Examination of Witnesses (Questions 4360
- 4379)
4360. Chairman: We will now move on to
the Confederation of Business Industry. Mr Mould, do you wish
to make an opening address?
4361. Mr Mould: Yes, sir. I will just
set the scene in the way that we have come to do, and I think
I can do it very briefly indeed. The Confederation of British
Industry Petitioners occupy and are leasehold owners of the first
and second floors at Centre Point, which is a building that will
be familiar to the Committee, at the junction at the top of Charing
Cross Road and Oxford Street. Their leasehold interests and occupations,
as I understand it—and Mr Harwood will confirm this—embrace
the first and second floors in the Tower Block at Centre Point,
the Podium Block and the Link Block, which is the bridge over
St. Giles High Street. I will ask Mr Fry if he will just put up
a document, and this is the second document, plan C1.9 in volume
7 of the Environmental Statement.[2]
This is a plan which is convenient in that it shows you the finished
permanent works at Tottenham Court Road in relation to Crossrail,
and indeed the improvement to the London Underground Station,
with which the Crossrail scheme interlinks at this point. You
can see Centre Point Tower which has the word Centre Point, and
you see the footprint of the Tower on that plan. Then you can
see St. Giles High Street and you have the Bridge element going
across St. Giles High Street. Then the Podium block is the block
which is shown to the east of St. Giles High Street, and although
it is not marked you can just see to the east of that, at the
top right hand corner of the plan, there is an entrance to a street,
unmarked, and that is Earnshaw Street, which you may hear mention
of in the course of the hearing today. So that gives you a sense
of the locus quo.
4362. So briefly to summarise the position in
relation to the permanent works, what you need to know for today's
purposes is that in this location the Crossrail project is combined
with improvement works to the Tottenham Court Road Underground
Station, and you are familiar with that station and you will know
that it is a much merited station for improvement. The London
Underground ticket hall will be replaced with a new ticket hall
and with new entrances to be provided near Centre Point itself,
with an additional bank of escalators leading to the Northern
Line and Crossrail platforms and improvements to make the station
accessible for the mobility impaired. You can see the new entrances
at street level on this plan and you can see, moving from the
west, the new St. Giles Circus entrance which is at the at the
corner of Oxford Street and Charing Cross Road. Then two new entrances
just to the east of Centre Point Tower itself, the Southern Plaza
entrance, which is being marked now, and I think what ought to
be the North Plaza entrance but also marked the Southern Plaza
entrance. Then the Dominion Theatre entrance, which is an existing
entrance, that is to be retained just to the north of New Oxford
Street. The Hornes Corner entrance, which Members may be familiar
with, which is just on the other side of Tottenham Court Road
at that point, is an existing entrance to the London Underground
Station, is going to be removed as part of the improvement works.
4363. Sir, as is clear from that, the area just
to the east of Charing Cross Road and the west of Centre Point
Tower itself is going to be subject to substantial works, but
the effect of that is to improve the quality of access to the
underground station and indeed to Crossrail, which will be served
by those same escalators to the eastern ticket hall, and it will
provide the opportunity to make improvements to the public realm
generally because part of the process is that that area should
be comprehensively landscaped for the public benefit; and, indeed,
just to the south, just along the line where the Southern Plaza
entrance is, there is an existing highway known as Andrew Borde
Street. That highway is proposed to be stopped up to enable the
public realm improvements to be implemented. So the message is
that there is a good deal of work to be done at this location,
both in relation to the London Underground improvement scheme
and Crossrail eastern ticket hall proposals. The outcome of that
is expected to be considerably beneficial, both in terms of improvements
to the transport infrastructure here, to the travelling public,
to the public realm generally and of course—and I know that
this is a point that the CBI will themselves make—it will
obviously improve the transport links and accessibility and the
environment here for those who occupy premises in the vicinity.
4364. Sir, the only other point to make is that
in order to achieve that result it will be necessary to carry
out substantial works. If I could ask Mr Fry to put up Map.C5(ii)
in volume 4a, the Environmental Statement?[3]
Sir, we have enlarged on to the junction of Oxford Street and
Charing Cross Road and you can see Centre Point marked, shaded
in the purple shading, and just to the east of that you can see
the worksite arrangements that are proposed to enable the London
Underground and Crossrail works to be carried out. That is in
the grey cross hatching, and you will see that there are effectively
three worksites: to the west of Charing Cross Road there is the
Astoria worksite to the north and the Goslett Yard worksite to
the south; then to the east of Charing Cross Road and indeed extending
across Charing Cross during the course of the construction works
is the Charing Cross worksite itself, which is immediately adjacent
to Centre Point.
4365. This brings us finally to some of the
issues that you are going to be hearing today. One of the effects
of operating those works is that there will be a period of some
years—I think the overall period of the construction pace
here is some five to six years—and for a fairly substantial
part of that time Charing Cross Road itself will be stopped up
to the traffic, and it will be necessary to have a series of transport
phasing arrangements, which will enable traffic to circulate in
this area, which is a busy part of Central London. Mr Anderson
is going to explain to you in a little more detail later what
is effectively an eight-stage phasing process that will enable
traffic to circulate and access to be gained to properties in
the vicinity, and I will leave that to him. Just to give you a
flavour at this stage of, if you like, the scale of activity,
I hope that the plan and what I have just said is an indication
of that.
4366. Sir, that is all I want to say by way
of brief introduction to this Petition and I will hand over to
Mr Harwood to set out the issues.
4367. Mr Harwood: Thank you. Mr Chairman,
the Confederation of British Industry is the UK's "voice
of business"; we represent some 200,000 firms across the
country. In that capacity we strongly support the Crossrail project.
We appear in front of the Committee to ensure that we can continue
our role effectively by protecting our headquarters at Centre
Point. The CBI occupies, as Mr Mould has said, as leaseholder
the first and second floors of the Tower, the Link and the Podium
buildings—you can also see that at CBI 7.[4]
The Link building, which bridges St Giles High Street, is where
the CBI's conference facilities are based; and in the Podium block,
also referred to as Centre Point House, the first and second floors
there, there is residential accommodation, not connected to us,
which is above that. The CBI facilities are used as offices, for
meetings with businessmen and senior politicians and as a conference
centre. The Centre Point Plaza and a set of stairs at the front
of the building, where there is access to the first floor, will
be acquired for the project and Centre Point and CBI will be next
to the Tottenham Court Road worksite for some five years, and
works, including highway works, will be taking place around all
sides of the Tower at different stages.
4368. We will call two witnesses, Sir Digby
Jones, the Director General of the CBI, and Mr Simon Handy of
Waterman Environmental.
4369. Sir, I want to briefly explain where we
have reached in discussions with the Promoter and the issues which
we bring to the Committee. The CBI sent a proposal for settlement
on 14 February, which is document CBI 13. Following a meeting
the Promoter replied on 6 March, their document number one. We
then sent a draft undertaking to the Promoter on Friday 10 March,
reflecting what we had understood to be agreed and certain matters
which we wanted to secure. That document is CBI 14. Just after
6 p.m. last night we received a further letter from Crossrail.
What was perhaps unfortunate about that letter was that a number
of the matters which had been agreed, as we understood it, had
seemed to be withdrawn and a number of issues were left unclear.
There have been further discussions outside the Committee this
morning and they have clarified issues somewhat, and I will pick
those up as I go through.
4370. Turning to our first issue, which is access.
Adequate and attractive access has to be maintained to the Centre
Point Tower for pedestrians, vehicles and, in particular, for
the dropping-off of VIPs, including politicians. The Crossrail
6 March letter confirmed, "Vehicular/pedestrian access will
be maintained throughout construction." The 13 March letter
merely says that the nominated undertaker will "use reasonable
endeavours to maintain vehicular access to the premises, including
`reasonable endeavours to allow deliveries at pre-arranged times
where round-the-clock vehicular access cannot be made available'".
The assurance on maintaining pedestrian access to the Tower has
been replaced by the reference to the Crossrail Bill's requirement
of reasonable access if there would otherwise be no access. That
does not explain quite what is meant because what is important
to the CBI is access through the current main entrances, which
are on the ground and first floor of the Tower. There is a car
park access from Earnshaw Street and that goes under St. Giles
High Street, but that is not an attractive access; and also potential
accesses which are not used through the Podium—that simply
links into the CBI rather than anything else. But proper access
has to be via the ground and first floor of the Tower. We had
been told on 6 March that this pedestrian access could accommodate
over 400 people per hour entering and leaving the building, but
that point is not addressed now by Crossrail. The specifications
that we propose for the temporary footways are described by the
Promoter as "premature", so we do not know whether these
routes will comply with the Disability Discrimination Act—the
width of the routes, whether they will be illuminated, whether
CCTV will be provided or whether the footpaths will be suitably
built and drained. In addition, the Promoter has merely proposed
reasonable endeavours to provide vehicle drop-off points.
4371. 4371. On noise and vibration the CBI is
concerned about the effects of airborne and groundborne noise
and vibration on its operations, including conference business.
Crossrail have agreed that the CBI will be a special case for
the purpose of the Noise and Vibration Mitigation Scheme; that
it is a particularly sensitive structure in relation to airborne
noise; that a Noise Mitigation Package will be prepared; and that
the lecture theatre level will apply to the conference centre.
That that standard will be applied to the construction of the
railway and to the permanent railway when that is in operation.
4372. The outstanding issues are whether the
Promoter will ensure that the lecture theatre standard is met
or merely undertake reasonable endeavours to meet that standard,
and whether Crossrail would be prepared to relocate the CBI if
noise and vibration could not be satisfactorily resolved in practice.
4373. On dust the CBI are content with Crossrail's
general proposals.
4374. On settlement, Chairman, part of the Centre
Point Tower and the Podium will suffer more than ten millimetres
settlement. Following discussions this morning it is apparent
that Crossrail will be prepared to enter into a settlement agreement
with the CBI. What is not now agreed is that Centre Point should
be a Risk Category 3 building. Our concern on that is the effects
of differential settlement on the Link building, which is supported
at two ends by the Tower and Podium. If one element goes down
we consider that the risks of damage to the Link building are
increased, and that that has not been properly considered. The
reason we want the Category 3 is because that allows protective
measures to be agreed between ourselves and Crossrail under the
Settlement Deed.
4375. The final matter we would raise on our
proposal is to ensure that we have protection for ongoing repairs.
It is important to maintain the quality of the conference centre
and the quality of the rooms used for important meetings. So there
should be ongoing repairs while settlement is progressing. We
have discussed that outside the Committee and how the Deed allows
a mechanism for that to be done, subject to expert determination,
and we will be content if the Promoter acknowledges that there
are particularly sensitive uses which require a high standard
of internal finishing. Chairman, the issue that really remains
between us on settlement is Risk Category 3.
4376. Turning to environmental protection, the
Bill authorises the carrying out of works which are described
in general terms in schedule 1, within the limits of deviation
shown on the deposited plans. For Centre Point it simply says
that there will be two railways in tunnels and a station at Tottenham
Court Road. The Environmental Statement contains vastly more detail
about the design scheme, how it will be built and how adverse
environmental effects will be mitigated. But the Bill does not
require the scheme to be designed in that fashion, or built in
that way, or environmental effects to be mitigated as proposed.
Many potential Petitioners will have been reassured by the Environmental
Statement, and for those who have not much of their time and much
of the time of this Committee will be spent on the scheme and
the impacts described in the Environmental Statement.
4377. The Environmental Impact Assessment process
requires the developer to explain at the outset, so that the public
can comment on the effects and an informed decision can be reached.
Environmental Impact Assessment only has value if what is built
is based on what it says. Mr Justice Sullivan who, when he was
at the Bar, promoted the Channel Tunnel Rail Link Bill, said this
in the leading Environmental Impact Assessment case of R. v.
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council ex parte Milne, and
the Judge said, "...the development which is described and
assessed in the Environmental Statement must be the development
which is proposed to be carried out, and therefore the development
which is the subject of the development consent and not some other
development." The Court of Appeal subsequently emphasised,
in a case Smith v. Secretary of State: "Constraints
must be placed on the planning permission within which future
details can be worked out, and the decision-maker must form a
view about the likely details and their impact on the environment."
So, Mr Chairman, the consent for the project should fix the scheme
in sufficient detail that the likely significant effects cannot
be changed. This is often done in planning permission and was
done in the Milne case, by planning conditions fixing the
main parts of the design and requiring mitigation to be carried
out in accordance with the Environmental Statement.
4378. The Promoter does point on this topic
to the power of local authorities to approve measures under schedule
7, but those measures may be different to those in the Environmental
Statement and relate to a different design. The Environmental
Minimum Requirements do not require the design and mitigation
to be as assessed. The Secretary of State merely expressed this
as a heavily caveated intention that the impact be assumed in
the Environmental Statement. Those requirements are not enforceable
by anyone other than the Secretary of State in any event.
4379. We therefore propose an amendment to require
the project to be carried out in accordance with the Environmental
Statement, except as amended by Parliament, by undertakings given
in the course of these proceedings, or in a limited fashion by
subsequent approvals from the local authorities. These reflect
the practice of Environmental Statements in planning matters.
Mr Chairman, this amendment, and our other amendments, is in the
document CBI 15.
2 Environmental Statement, Volume 7, Plan C1.9, billdocuments.crossrail.co.uk Back
3
Crossrail Ref: P10, Tottenham Court Road Station; construction
works and impacts (LINEWD-ES16-026). Back
4
Committee Ref, A51: Plan demonstrating the current layout of
Centre Point-CBI 7 (CAMDLB-6705-007). Back
|
