Examination of Witnesses (60 - 79)
60. There are also plans showing examples of
the alternatives to the western alignment. That can be seen in
the Non-technical summary, although I do not think it is necessary
to trouble the Committee with the details of it. Similarly for
the eastern arms, again, alternatives were looked at and rejected.
61. Turning to the question of policy support
rather than other forms of support, the project meets national
policy requirements because it provides sustainable, accessible
and inclusive transport. It provides important relief to congestion,
to the transport system of London, and provides further incentives
for the use of sustainable transport over private vehicles of
those living and working in and around London. As I have already
mentioned, and I think we are just about to have the diagram again,
it will integrate well with the existing rail and Underground
systems, and there is the central area showing the interchanges
between Crossrail, the national rail system and the various branches
of the Underground system. It also enjoys the support of planning
authorities, as I have mentioned. All Underground lines will see
a reduction in passengers, other than the Northern line, as I
have already mentioned, with the greatest decreases occurring
on the five lines that I have already indicated and you have the
table. Providing better accessibility, it provides support for
the policies of regeneration again in the areas which have been
identified.
62. Turning now to the planned services, once
Crossrail is constructed and fully operational it will be expected
that there will be considerable demand, not surprisingly, we would
say, given the circumstances both at present and then likely to
hold sway when it is opened. The proposal therefore is that 24
trains per hour will be run in the central section. To the east
this will split equally with 12 trains per hour to Abbey Wood
down to the south east and to Shenfield in the north east. The
western side has only one limb, which is the Great Western main
line, with a branch from the Great Western main line to Heathrow
airport. This means that only a proportion of Crossrail trains
will run west of Paddington, up to 10 per hour, four of which
will run to Heathrow and at least four of which will run to Maidenhead.
63. The new Crossrail line to Abbey Wood, running
parallel on the existing North Kent line, will only take trains
going through the central tunnel, but on the line to Shenfield
Crossrail services will share the slow or so-called "E lines"
with those suburban passenger services not subsumed by Crossrail
and which are designed to be complementary. The further distance
passenger trains and the freight trains which use the fast lines,
once Crossrail opens, will be unaffected during normal operation.
The Committee will recall that, as I said earlier, it is not proposed
that Crossrail will interfere with the current main line services
which will retain their use of the fast lines. On the Great Western
main line Crossrail will share the slow or so-called relief lines
with freight and complementary passenger services to Reading.
The intercity services and Heathrow will continue to use the fast
or main lines during normal operation. Greater capacity is obtained
on the existing network by a variety of features: the use of longer
trains, fitting in more trains through investment in the infrastructure,
which is part of the Crossrail project, and in increased attention
to design of the timetable. There is a variety of measures to
create that improvement in capacity.
64. We now turn to a brief description of the
Bill. The Bill provisions and the concepts used in the Bill borrow
a good deal from the experience of the last major infrastructure
Bill in 10 years, that is, CTRL, but it also borrows from the
experience gained from operating that legislation. Some lessons
have been learned. The Bill seeks a range of powers to build and
operate Crossrail, which include the following matters: the power
to construct and maintain Crossrail and its associated and enabling
works; granting deemed planning permission to construct Crossrail
and its associated and enabling works; removing the need for special
heritage consents, listed building and conservation area consents,
in buildings and areas specified in the Bill where this is necessary
to construct the railway and the associated works.
65. It confers powers of compulsory purchase
in two forms. There are powers of direct compulsory purchase in
the normal sense of taking the land absolutely but there are also
powers to enable temporary possession to be taken in certain circumstances.
The Bill will authorise the stopping up or closure of highways
and other public thoroughfares, including navigable waterways.
It will also allow the alteration of highways, and they are specified.
It will enable rights to use certain rail facilities to be taken
by Crossrail or varied specifically for the purposes of the Crossrail
services; and it will confer such other powers that are required
in connection with the construction and operation of Crossrail
and its various associated and enabling works.
66. The provisions of the Bill deem planning
permission to be granted for the authorised works, and that is
deemed to be subject to conditions requiring the approval of the
local planning authority for certain matters of detail. The Bill
does not preclude the influence of local planning authorities
in the detailed design of the scheme. The extent of matters subject
to approval under these conditions will depend on whether the
local authority is a qualifying authority, that is, it has given
an undertaking to the Secretary of State about the way in which
it will handle applications for approval of details. For qualifying
authorities the matters subject to approval will include certain
construction arrangements. Where works affect highways certain
matters will be subject to the approval of the highway authority.
I do not pretend, of course, that it leaves matters significantly
in the hands of the local planning authority in the way that a
normal planning application would but nor does it cut out local
authorities completely from consultation and influence on details
of the scheme.
67. With regard to compulsory purchase powers,
it is considered in the case of those powers that the public interest
in acquiring the land to build the project, whether permanently
or temporarily, outweighs the interest of owners and occupiers.
There is, of course, no sensible way to build a scheme of this
size through the nation's capital without acquiring land held
by others. For that reason of overriding public interest the scheme
is compliant with the provisions of the European Convention on
Human Rights.
68. The Bill seeks powers for compulsory acquisition
within the limits of deviation for the works. These limits are
intended to ensure sufficient flexibility of the detailed design
of the scheme. The full extent of the land within the limits,
however, will not necessarily be acquired. The Secretary of State
has policies which are contained in large part in the information
papers the Committee has been handed today, policies to mitigate
the effects of compulsory purchase wherever possible, including
Information Paper C9, which is the land acquisition policy. What
this says in simple terms is that while the Bill generally includes
full land acquisition powers, the exercise of those powers in
an individual case will operate on the basis that the Secretary
of State will seek to exercise the powers only so far as is necessary
at the time that the detailed design has been carried out. In
other words, the compulsory powers in the Bill are for the maximum
extent of the Secretary of State's powers to compulsorily acquire.
The Secretary of State will operate a policy of only taking so
much as is reasonably required once the detailed design works
have been done. It should be possible and practicable to acquire
in many cases smaller areas of land without compromising the Secretary
of State's ability to secure the construction and implementation
of the project in a timely and economic manner and, in accordance
with any undertaking given by the Secretary of State in respect
of the Bill, agreement will be sought with the landowners where
reasonable terms can be reached. In other words, the compulsory
powers will only be used as a last resort.
69. It is also necessary to draw the Committee's
attention to what the Bill does not do. There are a number of
locations in central London where the Bill seeks powers to demolish
buildings, including some which are listed buildings and some
which are in conservation areas, but does not seek powers from
Parliament to replace those buildings in addition to the operational
works needed for the construction of the railway, the construction
of the station and other associated works such as ventilation
and emergency access.
70. Locations effectively fall into two categories:
those where operational works are to take place, such as the construction
of stations or shafts, and those where demolition is required
for the use of the land as a work site, but there are no permanent
operational works on the land. In those two categories of case
the Bill does not seek permission for non-operational development
above the stations or above the structures, whatever they are
going to be. These replacement structures which the Bill does
not contain powers to authorise are referred to in the Environmental
Statement and elsewhere as OSD, over-site development. The form
of OSD should be applied for and determined through the normal
planning process by the appropriate planning authority subject,
of course, to the power by the Deputy Prime Minister to deal with
such cases on appeal or by virtue of his powers of call-in.
71. The Bill will require that any OSD will
either require an environmental impact assessment on its own where
the works are integral to the new works, or they will require
environmental assessment where the planning authority determines
that it is necessary because it would be likely to have significant
environmental effects. What this ensures via the powers of the
local authority is that there will be assessment where only the
loss of the buildings has been assessed by the Environmental Statement
of the Bill. As I say, the Bill only seeks powers to remove them
and for limited operational replacements.
72. Although, of course, the Bill does not give
powers for OSD, there is an obvious and overwhelming likelihood
that in all these cases some form of development will take place
at the same time as the construction of Crossrail or very soon
thereafter, and the reasons why we say it is extremely unlikely
that only the operational works will be constructed are these.
First, all the stations will have to be designed to ensure the
appropriate load bearing and servicing facilities, with assumptions
being made about the size and general dimensions of the buildings
that are likely to go up. Secondly, the sites are within areas
with very high land values—Oxford Street and Tottenham Road
and the like—where there will be a strong financial incentive
to redevelop. Thirdly, there are currently discussions between
the department and the local authorities as to what might be a
reasonable timescale for making outline planning applications
for each of the OSDs. The Secretary of State intends that, following
those discussions, an undertaking will be brought forward before
the Committee by the time of the end of the hearing, so it is
intended that those discussions will reach fruition before the
Committee hearings conclude.
73. To assist the Committee and others material
has been provided as to the appearance of the operational works
in question in the Environmental Statement and illustrative material
has been provided at Appendix C2 of the possible form that OSDs
could take, as suggested by the requirements of load bearing and
servicing of the works which are authorised by the Bill. I will
just give the Committee an illustration. This is the corner of
Tottenham Court Road and Oxford Street.[9]
The Committee will see on the right hand side Centre Point and
in blue the location of the fountains that are currently in front
of Centre Point, and then to the left is the corner of Charing
Cross Road and Oxford Street, which has one of the major entrances
to Tottenham Court Road Tube at the moment, which is marked as
a cleared site. This is obviously a high value and prominent location
where there will be considerable works and where the Bill only
seeks powers to put back the operational works needed for the
station. What the plans in the Environmental Statement show is
not what is going to go back in terms of the final form of development
but what the operational characteristics are of the development
which is authorised by the Bill, therefore showing the maximum
impact that could happen because, of course, in reality one simply
will not see this because there will be additional development
over the station to deal with the buildings that were lost.
74. This is a view, with Centre Point on the
left, facing down Charing Cross Road, so looking due south, and
that is Oxford Street to the right.[10]
If we zoom in a little the Committee will see on the right hand
side, with various arrows, an assumed line of Gosleth Yard operational
buildings and the like. All this plan shows just above street
level is the operational works which the Bill authorises. It does
not give the Committee or anyone else an impression of what will
go there ultimately because that will be a matter for the normal
planning processes. The local planning authority will in the usual
way decide, having regard to their policies and the context of
the site, what is appropriate development to go over the top.
This location can also be seen in a number of different directions,
and perhaps we can look at them briefly. This is the view facing
due east, facing Centre Point and its fountains, and this is the
view looking west up Oxford Street, and again you will see the
blank areas to the left.[11],[12]
The railway development is shown above the railway to fill in
the gap once the works are complete. That remains a matter for
the local planning authorities in the usual way. I have not put
up any illustrative material for the Committee and I stress to
anyone looking at the Environmental Statement illustrative material
that it is just that, for the reasons I have just mentioned, namely,
the decision as to what goes back in place of the buildings that
are lost, is for normal planning powers.
75. I then propose to turn to the works which
are comprised in the Crossrail project. This is a plan which shows
the main works proposed throughout the route which I am not going
to ask the Committee to decipher because there are more detailed
plans which I can show the Committee.[13]
If the Committee would turn up the Non-technical summary of the
Environmental Statement, at page 40 the Committee, for example,
will see the main works in the western section, where the new
stations are to be, where existing routes or tunnels are to be
used, where there are to be bridge works and the like; similarly,
if the Committee turns to page 46, for the north eastern section.
There are plans for each of the sections and, as I mentioned earlier,
the Committee will be getting a legible copy of this plan showing
an overview of the main works as they are distributed across the
route.
76. The works, as I have mentioned earlier,
comprise twin-bore tunnels and this diagram gives the Committee
a comparison between the dimensions of the Crossrail tunnels with
the most recent Underground works, which was the Jubilee Line
extension, and the Committee will see that the Crossrail tunnels
are somewhat larger and that the trains in use are more appropriate
to the type of service that Crossrail will operate rather than
a pure Underground metro service.[14]
You will see from that diagram that the trains will operate overhead
electrification. I will come back to the rolling stock in a moment
but that gives the Committee an idea of the comparative size of
the tunnels.
77. Also to be provided, of course, will be
stations. This is a typical layout of a station showing the twin
tunnels and platforms and the various points of access, ticket
halls and the like.[15]
Perhaps Mr Bennett can zoom in one side or another to show that
in a little more detail, as the Committee will expect, the various
services to be provided so that one can buy a ticket and get to
the train, or get away from the train, as the case may be. Also
required are emergency intervention points, ventilation shafts
and escape shafts.[16]
This illustrative diagram shows the sort of provision that is
needed and if Mr Bennett will zoom in on the left hand side the
Committee will get an idea of the sort of shafts that are needed.
You will see that there is a shaft with emergency access stairs,
and you can see the emergency access from the running tunnel through
to the emergency access stairs and the ventilation shaft, both
separately accessed.
78. There will be train depot and stabling facilities,
track works, traction power and signalling systems, communication
systems, a route control centre, works at existing stations to
improve and include platform lengthening, and a river crossing
for the south eastern section. Perhaps that can be put up for
the Committee.[17]
That is the crossing from the portal of North Woolwich down to
the south eastern route and the Plumstead portal, which is the
portal on the far right hand side of the picture. Works will also
improve existing rail facilities in a number of places. To take
one example, a substantial increase in passenger capacities will
be created in the growing rail corridor which is east of Maidenhead
and, as I mentioned earlier, it will subsume or alter the existing
slow suburban services rather than the main line fast services.
The use of the Great Western corridor east of Maidenhead will
be intensified by means of investment in infrastructure and the
use of longer trains.
79. The trains for Crossrail, as I mentioned
earlier, and this is an illustration, are somewhat larger than
the trains that London is used to by way of Underground trains.[18]
The rolling stock for Crossrail will be about 200 metres long
comprising 10 cars of 20 metres each grouped into five. They will
be more spacious than London is used to in terms of the accommodation
in Underground cars, and they will be so designed to allow quicker
and easier access and exit. They will draw power from overhead
electrical lines, as you will see from the illustration, and,
as I have mentioned already, it is proposed that there should
be 24 trains per hour running through the central section. The
fleet size will allow at peak demand the operation of 116 five-car
units at any one time from a fleet of about 129 five-car units.
9 Crossrail Environmental Statement, Appendix C2,
Plaza Ticket Hall, Crossrail Operational Structures - Eastern
Ticket Hall Site Plan, billdocuments.crossrail.co.uk (LINEWD-EXH02-023). Back
10
Crossrail Environmental Statement, Appendix C2, Plaza Ticket
Hall, Crossrail Operational Structures - Eastern Ticket Hall -
Oxford Street Elevation facing south, billdocuments.crossrail.co.uk
(LINEWD-EXH02-024). Back
11
Crossrail Environmental Statement, Appendix C2, Plaza Ticket
Hall, Crossrail Operational Structures - Eastern Ticket Hall -
Charing Cross Road facing east, billdocuments.crossrail.co.uk
(LINEWD-EXH02-025). Back
12
Crossrail Environmental Statement, Appendix C2, Plaza Ticket
Hall, Crossrail Operational Structures - Eastern Ticket Hall -
Charing Cross Road facing west, billdocuments.crossrail.co.uk
(LINEWD-EXH02-026). Back
13
Crossrail - Main works proposed (LINEWD-EXH02-027). Back
14
Comparison of Crossrail and Jubilee Line Extension tunnels (LINEWD-EXH02-028). Back
15
Illustrative layout of a Crossrail station (LINEWD-EXH02-029). Back
16
Illustrative diagram of a Crossrail station, indicating shafts
(LINEWD-EXH02-030). Back
17
Aerial view of the South Eastern Route (LINEWD-EXH02-031). Back
18
Illustration of Crossrail rolling stock (LINEWD-EXH02-032). Back
|
