Examination of Witnesses (Questions 1280
- 1299)
1280. That is a long way from 35 per cent future-proofing
based on forecast demand, is it not?
(Mr Spencer) There are two situations here,
really. When you are doing major works, if you are simply asking
are there enough gates at Station X when you are not intending
to do anything at Station X, then you will have a certainty of
what demand is going to be, because the only thing you are changing
is the number of ticket gates. When you are actually doing substantial
works to a station which is going to change how it operates, LUL
dictate that you provide 35 per cent future-proofing for every
aspect of that station building. That is what we are following.
I do not believe there is a significant difference between 20
and 35. I am afraid that the rationale is because there is greater
uncertainty because it is a high level of intervention because
there are more works in this situation.
1281. There is an obvious difference if you
are applying 20 per cent on top of observed flows to a situation
such as here where we have forecast demand for 2016, so we are
not simply looking at observed flows we are applying growth and
the reassigning of passengers and growth of passengers throughout
the network. We are not doing that at all, are we?
(Mr Spencer) The rationale is that because
you are doing major work you have got to be certain that those
major works are going to have a benefit over a sustained period
of time. Sixty years is the evaluation period. Putting gates in
and taking them out of the existing station where you have got
20 per cent is, basically, saying: "Well, this is a short-term
investment". It pays for itself in, maybe, five years, six
years or ten years, but clearly you do not need to assess it over
60 years. In 60 years' time the situation will be completely different.
1282. Mr Spencer, it is the standard you are
applying. I am not going to spend any more time on it. The Members
of the Committee have heard your view.
1283. Sir Peter Soulsby: I think the
Committee did understand, from the evidence given by Mr Spencer
earlier on the nature of the figures being put in front of us,
which were projections and predictions and which were looking
at eventualities that may be some distance in the future. We have
understood the nature of the figures.
1284. Mr Elvin: Just to be absolutely
sure, Mr Spencer, what you have done is applied 35 per cent at
the gateline as well as everywhere else. Is that right?
(Mr Spencer) Well, the only test we are doing
of future capacity ourselves is gateline testing. The 35 per cent
has also been applied by you in terms of the pedroute analysis
that you have done.
1285. That is what I wanted to come on to.
1286. Mr Laurence: Before he does, the
exhibit is exhibit E to Mr Weiss, which contains the relevant
standard which the witness is being asked to comment on. I wonder,
sir, if Mr Elvin would just give the witness an opportunity to
look at the actual bit of the relevant standard that refers to
this 20 per cent, in case there is anything that he would like
to add. He has had to do it without having the relevant passage
of the standard drawn to his attention.
1287. Mr Elvin: I am very grateful to
Mr Laurence, but he will have his opportunity to re-examine.
1288. Sir Peter Soulsby: I am sure he
will. Nonetheless, I think if we can illustrate it on the screen
while we are talking about it, it would be helpful.
1289. Mr Elvin: It is page A1 of document
A16.[20]
In case there is any doubt, Mr Spencer, the
paragraph I am referring to is the one that follows the three
bullet points.
(Mr Spencer) Sure.
1290. Sir Peter Soulsby: Thank you very
much for reminding us of that, Mr Elvin.
(Mr Spencer) I have got nothing to add. You
are not putting anything to me, are you?
1291. Mr Elvin: No. It was not my intervention.
1292. Sir Peter Soulsby: Mr Elvin, do
continue.
1293. Mr Elvin: Mr Spencer, of course
what pedroute does—and as you say there are later design
stages that will have to be followed, but we are not there yet—is
gives you a good, general overview of how the station will work
on a wider basis rather than simply looking at the gateline. It
may not be perfect, it may not incorporate all the detailed design
that will take place before construction, but it gives you a good,
general view of the overall picture. Does it not?
(Mr Spencer) pedroute is a very valuable aid
to detailed design of a station. It is not a means by which you
verify or otherwise the adequacy of a facility, it is a very,
very helpful design tool.
1294. It gives you a broad picture of the overall
station.
(Mr Spencer) It gives you a feel for as it
is defined; it tells you what the level of service is: is it a
nice place to be or a nasty place to be? That is what pedroute
tells you.
1295. Can I just then come, with those preliminary
remarks, to where there are areas of difference? I do not think
we need to discuss technicalities to try and understand how those
areas of difference arise. As I understand it, you have taken,
effectively, the base position that CRLR has looked at and made
four major adjustments before applying the 35 per cent. Is that
right?
(Mr Spencer) Absolutely, because they are all
future year forecasts, so all of them should be subjected to future-proofing.
1296. Let us run through them briefly and then
test the ones that need testing. On the first one, you have assigned
65 per cent of the passengers to Liverpool Street, 35 per cent
to Moorgate.
(Mr Spencer) We have done that, yes.
1297. The second one is an increase in passenger
growth by 4 per cent.
(Mr Spencer) Three point three per cent.
1298. Can I tell the Committee I am not going
to bother with that because it makes a difference of just 300
passengers, so we will forget number two. Number three is you
then increase the market share of passengers using Crossrail from
13.3 per cent to 20 per cent.
(Mr Spencer) Correct.
1299. That increases the numbers by about 50
per cent. Another 5,000.
(Mr Spencer) Four thousand eight hundred, so
about 50 per cent.
20 Committee Ref: A16, Station Planning Standard Extract
(SCN-20060125-030). Back
| 
