Examination of Witnesses (Questions 4460
- 4479)
4460. I understand that your position is that
more would be required than that, but it is at least an indication
in this report that that is a matter that requires to be considered
and to be attended to—that is to say the need to improve
the quality of the environment for what is, on any view, a relatively
lengthy temporary period of construction.
(Sir Digby Jones): Yes, except it is not capable
of improvement to the standard we want, whatever you do.
4461. Mr Mould: Sir, my final point,
really, to Sir Digby is based upon some scribbling I have done
during the luncheon adjournment. I wonder if I might just hand
that in. We have drawn up—I am afraid it is in manuscript—a
series of proposed assurances that we could give to the CBI. I
have mentioned these to my learned friend a few moments ago. Sir
Digby has not seen them; it might be helpful just to put them
through him to you, so you can see what we have in mind.[14]
4462. Mr Harwood: I was going to suggest,
Chairman, that they be put to Mr Handy, who is our technical consultant
who will be dealing with access matters, particularly concerning
the specification of access. Also, he has had the advantage of
discussion which we have had with my learned friend outside the
Committee rather than what is a matter of bringing in front of
a witness a document and proposal which he will not have seen
at all. So I suggest that Mr Handy may be the more suitable—
4463. Mr Mould: I am content to leave
it at that, yes. Perhaps, finally, Sir Digby, just to confirm
the point: your concern is that during the construction phase
there should be pedestrian and vehicular access to Centre Point
of a quality which fulfils what you have explained to be your
needs and the needs of those who visit you.
(Sir Digby Jones): Yes. Points one to five
will be dealt with by someone more skilled in this than me, but
I would say it is not about whether you can provide, it is about
the standard to which you provide, and on that basis it is yes
to the question on the basis that it is about the standard as
well.
4464. The final point, just to sum up where
we were this morning: as I understand your position, you do not
yourself put forward for the Committee's consideration any particular
point of access to Centre Point which you say either does or can
be made to fulfil those criteria during the construction phase.
(Sir Digby Jones): I personally do not. That
is not to prejudice what those advising us may do. So if I say
I am not saying there is a better one than this, that does not
mean that the CBI is not saying it; it is just that I personally
do not know.
4465. Mr Mould: I just wanted to understand
your position.
4466. Mr Harwood: I have no re-examination.
4467. Chairman: There are no queries
for Sir Digby. Thank you very much.
The witness withdrew
4468. Mr Harwood: I would like to call
Mr Simon Handy, the CBI's second witness.
Mr Simon Handy, Sworn
Examined by Mr Harwood
4469. Mr Harwood: You are Simon Handy.
Can you tell us your qualifications, please?
(Mr Handy): Yes. I am a Chartered
Civil Engineer, a Member of the Institution of Civil Engineers
and I have 28 years' experience in the construction industry.
I am currently the managing director of Waterman Environmental
Limited. I graduated with a degree in civil engineering in 1981
and qualified as a Member of the Institution of Civil Engineers
in 1985.
4470. What is your role at Waterman Environmental?
(Mr Handy): I have been with Waterman for many
years and started off in design of buildings and working on major
projects in London and the South East and elsewhere in the country.
My role is that of a director of a company. I set up a team which
is known as Waterman Environmental, a specialist environmental
consultancy, in 1992 and have grown that business to deal with
ground conditions and environmental consultancy, primarily within
the construction industry. I have particularly undertaken a number
of site investigations, designs of foundations and assessments
of the impact of tunnelling works. In particular I have assessed
the impact of the Jubilee Line extension, when it was built, on
the Docklands Light Railway at Canning Town, the impact of the
Channel Tunnel Rail Link on the Trowbridge Estate in Hackney and
the impact of the former Crossrail scheme on Hanover Square. In
addition, I have undertaken a number of appraisals on major development
schemes in Central London at Paternoster Square and Lyon's Plaza
where London Underground tunnels were seriously affected by the
development works.
4471. What do you want to explain about the
proposed works in the vicinity of Centre Point?
(Mr Handy): I suppose I want to, perhaps, briefly
recap on some of the important aspects of the scheme. The two
tunnels that have been referred to south of the buildings—I
think they are on exhibit CBI 12—indicates the proximity
of the tunnels, the dotted line on the plans does indicate the
position of the tunnels passing just to the south of Centre Point
House and to the south of the Centre Point Tower.[15]
We also have ticket hall access points that have been referred
to, but in particular there is a very large worksite that has
major works proposed in it. I refer to that, I think, in CBI 8,
which indicates the proposed worksite.[16]
Particularly, within that worksite there is the demolition of
the plaza, there is also a major piling operation adjacent to
the Centre Point building, a new retaining wall that needs to
be constructed along that line to enable the construction of the
ticket hall, and significant works to connect down into the London
Underground tunnels and the proposed Crossrail scheme.
4472. What effects will these have on access
to Centre Point?
(Mr Handy): Access will be affected quite severely.
It falls into a number of different categories. Vehicular access
is going to be affected by the changing of the configuration of
the streets around Centre Point, particularly Andrew Borde Street
will be stopped up and, for a period of time, if you look at CBI
8, again, here, you can see that access is denied to a number
of vehicles through St Giles' High Street. So within that area
you have got cycles are permitted, taxis are permitted but a number
of other vehicles would not be permitted other than, perhaps,
buses. So there are restrictions on access to vehicles. In terms
of public access, there are a lot of effects on the streets around
Centre Point. You can see on the same diagram the orange areas
marked where there are going to be highway works around the buildings.
So pedestrian access through those areas will be difficult for
periods of time. The drop-off locations are somewhat unclear.
The current drop-off (I do not know whether you can see it but
it is at that point there, which is marked 3 on the plan) will
be encapsulated in the worksite and there is not a facility for
drop-off being provided either temporarily on that diagram or,
indeed, in the permanent works. In terms of deliveries, again,
if you look at this diagram, there is an indication that there
may be a delivery point somewhere there, but that is on the far
side of the main access into the construction site with the main
construction vehicles coming in and out of that site at that point.
It is unclear as to whether that would be a suitable delivery
point for the building or indeed if it is intended to be a delivery
point to the building. The final area that I would be concerned
about is the one which Sir Digby mentioned, which is the quality
of the access.
4473. What sort of quality of access do you
think is appropriate?
(Mr Handy): I have given an indication of what
I consider to be the important aspects within, I think, what is
included as CBI 11, exhibit 11, as an example specification for
what might be included for quality of access.[17]
Primarily, this deals with the condition of the pavements, the
suitability for disabled people, the height of hoardings, the
widths of footpaths, the illumination of areas, the security coverage,
and so forth. This is intended not necessarily to be exactly the
answer but is an example of, perhaps, what might be a suitable
specification for access to this building.
4474. Thank you. Can you turn, please, to the
Hawkins Brown report, which was referred to by Mr Mould earlier?
Would you explain to the Committee what this report is and when
it was produced?
(Mr Handy) It is a report done in August 2005.
I must say I only received it at about 4 o'clock on Friday afternoon,
so I have not had very long to look at it and did not have any
knowledge of it beforehand. Basically, this document reports on
a number of options that might be available during the construction
period for accessing Centre Point. I think it covers six different
options, and Option 6 is the one that is recommended.
4475. Can we turn, please, firstly, to the executive
summary, which is the third page in? What does that explain about
the purpose of the report?
(Mr Handy): It describes the purpose is to
address the owner and occupier concerns by exploring the indicative
options. So it is looking at the main entrance to Centre Point
during the period of the construction programme.
4476. You said that you had first seen this
report at 4 o'clock last Friday. Do you know when the CBI first
saw the report?
(Mr Handy): I think they had sight of it at
some time on Monday. I know they were having difficulty opening
certain documents that were sent over. I am not precisely aware.
I was in a meeting on Monday when we were trying to talk about
these reports, but as you can appreciate some reports are more
difficult to open on e-mail than others. I think some people had
difficulty. I did have the privilege of opening it on Friday.
4477. Can we turn to Option 6, which is the
option referred to by Mr Mould's questions. [18]Now,
Mr Handy, what are your comments on what we see on Option 6?
(Mr Handy): On Option 6 the diagram
shows that the access will be from the eastern side and this is
pedestrian access. It also seems to indicate that the pavements
are widened on that side, on the eastern side, of Centre Point
and that does marry up with some of the construction proposal
drawings that I have seen and referred to earlier. It does appear
to be a widening of the pavement there. There is quite clearly
a construction site that wraps around both the western and the
southern side of Centre Point. I think that is probably somewhat
diagrammatic because the more detailed drawings do show it is
a phrased approach and that arrangement is not necessarily the
position throughout the work. It does change depending on the
stage of the construction work. Particularly, it does show that
the construction site comes out to the line of St Giles High Street
and it does not indicate that there is any facility, really, for
vehicles to stop to unload or to deliver people or materials.
It is quite a narrow section of road there and I do not think
that is particularly addressed in Option 6. There is a reference,
under the positive items to "Locality of vehicular drop-off
point" but the diagram does not seem to explain that at all.
4478. Can we turn, please, to Mr Mould's seven-point
document on access.
(Mr Handy): Yes.
4479. Mr Mould: This will be document
P61.[19]
14 Crossrail Ref: P61, Seven point note of assurances
presented by Promoter's Counsel, Mr Timothy Mould (SCN20060314-001). Back
15
Committee Ref: A51, Plan demonstrating 10mm settlement contour
in relation to Centre Point (CAMDLB-6705-012). Back
16
Committee Ref: A51, Tottenham Court Road East-Traffic Management
Stage C Outline (CAMDLB-6705-008). Back
17
Committee Ref: A51, Specification for Temporary Footways to Centre
Point during the Crossrail works to Tottenham Court Road Underground
Station (CAMDLB-6705-011). Back
18
Crossrail Ref: P58, Hawkins Brown Report, Option 6, page 27 (CAMDLB-6704-027). Back
19
Crossrail Ref: P61, Seven point note of assurances presented
by Promoter's Counsel, Mr Timothy Mould (SCN20060314-001). Back
|
