Western Rail Link To Heathrow

Non-T echnical Summar y - Initi al Envir onmental Infor mati on R eport Networ k R ail Western Rail Link To Heathrow Network Rail Non-Technical Summary - Initial Environmental 129088-JAC-REP-HEN-000014 A03 18 February 2016 129088

Western Rail Link To Heathrow Project no: Document title: Document No.: Revision: B1964601 Non-Technical Summary - Initial Environmental 129088-JAC-REP-HEN-000014 A03 Date: 18 February 2016 Client name: Network Rail Client no: 129088 Project manager: Author: File name: Jacobs U.K. Limited 1180 Eskdale Road Winnersh, Wokingham Reading RG41 5TU United Kingdom T +44 (0)118 946 7000 F +44 (0)118 946 7001 www.jacobs.com Keith Munday Simon White Copyright 2016 Please select a legal entity from the Change Document Details option on the Jacobs ribbon. The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Jacobs. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Jacobs constitutes an infringement of copyright. Limitation: This report has been prepared on behalf of, and for the exclusive use of Jacobs Client, and is subject to, and issued in accordance with, the provisions of the contract between Jacobs and the Client. Jacobs accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for, or in respect of, any use of, or reliance upon, this report by any third party. Document history and status Revision Date Description By Review Approved A01 29 Jan 2016 Non-Technical Summary For client comment SW RV RL A02 11 Feb 2016 Non-Technical Summary - Final SW RV KM A03 18 Feb 2016 Non-Technical Summary Final amendments SW SM KM 129088-JAC-REP-HEN-000014 i

Non -Technical Summary Introduction Heathrow is the UK s busiest airport with 73 million passengers annually. The London Underground, Heathrow Connect and Heathrow Express provide excellent connections to central London. However, there are limited options for rail passengers travelling to and from other destinations. The Western Rail Link to Heathrow (WRLtH), the Proposed Scheme, will address this by providing a new direct link from Reading. Purpose of the Initial Environmental Network Rail has produced this Initial Environmental (IEIR) as part of the on-going Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and specifically to support public consultation on the Proposed Scheme. The purpose of the consultation on the IEIR is to allow interested individuals and organisations to:- comment on the proposed alignment; comment on the alternative options that have been considered and discounted; and understand how the local area may be affected, and options for reducing these impacts. It is expected that Preliminary Environmental Information (PEI) will be published in 2017 to support public consultation. This will provide a summary of likely significant environmental effects as defined by the Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2009. An EIA Scoping Report was published in 2015 which defined the proposed approach to the EIA. Following the consultation on the PEI an Environmental Statement (ES) will be produced and submitted with the DCO application. Description of the Proposed Scheme The Proposed Scheme would involve the provision of a rail connection between Reading railway station and Heathrow Airport Terminal 5. Trains to Heathrow would use the existing railway lines between Reading and Langley and would then transfer to the new rail link east of Langley. Figure 1 Proposed Scheme 1

The main elements of the Proposed Scheme would include: Re-alignment of platform 4 at Langley station; Diversion of the existing Up Relief and Up Goods lines between Langley and Iver; Provision of a new connection to the existing GWML at Langley; A new Rail Intersection Bridge (RIB) to allow the Proposed Scheme underneath the Great Western Main Line (GWML); Deep cutting, below ground either side of the RIB; A 5km twin-bore rail tunnel between Richings Park and Bedfont Court at Heathrow Terminal 5, with new cut and cover tunnels at each end of the twin-bore tunnels; Intervention shafts with headhouse buildings and secure compounds at Richings Park and Bedfont Court, shafts 1 and 4; and Ventilation/intervention shafts with headhouse buildings and secure compounds at Old Wood (south of M4) and Poyle, shafts 2 and 3. Design options The design of the Proposed Scheme is being progressed and there are alternative options for:- The construction of the RIB; The extent of the works at Langley Station; and Whether to include a cross-over in the track design at shaft 4. Key environmental risks The environmental risks for the construction and operational phases of the Proposed Scheme are summarised in Table A. Table A: Key environmental risks Receptor Potential Adverse Risks Air quality Impacts from construction including exhaust emissions, dust emissions. Impacts from permanent changes in traffic flows. Cultural heritage Construction compound in areas of known heritage features around the northern portal of the bored tunnel. Alterations to Langley station, (locally listed). Ecology Impacts on protected species including for example, bats and badgers. Loss of habitat and habitat fragmentation during construction. Habitat change (resulting from e.g. change in water quality). Impacts to designated sites particularly Opposite Iver Station BNS and Lower Colne SINC. Potential spread of invasive species. Landscape and visual Impacts to local landscape character and Green Belt designation. Visual impacts to residents and users of PRoW and public open space, particularly during construction. Visual impacts to vehicle travellers along North Park and Bath Road. Visual impacts to workers and visitors to commercial properties surrounding Poyle intervention and ventilation shaft and Bedfont Court intervention shaft. 2

Receptor Potential Adverse Risks Noise and vibration Noise impacts during construction and operation specifically along the surface sections of the route north of the bored tunnel. Vibration impacts during construction and operation specifically for the sub-surface sections of the route. Surface water and flood risk Loss of floodplain and changes to flood flows in particular north of GWML. Impacts on WFD surface waterbodies notably Horton Brook. Hydrogeology Impacts on groundwater resources (Lambeth Group and Chalk Aquifers and Drift aquifer) from below ground activities specifically at the RIB and tunnel portal. Geology, soils, and contaminated land Construction work required in areas of known land contamination and historic landfills including Tanhouse Farm No. 1 Landfill, Iver Landfill and Hollow Hill Lane Landfill. Materials and waste Large quantities of excavated waste from tunnelling activities. Use of embodied carbon and impact of vehicle emissions. Use of minerals and other finite raw material. Socioeconomics and land use Loss of Grade 1 agricultural land particularly during construction. Increased HGV / vehicle movement on local roads could affect the accessibility of local businesses. Ground settlement risk to infrastructure and properties, associated with tunnelling operation. Communities and human health Impacts on local communities and businesses particularly associated with construction impacts and disturbance including the main construction areas and construction traffic routes. Traffic and transport Permanent closure of Hollow Hill Lane. Increase in traffic vehicle movements particularly during construction. Impacts on users of Langley station, PRoW and bus services. Cumulative effects In-combination impact of adverse environmental risks. There would be the potential for some beneficial environmental changes including:- Improved accessibility to Heathrow Airport for leisure and business travellers from the Thames Valley, South Coast, South West, South Wales and West Midlands; Reduced congestion at Paddington station; Modal shift from road vehicles to rail services, potentially reducing road traffic and improving air quality; Investment in the local economy and local job opportunities during construction; and Provision of improved transport links with international markets to secure trade and investment, further establishing the Thames Valley and surrounding area as an excellent location for businesses to locate. Key mitigation measures As part of the development of the Proposed Scheme, a series of design workshops were held to identify where potential environmental impacts could be designed out. The consequence of this is that the Proposed Scheme includes a number of measures intended to avoid or reduce potential impacts as summarised in Table B. Table B: Embedded environmental mitigation Mitigation Measure Environmental Benefit Design Length of bored tunnelling Longer tunnel reduced the environmental impacts which could have arisen, specifically for ecology, heritage, noise, landscape and visual receptors. 3

Mitigation Measure Length of cut and cover tunnel Environmental Benefit Length of tunnelling reduced the environmental impacts which could have arisen from a longer length of open cutting, including reducing permanent visual and land take impacts. Route of the alignment Route avoided potential impacts that could otherwise have occurred including ecology, contaminated land, noise and community. Depth of the tunnel Alignment for the bored tunnel reduced groundwater impacts. Location of shaft 2 and 3 Location of shafts reduced the construction impacts that could have occurred specifically for ecology. RIB and retained cutting Proposed construction methods reduced the potential groundwater impacts. Langley station Proposals limited to Platform 4 with reduced disruption to users of Langley station. Construction Construction method Proposed use of Earth Pressure Balance Tunnel Boring Machine resulting in reduced risk of groundwater / vibration risks. Construction method Rail possessions would largely occur on bank holidays, with two tracks always remaining open, reducing disruption to the GWML. As well as this embedded mitigation the IEIR has identified further potential mitigation measures that will be considered as the EIA progresses. A summary of these mitigation measures is provided in Table C. Table C: Potential additional mitigation measures Receptor Key Potential Mitigation Air quality Locating equipment away from receptors, and use of efficient, well maintained equipment. The use of a conveyor in order to remove excavated material by rail. Limits on the number of vehicle movements within a specific period e.g. each day. Cultural heritage Mitigation determined by geophysical survey and trial trenching. Ecology Timing of site clearance operations and works to avoid the most sensitive periods. Requirement for fish removal ahead of any dewatering works to aquatic habitats. Minimise disturbance during construction through screening. Use of temporary fences. Avoid sensitive and/or valuable features. Creation of replacement habitat and reconnection of fragmented habitat. Landscape and visual Screen planting where practical. Sympathetic design of the RIB, retaining walls, tunnel portals and shafts. Alignment and design of access roads to reduce visual impacts. Sensitive reinstatement of the construction areas. Noise and vibration Minimising the requirement for working outside normal working hours. Use low noise emission plant where possible. Use temporary noise screens around particularly noisy activities. Monitor vibration levels with works to be stopped if risk of exceedance of agreed limits. Noise barriers / earth bunds, if required by predicted future noise levels. Specify plant with lower noise levels. Fit silencers and / or sound attenuating louvres. 4

Receptor Key Potential Mitigation Surface water and flood risk Provision of floodplain compensation areas. Restriction of surface water runoff to greenfield rates. Minimise the duration of exposure of bare earth surfaces and mitigate uncontrolled runoff from newly constructed areas. No direct discharge of contaminated water to surface watercourses. Realigned channels created with characteristics to the replaced channel. Hydrology and hydrogeology Piling risk assessments and piling methodologies developed to reduce risks to aquifers. Geology, soils, and contaminated land Limit the potential for exposure of contaminated materials. Measures to ensure that gas does not build up in structures. Safe working procedures during any remediation works. Good practice measures to reduce impacts on soils. Materials and waste Managing waste in accordance with the waste hierarchy. Use of secondary aggregates and recycled materials where possible to reduce the need for the use of primary raw material. Socioeconomics and land use Restoring land used temporarily during construction to as close as possible to its original condition. Communities and human health No additional mitigation has been identified at this stage. Traffic and transport Timing deliveries to avoid rush hour and busy periods. Appropriate signage for diversions. Notifying users of disruption and timings of works. Next steps As part of the process of producing the EIA Scoping Report, published in 2015 (Jacobs, 2015a) and this IEIR the following have been identified as key matters for resolving as the project moves forward:- Water Framework Directive compliance for the diversion of the Horton Brook; and Floodplain loss mitigation. The major stages in the project moving forward will include:- Preferred Option late 2016: Following the consultation period scheduled for early 2016, Network Rail intends to engage with key organisations to address the matters that have been raised. The intention would be to try and achieve general agreement to the alignment and major elements of the preferred option. This would include determining the final design option for the RIB, Langley Station and shaft 4 at Bedfont Court. EIA ongoing: The EIA process has been on-going alongside the design development and will include the EIA Scoping Report, this IEIR, the PEI and ES. No detailed assessment has been made of significant environmental effects at this stage. In 2016 surveys will be undertaken for landscape, noise and heritage to inform the PEI. PEI early 2017: The PEI will provide an indication of the likely significant effects that are predicted to arise from the Proposed Scheme. It will also detail all the mitigation included in the Proposed Scheme at that stage. This will be published as part of a public consultation period to allow interested individuals and organisations to comment on the proposals to inform the EIA process and the development of the ES prior to the DCO application being made. DCO 2017: The intention is to make a DCO application in late 2017. This application will include the ES. Construction: The intention is that construction will commence in 2019. Operation: The aim is that train services will commence in 2024. 5