Examination of Witnesses (Questions 3300
- 3319)
3300. Mr Thornely-Taylor, you have received
complaints about the North Kent tunnel, is that right?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Yes.
3301. Where have you told us that? In any document,
in any analysis of CTRL, any Environmental Assessment for this
Crossrail?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) No, I certainly have not
given evidence about all the phone calls I receive from people
about groundborne noise which is extensive. I am not sure if it
would be helpful. I am well aware of the fact that there are problems
in North Downs tunnel.
3302. What was promoted by you relevant to North
Downs tunnel at 40 has caused a problem, do you agree with that?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) I explained in detail
yesterday what had happened. It is the application of the prediction
method with a very large uncertainty band attached to it, and
what I think Union Railways would say, who are no longer my client.
What I think they would say is they did what was intended which
was to predict for average effect of 40 which inevitably means
some will go over 40. That is not what Crossrail will do but it
appears to be what Union Railways did. One would expect from the
nature of the statistical properties of their prediction methods
levels up to 48 above the North Downs tunnel, maybe even higher.
3303. Let us just look at LBC35. I am going
to return to that. Can we go to LBC35, please? While we turn that
up, it is the recollection on this side of the room, and perhaps
you can confirm, that Tonbridge and Malling were asking for a
35 dB(A) standard, were they?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) The petition against the
CTRL Bill in Parliament was brought on behalf of the Kent authorities
acting together.
3304. Yes.
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) They were calling for
a very large number of changes to the policy. If we did need to
go there I think we ought to look at at least a report of the
deliberations because it is highly complex.
3305. Is the answer yes?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) The answer is no. They
were asking for a complex matrix of changes to what was being
promoted by Union Railways.
3306. One of which was 35 dB(A), was it not?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) You may be right. I would
need to revisit the papers. It may not have been couched in such
clear terms. For example, one of the things they wanted was a
matrix of targets that were related to background. From memory,
I think that was construction noise but I would need to check
the papers. I do not want to mislead anyone by giving a simple
answer where I might be wrong.
3307. The document that we have exhibited now
is the product of Mr Methold's work. He gave evidence yesterday
that there was no noticeable vibration.
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) I heard his evidence as
being that the vibration was below the threshold of no probability
and adverse comment. I had better check the transcript but I think
that is what he said.
3308. I may have got it wrong.
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) I explained this morning
that does not at all mean that it is not noticeable. He did say
he had witnessed it and could not feel any perceptible vibration.
3309. That is good enough for me. Just give
us the reference. What paragraph is it?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) It is Day Ten and paragraph
2964.
3310. Mr Methold could not notice any vibration.
Simply and starkly, and you have explained the circumstances of
what was predicted, that 40 has failed those people living above
the North Downs tunnel, is that right?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) That is why I do not want
Best Practicable Means in our case.
3311. This is the highest number of properties
surveyed in any document that you or we lay before the Committee,
is it not?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) I do not think any social
survey has been done.
3312. This is the highest number of buildings
surveyed, is it not?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) You mean measured sound
levels?
3313. Yes. It is the best we have got, is it
not, Mr Thornely-Taylor?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) No, we have got the London
Underground report from which we drew the 90,000 people at 35
dB(A).
3314. Is that measured or is it theoretical?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) No, it was a mixture of
the two. There is measurement from which an extrapolation and
interpolation of methodology was derived and validated by the
measurements which compared those extrapolations with actual measurements.
3315. The North Downs tunnel is the highest
number of—I will bring it up-to- date—modern measurements
that we have before the Committee, is it not?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) I have not seen the results.
I see in front of me, as we all do, that of 90 properties 81 per
cent of them—
3316. Do you have any data? Are you still instructed
by those responsible for running the railway in noise terms?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) I did say that Union Railways
were no longer my client but I do receive quite a lot of information
by various channels about the railway world.
3317. This is the last topic I have, so it rounds
it all up. It is under the concept of design, bringing all that
into the question of design. Both sides are agreed, are we not,
that we can achieve an engineering solution, we have dealt with
that already?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Yes.
3318. What is proposed here by way of specification,
and I will read it out, is: "The nominated undertaker will
be required to design a permanent track support system so the
level of ground noise near the centre of any noise-sensitive room
is predicted in all reasonably foreseeable circumstances not to
exceed ..." 40 dB(A). You told us that is a design principle
given to the engineers when they start to design the railways,
is that right?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) It starts further back
than that. The principle has been adopted by the Department for
Transport as being the approach that will be placed upon the nominated
undertaker.
3319. As you told us that is a design principle,
that is what they have before them when they start designing the
railway. Who is going to design it? Do we know that yet?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) I assume the nominated
undertaker will appoint a contractor.
| 
