Majestic stone arches fronted with ashlar?
Not sure there are skills to build one like that these days, in the time/cost allowed (for the 2.1-mile viaduct - 3 times the length of the brick Harringworth Viaduct*).
Could it provide the water clearance arches needed for the lakes?
Could it cope with 300km/h plus trains on a slight curve?
* Harringworth is 82 arches each of 40ft span (about 12m).
Colne Valley is 56 variable-length spans, averaging 60m.
I suspect Harringworth has longer approach embankments, and sits higher in the landscape, than Colne Valley will.
Ribblehead is 400m long and has 24 arches of 14m span.
Much of the HS2 route crossing river valleys (as was HS1 in Essex) is on piled viaducts sitting low in the landscape.
Edit:
I've had a look at the construction of the GC's London Extension in the 1890s, and the largest viaduct was at Brackley over the River Ouse.
It was intended to be 22 brick spans over 250m, but had to be modified with some girder spans after early ground settlement.
It was demolished in 1978, apparently for use as hard core in the construction of Milton Keynes' road system.
It didn't have any saving architectural features.
There are some good pictures of its construction in this article:
www.forgottenrelics.co.uk
This may be over-generalising, but I think that brick (cheap and easily transported) was the medium of choice for major railway viaducts, particularly in the south-east.
Stone was only used in areas with a ready supply of local stone, as in the Pennines, or for decorative features.
Metal was also increasingly used, such as the Bennerley Viaduct at Ilkeston (20 spans over 400m), and for major bridges.
Bennerley is impressive as engineering, yes, but I don't think you could call it "pretty".