Examination of Witnesses (Questions 5480
- 5499)
5480. So far as the commuter car parking is
concerned—that is the Mount Avenue and Hunter Avenue car
parks—the important point to bear in mind is that we are
now only proposing to take a maximum of 50 per cent of the Hunter
Avenue car park and, even there, we are saying with reasonable
endeavours we should be able to bring it down to 35 per cent.
Yes, there will be an impact but it is my submission that it will
be a wholly acceptable impact. If the council really thinks that
35 per cent of Hunter Avenue is unacceptable, there are other
ways to provide more car parking—for instance, by allowing
more spaces on the local, residential roads, not something which
will necessarily be popular with the local residents in the short
run, but we are only talking about a construction phase; we are
not talking about the rest of time. There is space, as Mr Anderson
will show, if necessary to allow more parking in residential streets
for that period if that is considered to be a very significant
problem.
5481. Mr Mould reminds me the overall construction
phase is 21 months so even if there is a bit more parking in people's
streets one has to bear in mind that will only be for 21 months.
It may not be popular, but these things are all balances.
5482. One detailed point I should come back
to—I am afraid I will have got the petitioner wrong—is
that Mr Jardine on the Hunter Avenue side made reference to a
retaining wall and an embankment. There is no retaining wall being
built by Crossrail on the Hunter Avenue side. The retaining wall
is on the Friar Avenue side, the west side. It was in relation
to Minnie Cockell's petition and she lives on the Hunter Avenue
side.
5483. As far as the loss of trees is concerned,
there will be a loss of trees. We will do our absolute utmost
to keep it to a minimum but on the west side behind Friar Avenue,
where the embankment is being extended, there is an unavoidable
loss of trees and there is nothing one can do about that except
for not expanding the embankment. That has severe operational
ramifications for Crossrail.
5484. Mr Mould reminds me that the construction
code provides for particular standards in British Standards to
apply for protecting trees that are retained. As far as the ones
on the embankment are concerned, it would be wrong to suggest
to the Committee that they were going to be retained, but there
are trees at the bottom of people's gardens in Friar Avenue and,
if appropriate, we will take action to protect those because the
Committee may be aware that even if you are not working right
on top of the trees you need to protect their roots in order to
ensure that the construction work does not jeopardise their future
existence.
5485. I hope that covers the kind of points
that you wanted. I have those four witnesses. I leave it in the
Committee's hands for the moment as to which, if any of them,
are called.
5486. Mr Hollobone: What is the total
cost of constructing the terminus at Shenfield?
5487. Ms Lieven: I do not know but I
will find out.
5488. Mr Hollobone: What is your estimate
of the total cost of the remedial measures that are likely to
be in place?
5489. Ms Lieven: Again, I do not know
the answer to that but I will find out.
5490. Mr Hollobone: Presumably those
two numbers are likely to be considerably less than undergrounding
the terminus at Stratford? Otherwise, the Shenfield terminus would
not have been advanced.
5491. Ms Lieven: Yes, very considerably
less. The assessment of the cost of undergrounding the terminus
at Stratford is between 300 and 400 million. The works at Shenfield
will be nowhere near that order of magnitude. I am not going to
advance a figure because I would be guessing but they will not
be in that ballpark at all.
5492. Mr Hollobone: Is the amount of
disquiet in the Shenfield area of concern to you because of the
terminus arriving in Shenfield?
5493. Ms Lieven: Absolutely. From our
point of view, we would like it if we were welcomed everywhere
but it is an inevitable reality that people who are most directly
affected by construction works are unlikely to be as enthusiastic
as those who are a few streets away and get a better service.
We are taking all reasonable measures, both in terms of limiting
construction and in terms of mitigation, to try to make the works
as acceptable as possible.
5494. Mr Hollobone: For most of the stations
on the route, the evidence we have heard so far is that Crossrail
has been welcomed as a benefit to the local area, giving access
to the capital and so on. In Shenfield's case, it appears that
local residents are concerned that it will not give them access
to London at all and there are very few, if any, positive reasons
for having the terminus in Shenfield and having Crossrail in Shenfield
at all. Indeed, it would seem that in many respects the reason
that you are advancing for the terminus being at Shenfield is
that it cannot be sited anywhere else, which is not exactly a
positive endorsement of its location on this spot.
5495. Ms Lieven: There are two answers
to that. First of all, there is a positive case for going to Shenfield.
There are real benefits to the people of Shenfield. They may not
feel it at this moment but there are benefits in terms of being
able to get on trains and go straight through into the West End,
for instance. The timings that you have been given do not appear
to have included both the time and also the difficulty of changing
trains. For instance, if you are a passenger who wants to go to
Heathrow, yes, it might be almost as quick to get off at Liverpool
Street, get on another line, get yourself to Paddington, get onto
the Heathrow Express but at each stage you have had to get off
one train and onto another with baggage or whatever. Those through
routes are a positive benefit to people at Shenfield. They will
also get a greater frequency of service. Some of them may choose
to continue to go on fast lines but others—for instance,
going to Stratford to work or going, importantly, to Stratford
and then on the Jubilee Line to the Isle of Dogs which is quite
an important line of work—will now get a more frequent service
to Stratford.
5496. There are also benefits in terms of the
ease of congestion which to some people is a very important consideration.
I do not accept at all that there not benefits. It has to be said
that what the Committee is now doing is moving from the central
section, where the time benefits of Crossrail are easy to see,
to the limbs. You will find the same argument at Maidenhead on
the western limb. When one gets to the extremities of Crossrail,
because it is not a high speed service, the time gains will be
less. That is the nature of the service. Unless one did nothing
but the central section, which would be enormously expensive and
not have the passengers, I am afraid that is just the nature of
the railway.
5497. There is no getting away from the fact
that the time benefits are less, for instance, than somebody coming
in from Stratford, who is going the same distance further in.
On the other side of the equation, the line does have to terminate
somewhere. Yes, to some degree, we are saying it cannot terminate
at Stratford. I have been handed a note by Mr Berryman who says
that his assessment is that Stratford underground would cost something
like £500 million. We have not costed it out in detail. It
is just too large a figure to contemplate.
5498. Stratford is not a possibility. If one
terminates at any of the other options, as Mr Berryman can explain,
the engineering difficulties are great, not as great as Stratford
but great; the costs are not as great as Stratford but significant
and, most importantly, it completely messes up the operation of
the stopping services on the Great Eastern Line because you get
a cohort of people who are not any longer getting the electric
line One service because that has been taken over by Crossrail,
but Crossrail is not getting to them. They are positively disadvantaged
in a way that we consider to be unacceptable. Again, there are
balances and there will be sufferers at Shenfield who suffer construction
impacts close to the line and whose own journey patterns mean
they do not feel they will benefit.
5499. Mr Hollobone: Originally the route
was going to stop at Stratford—is that right?—and
only at a late stage was it extended to Shenfield?
| 
