Examination of Witnesses (Questions 4440
- 4459)
4440. That is, under the proposals that go hand-in-hand
with Crossrail and London Underground improvement, a permanent
loss, as we have already established: the area upon which the
worksite is to be located will, after completion of the works,
provide two new accesses to the underground, and so the existing
CBI drop-off point will be permanently lost.
(Sir Digby Jones): Yes.
4441. Again, on a permanent basis an alternative
arrangement has to be found.
(Sir Digby Jones): Yes.
4442. With that context in mind, I put to you
one solution, on a temporary and, indeed, permanent basis, would
be for the alternative to be at a point immediately to the east
of Centre Point Tower, roughly where the left-hand filter arrow
is on this plan. I am inviting you to say whether or not that
would, all things being equal, be the optimum solution as far
as the CBI is concerned.
(Sir Digby Jones): As far as the interim period
of five years is concerned, it is not in any way suitable but
if it was the only place that it could be on a temporary basis
we would have to do our best. As far as a permanent solution for
post-work is concerned, it would be entirely irrelevant because
we will not be there, will we? Because if your clients do not
sort something out to help us we will not have a CBI at Centre
Point. So it is irrelevant.
4443. Sir, we have handed round some documents.
I notice the time and I will ask this question and then stop.
P58 is our series of documents. I wonder if we can just put up
page 27 of that, please? Sir Digby, if this is material you are
not familiar with say so and I will deal with it another way.
Whilst Mr Fry is finding this we sent, on Friday, to your agents,
a report by a firm called Hawkins Brown. Have you seen this before?[12]
(Sir Digby Jones): No.
4444. Mr Mould: I will just put the point.
4445. Mr Harwood: If it helps, maybe
we should ask Mr Handy about that.
4446. Mr Mould: I will do that. If I
can just ask this one point: that examined a number of alternative
options for alternative access arrangements to Centre Point during
the course of the London Underground/Crossrail works. Yes?
(Sir Digby Jones): If you say so. I have never
seen this before.
4447. This was a report carried out by consultants
instructed on behalf of London Underground, as I understand it,
to carry out that exercise. The option that they favoured as being
the most appropriate was Option 6. You see that that identified,
essentially, the point about access during the construction phase
as I have just put to you. Do you see?
(Sir Digby Jones): Yes.
4448. Then it sets out the positive and negative
features of that access. Then it explains in the conclusions why
that is, as between the other options considered, the preferred
option. The only question is this: have you had any advice from
consultants to promote positively an alternative arrangement that
which we see in this report?
(Sir Digby Jones): I do not know. I have not
got a clue.
4449. Mr Mould: Sir, I have got one or
two other questions, but I do not know whether you want me to
continue?
4450. Chairman: If you just give us a
moment, Mr Mould. Ms Lieven, could you advise the Committee on
whether or not the Petitioners are going to be called this afternoon?
4451. Ms Lieven: No, sir. My understanding
is that they will not. I believe Mr Walker is here on behalf of
GMS. My clear understanding is they are not going to attend. UBS
have not formally withdrawn but I have been told by the senior
partner of Dysons that as far as he can tell they cannot possibly
be attending because he cannot find anybody to knows where they
are. So they are clearly not coming this afternoon.
4452. Chairman: If you just give us a
moment. Mr Walker, can you enlighten us?
4453. Mr Walker: My name is Angus Walker
from Bircham Dyson Bell, Agents to both GMS Estates and UBS. In
both cases we have recently reached agreement in principle with
the Promoter and they have addressed our concerns satisfactorily,
although in neither case has the agreement been formalised in
writing yet. This should happen in a few days. We confidently
hope we will be able to withdraw these two Petitions. In the circumstances,
we are not appearing before you today, and you will understand
that we should be able to inform the Committee of the withdrawal
of the Petitions in the next two or three days, I would hope.
4454. Chairman: Thank you very much.
Mr Mould, how long will you be?
4455. Mr Mould: I would have thought
perhaps another ten minutes. So I am in your hands.
4456. Chairman: What I am going to do
is suspend the Committee until 2.30.
After a short adjournment
4457. Chairman: Mr Mould?
4458. Mr Mould: Thank you, sir. Sir Digby,
we were just looking at the document that you see on the screen
in front of you and you had expressed concerns about the environment
that currently exists at that point to the east of Centre Point.
A point, indeed, which picked up in the negative aspects—do
you see under "negative" there—"quality of
environment" as one of the downsides of that particular access?[13]
Do you have that?
(Sir Digby Jones): Yes, I am looking
at that.
4459. If you look at the bold text at the top
of the page, one of the points that is made is the possibility
of temporary lighting and signage to enhance the area—a
recognition that if this were to be an option for temporary access
during the construction phase to Centre Point, that is to say
to the east of the Tower, then there is a need for qualitative
improvements to be undertaken for that purpose in order to enhance
its quality.
(Sir Digby Jones): Temporary lighting and temporary
signage will not enhance the area to a standard at which you would
say that is a quality access for staff for five years.
12 Crossrail Ref: P58, Hawkins Brown Report, Option
6, page 27 (CAMDLB-6704-027). Back
13
Crossrail Ref: P58, Hawkins Brown Report, Option 6, page 27 (CAMDLB-6704-027). Back
| 
