Examination of Witnesses (Questions 3900
- 3919)
3900. This is also right, that if it became
a requirement that you maintained the six or seven loading bays,
and then you would be able to continue all your works, it would
just mean that you would have to adjust the way in which you tackle
any unforeseen problems?
(Mr Berryman) No, that is not quite correct.
We would be able to do the work if things are exactly as they
appear to be at the moment, but with structures of this age and
this nature we know that there are very often issues which arise
and only become clear once we actually start to get into breaking
out the structure.
3901. But you have given an undertaking to maintain
access around and through Lindsey Street throughout the whole
of these works, have you not?
(Mr Berryman) That is right, yes.
3902. Which means that you must be confident
of maintaining a bridge across Lindsey Street and over
the Victorian vaults.
(Mr Berryman) That is correct, and if worse
comes to worse there are a number of fairly drastic things we
can do to achieve that, such as putting a temporary bridge structure
over or something of that sort.
3903. The same can be said for the loading bays?
(Mr Berryman) Not really no, because some kind
of temporary bridge structure would have beams at the side and
so on and would make it very difficult to operate loading bays
in that area. I have to say that the balance of probability is
very strongly that we will be able to maintain the loading bays,
but we would be reluctant to give a categorical undertaking to
do that with the level of knowledge that we have at the present
time.
3904. Because it might impose an expensive parameter
on your construction scheme?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, I suppose you could put
it that way. It is not just expense, of course, it is issues of
safety and general construction management.
3905. Just on the importance of the loading
bays, you have heard what those witnesses from the market said
about the importance of the Lindsey Street loading bays this morning.
You would not argue with their expressions of importance?
(Mr Berryman) I am sure all the loading bays
around the market are very important, but the percentage of the
total number of loading bays which we are talking about here is
a very small percentage of the total.
3906. Can I turn to the question of working
hours? As you know, one of the things that the Petitioners have
asked for is that the working hours be moved to enable work to
take place between ten and eight rather than the usual eight and
six. Is there any reason why the Promoter is resisting that undertaking?
(Mr Berryman) We have a code of construction
practice which sets out, amongst many other things, the working
hours during which we can operate. There is a provision in that
to negotiate with the local authority for different working hours
if that is appropriate for the site. We know, for example, in
the City some people with property nearby would prefer us to work
at night rather than in the day, and subject to local authority
agreement we are happy to do that, but of course there are other
people in the area apart from Smithfield Market, and I think it
is appropriate that this kind of negotiation is done with the
local authority rather than directly with this group. In principle,
assuming that we could agree with the local authority, there would
not be any objection to working the kind of hours that they are
talking about.
3907. So as far as the Promoter is concerned
the hours of ten to eight would be acceptable?
(Mr Berryman) As I say, there are other people
in the area apart from the market operators, and I think it is
for the local authority probably to strike the balance between
the requirements of the different inhabitants of the area.
3908. The substitute loading bays for those
lost on Lindsey Street—this is the outstanding undertaking
number four, following on the document—you accept to try
and use your best endeavours to obtain substitute loading bays
for those lost on Lindsey Street, is that correct?
(Mr Berryman) That is correct, yes.
3909. As far as the Buyers Walk is concerned,
I understand that has been clarified and that it is now proposed
to keep open the entrance on the eastern side of the market, the
west side of Lindsey Street?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, that is correct—a
pedestrian entrance only of course at that point, and we may have
to move it around a little bit from time to time, but always a
reasonable pedestrian access there.
3910. Trigger levels, I understand from what
you said, someone else is going to be dealing with that?
(Mr Berryman) That is correct.
3911. One final undertaking that the Petitioners
asked for was an undertaking that the market could be safely operated
and occupied during the course of the construction works. Is there
any objection to giving that?
(Mr Berryman) It is certainly our intention
that the market should be safely operated during construction
works; there will of course need to be liaison with the tenants,
not just meat traders, but there is office accommodation there
as well, as to when exactly some activities are carried out. But
generally speaking, yes, we intend that the building should be
kept open.
3912. Is there any reason why you would not
then be prepared to offer an undertaking to that effect?
(Mr Berryman) I was under the impression that
we had, actually.
Re-examined by Mr Elvin
3913. Mr Elvin: The safety issues with
regard to the situation that might arise if you gave a guarantee
of loading bay provision at all times in Lindsey Street, you said
that access and, at the worse case, some form of bridging structure
could be provided, so what are the safety issues which make loading
bays a different consideration?
(Mr Berryman) I think with the
loading bay it is not just a question of a vehicle passing backwards
and forwards, the vehicle has to actually be able to be opened
and things taken out and moved out of the way. A bridge structure
that one might envisage would need to have some sort of raised
sides in a situation like this where we cannot have beams underneath
because there is a brick structure underneath, so I think it would
be quite a difficult thing to envisage exactly how that might
work.
The witness withdrew
Mr David Anderson, Sworn
Examined by Mr Elvin
3914. Mr Elvin: Mr Anderson, you have
been sworn but I do not think you have given evidence here so
we will introduce you to the Committee. You are David Anderson;
you are Head of Planning for Cross London Rail Links Limited.
(Mr Anderson) That is correct.
3915. You are responsible for the transport,
planning and environmental aspects of the project, including the
business case. You previously worked for BAA plc on projects such
as the Heathrow Express, Heathrow Terminal 5 and the development
of Stanstead Airport.
(Mr Anderson) That is correct.
3916. Although you do not use the title you
are a Doctor of Philosophy and a Fellow of the Institution of
Civil Engineers?
(Mr Anderson) That is correct.
3917. You are going to give a little more information
as to how environmental impacts during construction works will
be controlled and to deal briefly with the remaining issues on
parking?
(Mr Anderson) That is correct.
3918. Can I ask you to outline very briefly
to the Committee—this is the first time this issue has really
arisen—how environmental impacts during construction will
be controlled?
(Mr Anderson) There are two mechanisms for
controlling the impacts. The first series of controls will be
applied through the Bill itself, and there has been some discussion
about this this morning in relation to the suppression of dust,
which is a condition contained in Schedule 7 to the Bill. So there
will be some controls through the detailed consent process at
a later stage on that particular matter. The routing of lorries
gaining access to the site is another matter that is controlled
in that way. Outside of the Bill we also have the Environmental
Minimum Requirements, so-called EMrs. The EMrs comprise the undertaking
that is given to Parliament, the planning memorandum and the environmental
memorandum, and they are essentially documents which set out the
way that the Promoter will work with local authorities and statutory
bodies. The EMrs also include the construction code, and it is
the code that is most relevant to what we are considering here.
3919. The approach using the Environmental Minimum
Requirements, is that something which has just been used for this
particular Bill?
(Mr Anderson) No, that is not the case; it
was developed and applied successfully for the Channel Tunnel
Rail Link Bill. For that reason the EMrs for CTRL were our starting
point in that they provide a template for us. However, particularly
for the construction code we have also looked at more recent codes
developed for other major projects, such as Terminal 5 and the
Jubilee Line Extension. We have also looked at codes developed
by local authorities.
| 
