MORE than half the responses to the HS2 Environmental Statement, published alongside the hybrid Bill last December, were received on ‘pre-produced material’ – and the greatest item of concern was minimising the new line’s impact on the Chilterns.

This is disclosed in the ‘Summary of Issues Raised by Comments on the Environmental Statement’ prepared by Golder Associates, independent assessors appointed by Parliament’s Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.

Of the total of 21,833 comments “the most common type of response received was the campaign postcard,” Golder reported – with 11,679 postcards, more than 53 per cent of the total responses, containing “some standard text.” Other individual submissions ranged in size up to 800 pages.

Although the consultation was open to national reaction, and not restricted to the public in the immediate project hinterland, Golder reported: “Overall, minimising the impact of the proposed route through the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty is the single greatest issue of concern for respondents” – with more tunneling being most requested.

Other key issues were the impact of construction on local communities; sound, noise and vibration; and concerns about the consultation process and its limited time.

Golder said the high numbers of comments on tunnelling “are due to the specific campaign demanding a full length tunnel under the Chilterns AONB supplemented by other respondents also calling for the same feature within their responses.

“The second ranked tunnel campaign is for the extension of the Northolt Tunnel further westwards to minimise impacts on the Ickenham area. This tunnel is to the east of the Colne valley and AONB area.”

The third ranked tunnel request concerned Camden and the HS2/HS1 link – now withdrawn from the hybrid Bill and subject to a separate new evaluation of alternatives.

As for the consultation process itself, Golder reported: “Many respondents believe that the environmental impact assessment regulations have not followed EU or UK procedure. Many respondents believe that the lack of a Strategic Environmental Assessment has also led to the downplaying of cumulative and wider scale impacts as well as displaying a breach of required legislation.”

Concerns were also expressed regarding ‘sustainability’: “ Respondents are concerned that the measures of sustainability claimed for the HS2 option are based on flawed methodology and that the claims made for the project cannot be trusted.

“Respondents particularly focus on the carbon balance projected for the route and its contribution to the UK’s carbon, energy and climate change goals.

“The other key areas of focus are comments on the scheme’s contribution to the national economy and transport network, questioning whether the development is an appropriate approach for delivering a sustainable economy.”

On ecology, Golder noted: “Concern over ecological fragmentation was a frequent theme resulting from habitat loss, disruption and the proposed fencing along the route. Respondents frequently referred to bats and barn owls although other species of local significance (fauna and flora) were also highlighted.”

Golder also reported that the number of comments about water resources “has been influenced by its inclusion in a campaign which makes an unsubstantiated statement that the development of the route will affect drinking water quality.”

• Just 87 favourable comments were made about HS2: “Respondents in this category expressed support for the HS2 concept and the benefits that the line could bring to the national economy,” said Golder Associates.