949 Access to the Countryside Act, in which it was recognised that AONBs were a special landscape that needed to be safeguarded for future generations. There are only 40 such designated areas in the whole of England and Wales, covering less than 15 per cent of the land mass of the whole country. It is the statutory duty of the AONB to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of its area.
The Chilterns AONB was established in 1965 with all-party support, when it was realised that the 833sq km that make up the Chilterns AONB needed special protection if it was to preserve its unique landscape and tranquillity in the increasingly pressured south-east of England. The pressure on the countryside has increased even more in the last 50 years or so. The need to protect the AONB, an area where people can seek peace, tranquillity and unspoiled countryside is, in our view, even more acute.
The Chiltern Society is a non-political body whose members are dedicated to conserving, enhancing, enjoying and promoting the whole of the Chiltern Hills area, including the AONB.
The Society is the largest voluntary environmental group in the area and we will be actively canvassing the views of all our 6,500 members before giving our detailed response to the High Speed Two proposals later this year. If you want to be part of that consultation and influence decision making through the Society, you can join us via this website, write to us at White Hill Centre, White Hill, Chesham, HP5 1AG, or call 01494 771 250.
JOHN TAYLOR
Chairman The Chiltern Society
17 March 2010
Meeting 29 March
We are advised that a meeting has been organised by County Councillor Mike Colston for 19.30 to 21.30 at Misbourne School Hall (HP16 0BN) on Monday 29 March
Cheryl Gillan, MP, local councillors, the Chiltern Conservation Board and others will be present to offer views and actions about the proposed HS2 line through the Misbourne Valley. Chiltern Society members are welcome.
12 March 2010
Members to be consulted over Government plans
The Chiltern Society, the largest voluntary environmental group covering the Chilterns, today condemned the Government’s preferred route of High Speed 2, which will slice through the middle of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).
Chairman John Taylor said: “While we accept that high speed rail services are in the national interest, the Government must acknowledge that designated Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty have an equivalent claim on the national interest. The Department of Transport claims to be producing a transport system that balances the needs of the economy, the environment and Society, but they have not demonstrated that purpose today.
“The designation of an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty needs to be taken very seriously. It represents the highest quality of English landscape and is irreplaceable. For the nation to own an area of such peace and splendour within the increasingly pressurised south-east of England is extremely precious and privileged.
“The Chilterns AONB is the most unspoilt area of countryside close to London and we owe it to future generations to fight to maintain the integrity of the AONB.
“The proposed route will have a very damaging impact on the Chilterns particularly along the beautiful and historic Misbourne Valley. Even though tunnelling is planned, the effect on the tranquillity and landscape either side of the tunnel will be devastating.
“However, we will study the Government’s proposals very carefully and objectively, and consult our members, before giving our detailed response.”
The Society’s vice-chairman Mike Overall said: “The route options examined by the High Speed 2 company were highly constrained by the requirement in their terms of reference to evaluate options for linking the route to Heathrow. That made it almost inevitable that the route would pass through the Chilterns.
“We think a more objective and comprehensive review of options should have included potential routes from London unconstrained by a requirement to link Heathrow, which could then skirt round the Chilterns.
“We are not convinced, even on transportation grounds, that the case for routeing the service through the Chilterns is proven.”
“In short, this proposal highlights our view that the restricted range of options available for the HS2 company to consider undermines the robustness of the conclusions they have reached.”
