PUBLIC SESSION

MINUTES OF ORAL EVIDENCE

taken before

HIGH SPEED RAIL COMMITTEE

On the

HIGH SPEED RAIL (LONDON – WEST MIDLANDS) BILL

Monday 29 June 2015 (Afternoon)

In Committee Room 5

PRESENT:

Mr Robert Syms (Chair)

Sir Peter Bottomley Mr Henry Bellingham

Ian Mearns

_____________

IN ATTENDANCE

Mr Timothy Mould QC, Lead Counsel, Department for Transport Mr Alan Kauffman, representing South Ruislip Residents Association

Mr Graham Bartram, representing Ruislip Residents Association

_____________

IN PUBLIC SESSION

2

INDEX

Subject Page

South Ruislip Residents Association

Submissions by Mr Kauffman 3

Response from Mr Mould QC 8

Ruislip Residents Association

Submissions by Mr Bartram 14

Response from Mr Mould 21

3

(at 14.14)

1. CHAIR: Order, order. Good afternoon everybody. Welcome back to the HS2

Committee, following our visit on Friday to the Speaker’s constituency of Buckingham.

This week we continue with the Ruislip area; later in the week, we’ll hear from Nick

Hurd MP and from the Mayor of London. Today we’ll sit until about three o’clock and

then resume at 5.00 and sit through the evening until we finish hearing petitions. Once

again, the Committee appreciates petitioners understanding and being flexible on

timings. We have had some good, succinct petition presentations. These work well:

shorter works much better before this Committee. It works especially well if petitioners

start with a clear statement of what it is they’re looking for.

2. Councillor Kauffman, welcome?

South Ruislip Residents Association

3. MR KAUFFMAN: Good afternoon, Mr Chairman; good afternoon members of

the Committee. Can I have slide 1 please – it would be 2, actually, sorry. Right, okay.

My name is Councillor Allan Kauffman. I’m here to represent the Residents

Association of South Ruislip, together with the South Ruislip Ward. Mr Jackson who

was speaking on behalf of South Ruislip residents, his wife has taken ill so he can’t be

here, so it will be me speaking for both sets of people.

4. The following presentation – and we’re looking at the impact on the area – mainly

on the utility works, which is needed for the HS2 project. Can we have the next slide

please? Just to give you a bit of background, South Ruislip has just over 12,000

residents, 77% of them of working age and economically active. We have 4,600-plus

properties, which are owner-occupied. South Ruislip has four main roads, already

overwhelmed by traffic. I know you’ve heard loads of things about traffic and I will try

and be very brief on this issue. I shall be talking about Victoria Road, Long Drive,

Station Approach and West End Road, and how it affects the immediate area. Next

slide please? That is the main area of South Ruislip showing the intersection between

Station Approach, Long Drive, and the Victoria Road; and then the West End Road

follows on from Station Approach.

5. Okay, next slide please? Within these roads – within specifically, Victoria Road,

4

there’s 85 businesses, 51 major retail and commercial outlets, 34 retail businesses,

together with eight community facilities, including libraries, young people centres,

Goals, Queensmead Academy, Bourne Primary, Deanesfield Primary, an early years

centre, and special needs resources centre. The additional works, we feel, will cause

problems for a protracted period. I think that – as someone has just reminded me – that

six retail parks and not 51, I apologise for that.

6. Okay, can we have the next slide, please? This is just to give you some indication

of the sizes of the businesses in the area – large businesses like TK Maxx, Halfords,

Honda, PC World, DFS, and it goes on and on. What’s missing from there is a 30-

checkout Sainsbury’s, which is right on the corner of Station Approach and Long Drive,

and is a very active store.

7. Can I have the next slide please? These are the community facilities, along the

Victoria Road and first top left hand corner is South Ruislip Library; adjacent to that is

our youth centre. Bottom left is the Queensmead Sports Centre and bottom right is

Goals Football Centre. All these, again, are on the Victoria Road.

8. Slide 8 please? Now if you add into that mix, further congestion that will be

envisaged: Lidl, Aldi, B&M, Asda superstore, a cinema, three local housing schemes,

two speculative sites, and one Council. That will actually amount to something in the

order of 300 houses. All these will be built before 2017, when this project will start.

So, just add those into the mix of what I’ve just told you about, that will give you some

idea of the traffic – the seriousness of the traffic problem we have in South Ruislip.

9. Can I have the next slide please? Again, I won’t bore you with all this too much.

On your left, you can see traffic building up – that’s eight o’clock in the morning, going

along Victoria Road with the junction, at the traffic lights with Station Approach; and on

the other side is a similar picture coming home at night. Okay, something like 800 cars

cross this intersection and why you don’t see any cars coming the other way is because

they’re all waiting at the other side of the lights to turn right. You have another set of

traffic backed up in the middle of that, down Long Drive, waiting to cross over. So you

put all that into the mix and you have a big traffic problem.

10. Okay, let me take the next slide please? Also, together with that, our concerns

also are the primary schools in the area, and one Academy, equating to something like

5

900 primary places, and there’s about 1,000-plus at Queensmead Academy, all use that

road to facilitate them getting to school. The train journeys by commuters – that 1,500

is not 1,500; it’s actually 15,000. That was a typo. That’s the annual journeys from our

station, South Ruislip.

11. Can I have the next slide please? We believe that traffic modelling alone cannot

appreciate the complexity of the traffic in an area, and therefore we request a site visit

be made, and a traffic management plan produced to take account of the findings. I

have seen traffic modelling before, done by outside consultants, who don’t know the

area – or having visited the area – and what you actually see them come up with is

nothing like what you know is to be true in the area.

12. Can I have the next slide please? Okay, now we come onto the vent shaft. We

accept the vent shaft, which is part of the tunnelling procedure for HS2. We also are

aware that there are something in the order of 200 lorry movements a day, which will go

down the Victoria Road, up the Field End Road, and then toward Northolt and onto the

A40. We’re very concerned about the volume of the HGV lorries turning right into

Victoria Road with potential dangers to pedestrians – especially children travelling to

and from the schools that I’ve already mentioned. Our concerns also over air pollution,

and just add one more thing, the borough has, over the last two years, has had a major

refurbishment plan on our roads, and all the roads we’re talking about here have been

resurfaced. With the amount of lorries going through there, we expect to see some

damage on the road. But our primary concern is the safety of the children and

pedestrians going along that road.

13. Next slide please? Okay, I’ve explained about the vent shaft; where the traffic is

actually going through, so can we have the next slide please? Right, now we come onto

the utility works which we believe would be an absolute nightmare if not managed

properly. We’ve read the responses to our petitions, 577 and 738 with interest.

However, each site, we believe, has its own unique impact on the local area, and the

wider community which doesn't appear to be understood. So, we actually are asking for

a site visit. We think that’s imperative for potential problems of traffic flow, damage to

the environment, stress and safety of residents, businesses and community services.

14. Can I have the next slide please? This is the utility works at Station Approach and

6

Long Drive. I’d like to just bring this up here – enlarge it if we can? That area that

we’re talking about there is where people park for our local shops. There’s nine parking

bays there; coming further along you’ve got the Middlesex Arms, you’ve got the

Ramada Hotel; you've got a massive conference centre behind the Ramada Hotel.

You've also got a big cash and carry business there as well; and of course, our South

Ruislip Station. What I need to know is that all these businesses and retail outlets will

not be affected – or their entrance and exits to their premises won’t be affected by this;

and also, I’d like to know whether the car parking in that big red area that I showed you

at the top is going to be actually closed down for works on that particular site. So it’s

parking for the shops which, if we take that out, I think the businesses will suffer

terribly because that’s what they use for people to park in front of their shops to do

business with; and also the big hotel and the pub and the other businesses down there

must, must, must have access and egress to their premises.

15. We come down here to Great Central Avenue, and I just need the Committee to let

me know if we’re actually going to shut Great Central Avenue off, or is that just a site

compound and the road will operate as normal? There is one point here, and that is if,

perchance, a lorry comes from the West End Road down Station Approach which is

high-sided, it will not be able to get under the bridge, and the only way it can get out of

there is down Great Central Avenue –

16. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: If you put your finger on the screen, the magic will

show us what you’re talking about!

17. MR KAUFFMAN: That’s there; there’s an island there, and these big juggernauts

can just about turn there to get back on track. If you actually get one of these stuck

there, coupled with the utility works, you are going to have a major traffic problem in

that area. Okay, can we have the next slide please?

18. This is the Bridgwater Road site, and as the Committee might know, this is one-

way from the West End Road, through to the Victoria Road, and it’s for access only

from the Victoria Road into Bridgwater Road. This particular area here, this is where

you are suggesting that your site accesses and that is a gated area for the houses – from

here to here – and what I want to know is, will the gates be shut at night, thus retaining

the security for the residents of the area; and also if this is going to be used for

7

construction traffic, etc., will the residents be able to use their garages.

19. Coming under the bridge to the West End Road, you’ve got a right-hand turn of

the West End Road, and a left-hand turn. Down Bridgwater Road, and I’d like to know

whether or not we are going to shut Bridgwater Road, and if we are, where is that traffic

going to go to? So there’s my major concerns, together with the fact that, in the actual

park itself, that we would request that it is put back as it was. So I think that covers –

we actually went down Manningtree Road last night, and had a look at this, and you

cannot get anything down that alleyway, if that’s where you’re intending to -

20. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Point again?

21. MR KAUFFMAN: Yes, someone’s built on the back of their garage out into that

alleyway – legally or illegally, I don’t know, but you couldn't get a lorry down there. So

you might have to look at that quite seriously.

22. Okay. Can I have the next slide please? Before outlining my request and winding

this up, on Friday I actually filled up with petrol – I had 82 litres I put on board, and I

went along the Station Approach to West End Road, and suddenly realised there was

something wrong with the vehicle, so I got the vehicle turned around then it stopped

right on the junction at the traffic lights – I suddenly then realised I’d put 82 litres of

petrol in a diesel car.

23. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: You’re not the only person to do that!

24. MR KAUFFMAN: The point I want to make is the fact that within five or six

minutes of phoning the RAC, the traffic was back to the Polish War Memorial, and

that’s just me blocking half a carriageway. So I thought I would just throw that into the

mix.

25. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Keep that to yourself or other people will get ideas!

26. MR KAUFFMAN: Okay, finally, Chairman and Committee, before I outline

requests to mitigate the impacts of the project, we would ask for more than just a

desktop study on the actual traffic; more detail about an assurance about works

surrounding vent shaft sites and the three utility sites; project manager contact details for

councillors and the emergency services, have information to share. Next slide?

8

Comprehensive project plan for each site involving all stakeholders; realistic

contingency plans to cover all eventualities; a robust traffic diversion route to take

account of traffic flow issues. Next slide please? Clear signposting in advance of

critical route changes. The major problem with continental drivers coming of the A40,

down the West End Road, and then turning right into Station Approach, by the time they

get there, it’s too late. They have to try and move these trucks around. So I would

suggest that probably signage at the A40 or even up at the Target Roundabout – and it

probably needs to be in several languages, so that the Polish and Hungarian drivers can

understand that they can’t go down Station Approach. Strategically planned work on

one site at a time, keeping one carriage open at all times. Clear site safety procedures,

appropriate parking of plant and workers’ vehicles.

27. Next slide please? Possible consideration given to loss of earnings and possible –

some of the small businesses could actually go out of business over this if we don’t get

this right. In other words, the parking and access to their shops, etc. Interruption of

residents and businesses, water supplies, general utility works; and consideration of

increase in traffic flow, owing to planned housing schemes and the new retail outlets on

Station Approach, Long Drive and Victoria Road, which will come into play prior to the

commencement of the HS2 project.

28. I think this is the last slide, Mr Chairman. We would ask for a robust, strategic

management plan that ensures the residents, the businesses and the community facilities

of South Ruislip come first. Thank you very much for your time.

29. CHAIR: Thank you very much Councillor Kauffman. Mr Mould?

30. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Thank you very much. If I can put up P7013(5), just to

remind everybody of the approach we expect to take to implementation of utilities

works. The majority of works will be carried out during core hours – there will be some

need for night time working, but it will be kept to the reasonable minimum. We will

operate on the basis of rolling work sites, which with a typical length at any one time, of

no more 50 metres; and anyone who has seen a water main being replaced or a gas pipe

being sleeved will know what I mean by that – one works down the street. We expect

that there will be a need for some partial closure of roads resulting in traffic controls, but

that will be on the basis of a fairly, well, typical example of temporary traffic lights,

9

which mean that a single lane is able to continue to operate during the utilities works in

question. Where we do need to carry out multiple diversions in the same street, works

will be arranged, wherever practical, to avoid multiple openings. If we then turn to

P7014, just to get a sense of the works that we’re dealing with in the area, which

Councillor Kauffman is dealing with – P7014?

31. Again, we’ve already heard some debate about this last week, but moving from

east to west, one can see that there are some works proposed in Victoria Road – where

I’m showing now – which involve protection or diversion of nine utilities assets, likely

to take up to six months depending on what is discovered when we begin to investigate

these utilities. Daily number of works, 5-20; daily two-way vehicle movements during

the peak activity, we say up to 10. Then moving a little further west, Long Drive –

which is one of the ones that the Councillor Kauffman raised – we have six assets to

protect or divert there; we expect to be there between three to six months; and the

number of vehicle movements two-way, up to 10.

32. The vent shaft work site is not marked on this but I’m showing it now. That’s the

Ruislip vent shaft, we are predicting daily traffic movements of between 50-100 over

the peak, two-year period for construction of that. Then we move onto Bridgwater

Road, which I’m marking now, that – I think that’s six assets – and three to six months

expected duration, up to 10 vehicles two-way during the peak. Then finally, West End

Road, of which you will hear some more later, when we hear from Mr Masni and

Councillor Green, I think, a number of – where there we have about nine utilities, up to

six months expected duration, and up to 10 vehicles.

33. So that’s the broad picture here of utilities works. I don’t need to remind you of

the reasons why we are doing these works. What I can say is that our position is that we

expect – our general approach is that we expect to ensure that reasonable pedestrian

access is maintained throughout these works to commercial premises, which abut the

highways where the works are being carried out, and where reasonably practicable to

achieve it, we would look to maintain vehicular access as well.

34. The other matters that were raised are all essentially questions for preparing in a

detailed management plans, which is what we will be doing under our commitments to

the Committee – and in particular, these are matters that will be dealt with under the

10

preparation of local environment management plans, which would involve project

management, liaison, a helpline, engaging with the local community through their local

representatives – both their political representatives and their trade representatives and

so forth – to seek as far as we can to coordinate the works that we do so that they cause

the minimum reasonable disruption that we can achieve while carrying out the works

that we need to do in order to construct the railway.

35. So finally, just coming to the specific points, I think the first question was, will

entrances to shops on Long Drive, Station Approach, will that be affected? Well, it may

be but our objective and our policy is to seek to maintain access so far as we reasonably

can. Will parking for those shops be affected? It may be, but we will seek to ensure

that any interference of parking through having to close off parking spaces will be kept

to the reasonable minimum. Are we shutting Station Approach, Great Central Avenue?

No, that is not something that we expect to do. The Bridgwater Road site, the concern

about whether we will compromise the security of that community? That is something

that we would expect to work with the residents to manage so that we, as far as we can,

avoid having to do that. Will we shut Bridgwater Road? We don’t expect to shut the

Bridgwater Road; any closure of the road would be kept to the reasonable minimum, but

it’s not something we expect to do at the moment. Will any works in the park be

restored to their existing? We don’t expect to have to do any significant work to the

park, but if, in the event that we do, yes, we would expect to restore it to its existing,

after those works have been carried out.

36. Beyond that, we’re at a level of detail, I’m afraid where, again, we’re not really in

a position to give absolutely firm commitments at this stage in the development of the

project. If the petitioner would like us to write, in relation to those specific points, just

to put on record, so they have a letter, what we can say at this stage, I’d be very happy to

do so.

37. A couple of specific points have been raised today. The answers may be

somewhat qualified, but we can certainly provide a record in that way. As you say, that

will be in addition to, rather than in substitution for the assurances that have already

been given and which are in the pack.

38. MR KAUFFMAN: Yes, that would be quite acceptable actually, to get that. I

11

think the most important thing here is that all the stakeholders are well-informed at all

times; we will get through this, but we’re looking at 18 months of absolute hell, and I

think that – I hope that you will make a site visit and all your plans etc. will be based on

what you see on the ground. You mentioned about movements: I thought there was

going to be something like 200 movements from the site, the vent shaft at Victoria

Road?

39. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Well, the figure I have – our prediction in the

Environment Statement is for HGVs, for 90-100; but I’m being told that we’re able to

provide a slightly range now. We might be able to get it down to as low as 50. But that

of course depends on detailed planning. But that’s what we’re aiming for.

40. MR KAUFFMAN: Well, I hope we will have clarification, if you can write to us

on those issues.

41. MR MOULD QC (DfT): We would like – obviously, I mention those who we

would expect to work with, for the preparation of the local environment management

plan – Councillor Kauffman, I take it you’re a Borough Councillor?

42. MR KAUFFMAN: I’m a ward councillor for South Ruislip, yes.

43. MR MOULD QC (DfT): So you, if not you, whoever is in your shoes – we would

expect to engage with you in drawing up plans for these works.

44. MR KAUFFMAN: Right, okay. But your response does say 200, so I’ll expect

to –

45. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Alright, well if there’s a need to clarify that, we’ll –

46. MR KAUFFMAN: Can I just ask one more thing? It struck me that while you’ve

got the utility works going on at Station Approach, we have a major problem under that

bridge with flooding. It occurred to me that while you've got all these mains and

everything else up, that you might have a look at the drainage, so that we can probably

alleviate flooding – when you get a flash flood or it rains very heavily, that is

impassable for pedestrians.

47. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Can the highways authority talk to HS2 about it?

12

48. MR KAUFFMAN: Yes, I just thought I’d mention it while we’ve got HS2 here.

49. CHAIR: Well, I suspect Councillor Kauffman, you’ll be talking to HS2 more than

you ever dreamed of in due course, given the location of South Ruislip.

50. MR KAUFFMAN: Lovely.

51. CHAIR: Okay, have you any final comments?

52. MR KAUFFMAN: I can’t think of any – looking at all these notes I’ve got here.

53. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: The people behind you should be proud of the way

you’ve done it, because you’ve done it in a practical way; you've asked sensible things,

and you have had a fair response.

54. MS KAUFFMAN: Can the people behind say something as well? The fact that –

55. CHAIR: Are you another Councillor?

56. MS KAUFFMAN: I’m on South Ruislip Residents Association.

57. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Give your name?

58. MS KAUFFMAN: Lynn Kauffman, associated, obviously with him.

59. CHAIR: You don’t have be associated.

60. MR MEARNS: Are you the daughter?

61. MS KAUFFMAN: Now then, we have to wary of people like you. That’s the

trick of you guys – you’re all chat and have a giggle, and then you put people totally off

plan. But I would really implore you, on my knees if possible, to ask you to make a site

visit, because listening to the HS2 guys, and I've listened to them in all the meetings that

we’ve been to – they’re all very plausible and it’s all very interesting, and it’s not

always straight. In South Ruislip, we have some major problems that are going to be

exacerbated by the travel that’s going to be in addition to what’s going on in our area.

That’s where my – and we really, really do need HS2 to come have a look. We’d like to

walk you around so that you can actually see what’s there, so that at the end of the day,

you don’t make a big mistake and alienate everybody, especially our business people.

13

I’ve finished thank you.

62. CHAIR: A brief comment?

63. WARD COUNCILLOR: Yes, I’m one of the ward councillors. I’d just like to

pick you up on something you said, about you’d make sure there is always a single lane

available. There’s only one lane along part of Station Approach, so if you close one

lane, there are no lanes.

64. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Well, what I said was that our general approach will be

to seek to carry out these works so that we maintain at least one lane available. Clearly,

if we have a road in which there is a single lane, then that presents a slightly more

difficult challenge, but it’s not the first time that works have been carried out on a single

lane, and there’s a recognition by those carrying out the works that they have to try, so

far as they can, to maintain it. There are ways in which you can do that, for example,

you can try to limit any closure to a period of the day when the traffic is at its least.

We’ve had to face the challenge up and down the line of this railway of trying to tie in

bridge structures, for example, into existing roads, where we have built a bridge offline.

We recognise that you can’t do that without closing the existing road for a period whilst

you tie in the bridge. You can’t have people driving into concrete blocks while we’re

tying in the bridge. So we plan that to take place on a Saturday night or something like

between the hours of midnight and six in the morning, just as you see on the motorways:

‘Motorway closed, two weeks time so that we can carry out works’.

65. So, we recognise it, and I think we acknowledge to the community that there will

be – within the generally relatively positive approach that I have outline to you – there

will be some moments, some short periods where you may, if you happen to be

unfortunate enough to be on the road at that point, you may experience some

inconvenience. Our commitment is to seek to plan our works in consultation with the

local community, through the local environment planning to keep it to the reasonable

minimum. That’s all I can say to you now. I should say, in answer to Mrs Kauffman, I

don’t think I will give anything away by saying that, whilst we are planning the detail of

the works for this area, we will be visiting the area to make sure we understand what is

going on.

66. CHAIR: The Committee are very aware of how bad the roads are – if we wanted

14

to go out for a nice drive, we wouldn't go to South Ruislip!

67. MR KAUFFMAN: Thank you Mr Chairman.

68. CHAIR: Thank you Councillor Kauffman, and to your assistants. Right, we now

move on to petition 44, which is Graham Bartram

Ruislip Residents Association

69. MR BARTRAM: It’s been a very busy weekend.

70. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Armed forces?

71. MR BARTRAM: No, all the paperwork. Three years’ of questions answered in

one day.

72. CHAIR: How big is Ruislip Residents Association?

73. MR BARTRAM: Well, we deliver our magazine to – sorry, we have 28,000

people live in our area, and we deliver our magazine to 9,000 households.

74. CHAIR: Okay.

75. MR BARTRAM: We’re one of the oldest residents associations in the country,

we were founded in 1919, and obviously you’ve just heard from the other part of

Ruislip, South Ruislip, Councillor Kauffman, so if we could have my first slide please?

76. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: This is the bit that’s less than 1,000 years old?

77. MR BARTRAM: Well, we are getting onto that bit. I’d like to start by

introducing you to the community of Ruislip, because we’re not just a collection of

houses and shops on a map; we are a community of people. Before you see the entry for

Ruislip in the Domesday Book, probably one of the earlier pieces of evidence given at

this Committee.

78. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Where is Ruislip?

79. MR MEARNS: It’s been crossed out!

80. MR BARTRAM: No, that’s just how they emphasised in those days. Ruislip has

15

existed since before the Norman Invasion, in the Domesday Book, it is in the Hundred

Elthorne, in Middlesex, and is recorded as having 53 households, which in Domesday

Book terms is quite large. It’s under the lordship of Arnulf of Hesdin and shortly after

Arnulf got it, he gave it to Bec Abbey, which is in France – he made it the centre of their

English estates, with the Great Barn – can I have the next slide please? – being built

around 1280 to collect local tithes. The Church of St Martin of Tours was built in the

mid-13th Century and has rare examples of medieval wall paintings. Can I have the next

slide please? After the dissolution of the monasteries, the land passed to King’s

College, Cambridge, and then life was fairly quite until the Metropolitan Railway

arrived in 1904, and this led to a large expansion of the original village, with new

housing estates and the High Street extending southwards to the new station. In 1931,

the Residents Association realised that, if nothing was done, the expansion would

eventually destroy the very character of the place, that had brought so many people to

live there. They sent a delegation to King’s College, and persuaded the Fellows not to

build on the remaining part of their land, but to sell it to Ruislip Northward Urban

District Council, creating the town’s own green belt. To this day, the town is blessed

with open spaces, a national nature reserve in the middle of it, woods, and a lake.

81. Next slide please? This is the beach at Ruislip Lido. There are working farms and

fields; and we are not against innovation – we even have our own high speed railway.

Ruislip Lido Railway, Britain’s longest 12-inch gauge railway. So, if HS2 want any

advice on how to run a railway that has only three stations, then we are the experts.

82. Despite being in Greater London, we are more like a small town in the country.

Last weekend, I went to our summer flower show. Next slide please? This is held in

the Great Barn, where I perused the efforts of our keenest gardeners, have a cup of tea

and a slice of homemade cake for £2, before seeing who won the best homemade wine

category or baked the best scones. Afterwards, I visited the Cow Byre Gallery to look at

the work produced by the local embroidery guild, before finishing off the day with a

slice of homemade quiche in the small, volunteer-run café next to it. All this, in the

Manor Farm Complex, a gift from King’s College Cambridge, which includes our

library, museum, duck pond, the ruins of our castle, and our 20th Century theatre. This

is not something you could do in most parts of London, but then Ruislip isn't like most

parts of London. It has a very vibrant community.

16

83. The problem we have is that HS2 Limited is going to have no regard for

communities. They have done all their planning from maps at their desks in London,

failing to see the real world they are building a railway through, or the people who live

there. On behalf of the Association, I took part in all the community forums, but I am

afraid they were a waste of time. HS2 treated us with barely concealed contempt. They

often failed to answer the most basic questions, and usually claimed not to have the

information we requested – or that it would be coming later. One of the problems was

that none of the HS2 people at the meetings appeared to have any power to make

decisions or offer solutions. So what was the point of them?

84. The final insult came at the last meeting, where they announced their plans to

dump millions of cubic metres of spoil on the fields of Ickenham, instead of removing it

by rail, as they had promised. As it was the last meeting, there was no way for us to ask

for more information, investigate alternatives, or do anything about it. When the draft

Environmental Statement came out, it was full of errors for our areas. The Ruislip

Conservation Area was shown as the older, much smaller area - next slide please? – and

not the modern area which ends only a couple of hundred yards from the West Ruislip

Portal. You can see on here, the pale green is what’s in the draft Environmental

Statement, and the green outline is the actual conservation area. So you can see that’s

where they had it finishing, and that is where it actually finishes.

85. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Ruislip both as a village and as a town

interchangeably?

86. MR BARTRAM: Absolutely, depending on how we feel at the time. We don’t

have a Town Council, so we can call it a town or village, depending on how we feel.

87. We reported the error, along with several others in our response to the draft, but

when the final version was published, the mistakes were still there; in fact, the map you

are looking at isn't from the draft, it’s from the final version. We also pointed out that

one of the proposed construction routes given in the draft, via Ruislip High Street, Bury

Street, Ladygate Lane, Breakspear Road and Breakspear Road South, was completely

unsuitable for heavy lorries, as Ladygate Lane is a residential street with two primary

schools on it. HS2 Limited assured us that this was a mistake – next slide please? – yet

section 12.3.5 of the CFA Report Number 6 clearly shows that Ladygate Lane is still in

17

there.

88. So what do we believe? What HS2 Limited say or what it puts in print? As a

result of this uncertainty, many households in Ruislip have been left wondering whether

hundreds of lorries are going to be thundering past their child’s infant school. So far,

our relationship with HS2 Limited has not been very productive, but now is our chance

to ask you, the Select Committee, to hear our requests.

89. So, the first one, is to extend the tunnel. I’m sure you’ve heard it before. Many of

the problems we are facing as a community can be greatly reduced or even eliminated

by extending the Old Oak Common to West Ruislip Tunnel, to carry on, under the

Colne Valley Park and then the M25, just before the Chiltern Tunnel. Our Council,

Hillingdon, have commissioned a feasibility study by tunnelling experts, and have

concluded that the cost of the tunnel would not be that much more than the viaduct

option, but much less damaging to our community. We fully support our Council’s

petition to have the tunnel extended. Interestingly, when we suggested this to HS2

Limited at the very first community forum, we were told that – next slide please? –

tunnelling under the River Pinn would be problematic – Oh, that’s the Amazon, next

slide please?

90. That’s the actual River Pinn. It’s about 10-feet wide, and about two feet deep.

There’s another name for a river like that: it’s a stream.

91. MR BELLINGHAM: It goes into the Colne does it, eventually?

92. MR BARTRAM: Eventually, yes. If HS2 Limited can’t work out how to tunnel

under the Pinn, then the whole project is doomed. Later, when talked into extending the

tunnel all the way to the M25, we were told by HS2 Limited, we were told that

tunnelling under the flooded gravel pits of the Colne Valley would be very difficult and

expensive. Yet, when they unveiled their proposed route for the Heathrow Spur, from

West Ruislip to Heathrow Airport, their tunnels ran under those very same lakes. How

strange. They repeated this statement about tunnelling under gravel pits being difficult

in the petitioner response document. Next slide please? So, please can we have the

tunnel extended to the M25? This will save Ruislip Golf Course, and the Hillingdon

Outdoor Activities Centre, and greatly reduce the impact of HS2 on our community.

We still have the work to move services over the tunnel, but will be spared many years

18

of continuous construction and accompanying chaos.

93. Next slide please? Saving our community facilities. As it stands, without the

tunnel extension, HS2 Limited will damage our 18 hole public golf course and driving

range. Note, this is not a private golf course; it is a public golf course. This is where

young people learn the game. The typical round of golf here costs £14 for adults and

£10 for juniors and students. Compare that with neighbouring courses such as Moor

Park, which charges £90 for its high course, and £55 for its west course; or Northwood,

which charges £45. Neither of these have junior rates. On Friday, HS2 Limited

supplied with options for redesigning the golf course, with either nine holes or 18 very

short holes. This is because the plan doesn't include any adjacent land to replace that

lost to HS2. HS2 will also destroy our Rifle Club, a secure facility where people can

practice in safety. HOAC, a jewel in the community’s crown, built up over many

decades, to provide a wide range of outdoor activities for our children, especially those

who are disabled. You saw this facility for yourself, when you visited Denham and

Ickenham. It cannot be allowed to end just because HS2 can’t figure out a way to avoid

it or relocate it.

94. Next slide please? So, please can we have an assurance from HS2 that our 18-hole

golf course and driving range will be maintained, both during the construction of HS2

and afterwards. There is land available next to the course that HS2 could purchase in

terms of redesign the course. We realise that, whilst the course is being reconfigured, it

may not be available for play but, hopefully, this would be a matter of months, not

years. It may be necessary to relocate the golf centre, due to its proximity to the tunnel

head house. This could provide an opportunity to relocate the rifle club in a new

basement of a new golf centre. Next slide, please.

95. Again, on Friday, HS2 Ltd provided you with a report into the feasibility of

relocating HOAC. As far as I can see by reading it, it treats HOAC’s movement on to

any of the lakes as an isolated ecological event and ignores the secondary event of

Harefield Lake being vacated and left to nature. Surely many of the species will simply

move, especially if the construction of the viaduct includes specific provision for these

species, such as nesting platforms in the water away from predators.

96. Please can we have an assurance that HOAC will not be damaged or closed by the

19

construction of HS2 and that this important facility will continue to be available to our

children? The Bill has the power to make sure this happens, by moving SSSIs,

compulsory purchase and, indeed, anything necessary to build this railway. If it can

permit the demolition of a listed building, it can save a facility for disabled children.

97. HS2 has left us completely unsure what level of traffic they are planning on

inflicting on our community, but their petitioner response documents stated a peak of

between 1,395 and 1,860 HGV movements, per day, on our main routes, for up to 10

years. One problem we have is that, being at the very edge of London and being laid

out in the days when few people had cars, we have very few main routes. Next slide,

please.

98. You can see we have basically three main north/south roads: Ruislip High Street

and West End Road, which is shown in red; Ickenham High Road with Long Lane, in

green; and Breakspear Road South with Swakeleys, in purple and blue. All are at full

capacity during the rush hour and beyond, so any obstruction to any of the three tends to

lead to a complete logjam of the whole town. Next slide, please.

99. Here I’ve overlaid in yellow HS2 Limited’s proposed construction routes. Unlike

more central areas, it is not always possible to take one of several alternative routes.

HS2 Ltd assures us, in their petitioner response document, that all traffic plans will be

subject to approval by our council but, as I pointed out to them, there are only certain

routes that they can possibly use. If Hillingdon refused them permission to use those on

the grounds that they would cause traffic problems, what is HS2 going to do?

100. We ask that properly planned and considered traffic plans are drawn up, based on

up-to-date traffic censuses, including forecasts for traffic growth due to new housing,

which is being built next to the West Ruislip portal. We also ask that HS2 Ltd be made

to ensure any vehicles that are used for construction of HS2 do not cause more than the

occasional traffic problems for the community. If the traffic they need is more than our

roads can handle, they need to find an alternative, such as rail or a new haulage route

across the field from Harvil Road to the A40 Denham roundabout. We also ask that

HS2 Ltd ensures that all vehicles used meet modern environmental standards in terms of

emissions. Ideally, this would mean electric or, at the very least, hybrid lorries.

101. Disposal of tunnelling spoil: HS2 Ltd dropped a bombshell about sustainable

20

placement on us, at the very last community forum. Their plan to dump almost

1 million cubic metres of waste on our fields is horrifying and in no way sustainable.

They have failed to explain how they are going to re-contour a field with many ancient

trees on it, without destroying those trees and, with them, the landscape. HS2 Ltd talks

about replanting the hedgerows when they are finished, but how do you replant a

200-year-old tree without having to wait 200 years for it to grow?

102. People whose houses are next to the dump site are also concerned about flooding

and the possibility of mudslides. You met some of them when you visited Ickenham

and the coach stopped just beside the field in question. The Environment Agency letters

are not a guarantee that an area already prone to flooding will not flood more when its

landscape is completely altered.

103. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Graham, I’m not trying to break in, but how many

more pages have you got?

104. MR BARTRAM: Two and a half. Can we have the next slide, please? This map

shows HS2 Ltd’s proposed main work site in mustard yellow. Satellite sites are in

orange and temporary material storage, in brown. The other required line between

so-called sustainable placement, in pink. As you can see, it is a very large area.

Hillingdon Council and TfL have drawn up plans for an alternative rail head at Ruislip

depot, which would remove the need for so much waste to be dumped on our fields. It

would also remove many lorry movements. This plan is supported by the Mayor of

London and we too give it out backing. The location and approximate size of this is

shown in purple.

105. We ask that the Hillingdon/TfL rail head plan by adopted in place of the Harvil

Road/Breakspear Road South rail head proposed by HS2 or, at the very least, that the

options available at Ruislip depot and its existing need to expand are made best use of in

the building of HS2 Ltd. Next slide, please.

106. The current design for the footbridge to carry the public footpath over HS2 at

Ruislip Golf Course calls for pedestrians to walk quite a distance, sandwiched between

HS2 on one side and the Chiltern line on the other. Basically, the footpath goes up here,

along here, down here, across and that way, this area being sandwiched between HS2

and the Chiltern line. We do not think that this crossing will be a pleasant experience

21

for people. We ask that HS2 Ltd be directed to redesign the crossing to be more

pedestrian friendly, including provision for disabled users and parents with buggies and

small children. Next slide, please.

107. I hope I’ve made it clear that we don’t want a viaduct across our country park;

we’d rather have a tunnel under it. If we are to have one, then we’d want one with more

design integrity than the mock-ups that HS2 Ltd have shown us so far. These seem to

be based on the Hammersmith Flyover and have no flair whatsoever. Our Victorian

ancestors built some amazing viaducts, some so inspiring that we kept them even when

their purpose had disappeared. Most major projects follow this tradition of building

something special then building a major bridge or viaduct, something that, in 100 years’

time when HS2 is long gone, someone will want to keep purely for itself.

108. SIR PETER BOTTOMLEY: Particularly one of the Tyne Bridges.

109. MR BARTRAM: Ruislip’s town motto is non progredi est regredi; not to go

forward is to go backward. It only works if we’re going in the right direction.

Honourable members, that is my piece. I hope that I, along with my colleagues who

have already spoken and those still to do so, have convinced you to grant at least some

of our petition, especially the tunnel extension and preserving HOAC. As it stands, our

community is in for 10 years of hell, with fewer facilities at the end of it than we started

with. It will also probably take us longer to get to Birmingham, as our Chiltern line

service to Birmingham could well be killed off by HS2 Ltd. That would be ironic,

wouldn’t it?

110. CHAIR: Thank you, Mr Bartram. Mr Mould.

111. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Thank you. We’ve dealt with many of these issues

before and I don’t think you’d welcome me repeating in detail what our answer has

been. First of all, in relation to use of Ladygate Lane by HS2 heavy vehicles, we’ve

already given an assurance to the Chamber of Commerce indicating that the route that

has caused concern along the High Street, which would include this road, is not one that

the project proposes to use. We’ve made clear that there may be exceptional cases

where, for example, a heavy load can’t get under the Chiltern railway bridge on

Breakspear Road South, but we would need to find alternative access.

22

112. I’ve had another look at that assurance letter. I notice that it doesn’t actually

mention Ladygate Lane in terms although, if you read it, you can see that it embraces

Ladygate Lane. I’m going to have it reissued, so that Ladygate Lane is actually spelt

out to give further reassurance on that.

113. MR BARTRAM: Can I just say that there’s no need to use Ladygate Lane? You

could just carry on up Bury Street and turn on to Breakspear Road. You don’t need to

do the cut through Ladygate Lane at all, even if you have a large vehicle.

114. MR MOULD QC (DfT): As I said, I’ll reissue the letter on that, so that that’s

clarified. I don’t propose to say anything more about extending the tunnel; you’ve heard

our response on that issue.

115. Ruislip Golf Course, you heard a bit about this when Hillingdon appeared a

fortnight ago. We’ve done quite a lot of work to consider options for reinstating Ruislip

golf course and improving it, actually, over its existing layout, in response to the HS2

works. Hillingdon’s witness was willing to continue to talk about that when we heard

from him, and that is where matters stand at the moment. It’s right that we should, as

Mr Bartram fairly acknowledged, one should accept that there’ll inevitably be some

pause in the use of the golf course whilst it is reconfigured, in order to enable it to be

reinstated following the carrying-out of the HS2 works.

116. We have looked at bringing land beyond the existing limits of the golf course into

the golf course, but the advice we’ve had from our specialist in golf course design is that

that actually wouldn’t assist in producing a reconfigured golf course. I think we’ve

shared that with Hillingdon, and that’s where we are in relation to that point, so that’s

work in progress.

117. The Committee has heard that work is ongoing in relation to HOAC. I’m

proposing to provide a progress report on that tomorrow, in advance of the appearance

of Mr Hurd on Wednesday. Unless you would find it helpful to hear more about that

now, I’m going to deal with that then, but we are making progress in our discussions

with other stakeholders in relation to that. We clearly have a shared objective with

HOAC and with the local authorities to seek to avoid the need for HOAC to close, and

our efforts are focused very much on enabling HOAC to be relocated early in the course

of the works, so as to avoid that happening.

23

118. Traffic: we don’t intend to use Long Lane as a traffic route. There was an error on

the petitioner’s plan, A1139(17), in that respect. The Committee is familiar with our

proposed traffic routes through the area of Ickenham, from the Swakeleys roundabout

up to Harvil Road, Breakspear Road South and along Swakeleys Avenue through to

Ickenham High Street.

119. I don’t propose to say any more about sustainable placement; we had that in some

detail last week.

120. The canal feeder footbridge is a reinstatement of an existing bridge. Is that right?

121. MR BARTRAM: No, there is currently a tunnel under the Chiltern line, which

provides a public footpath on to the golf course. Obviously past the Chiltern line, you

are now building HS2, so you now somehow have to get over HS2 as well. The

proposal you’ve put forward is a footbridge. I’m not entirely certain whether the

footbridge is actually elevated because, at that point, HS2 is in the tunnel portal

structure. It may be that it’s just straight across it, at ground level. I don’t know.

122. MR MOULD QC (DfT): I’m told that the approaches to that bridge would be via

a ramp, so it should be accessible.

123. MR BARTRAM: You’re still going between 250-mile-an-hour trains on one side

and 50-mile-an-hour trains on the other.

124. MR MOULD QC (DfT): Yes, but your point was about it being accessible, as I

understood it.

125. MR BARTRAM: No, my point was about it being scary.

126. MR MOULD QC (DfT): There certainly will be trains running along the railway

line. That’s for sure. If it would help to confirm what our detailed thinking on that

bridge is, I’m sure we can write to you in that respect.

127. The final point was to do with design and you showed us a slide with the

Glenfinnan Viaduct and the Millau Viaduct. One of the things people need to

understand about structures like the Millau Viaduct is that they carry road traffic. I am

afraid, if you want to design a structure that is held up by suspension, and you want to

24

enable it to carry the sorts of loads we’re dealing with, with rail traffic, you will

necessarily produce something that is a great deal less sleek and elegant in its

appearance than that, simply because of the engineering challenge involved. Suspension

is, I suspect, unlikely to be the appropriate solution here to secure your objective, which

is an attractive visual design for that bridge.

128. The Glenfinnan Viaduct is probably closer, in the sense that it shows you an

engineering solution to the need to carry heavy rail across a viaduct, using the materials

and the technology that were available at the time when that structure was created, but

that was created a great deal of time ago, during the reign of Queen Victoria, as I recall.

Obviously we have a much wider range of materials that we are able to use for the kind

of engineering challenge that is presented by taking railways over our viaduct than were

available then. We’ve given some assurances to the local authority and others in

relation to the design of the Colne Valley Viaduct.

129. MR BARTRAM: The Hammersmith Flyover is falling down.

130. MR MOULD QC (DfT): I didn’t say we were going to be taking that as our

model.

131. CHAIR: Brief final comments, Mr Bartram?

132. MR BARTRAM: No, I think I’ve said what I need to say.

133. CHAIR: The TfL depot proposal we’ll hear more of, no doubt, when TfL appears

before us as well.

134. MR BARTRAM: Ours was always going to be, if you like, a portmanteau of

various other concerns that you’ll hear from other people, simply because of the nature

of our organisation, but I hope you will give our suggestions and our requests

consideration. Thank you very much indeed.

CHAIR: Order, order. We sit again at five o’clock.