Examination of Witnesses (Questions 6780
- 6799)
6780. And that is the reason why a non-technical
summary is also provided to ensure that those who are less familiar
with wading through voluminous appendices know where to look for
the information?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, that is so.
6781. And the only two alternatives that are
identified are those which you have shown, and that is the original
northern alignment promoted by the Residents' Association and
the river route, the Superlink?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, that is correct. Yes, those
are the ones which we took forward in most detail. There is an
issue here about how one does analyse alternatives. If you can
see quickly that an alternative is not going anywhere you do not
take it to the final degree of analysis. It does not make economic
sense to do that.
6782. That may be the case, Mr Berryman, but
as Mr Schabas told us when he was involved with Channel Tunnel
Rail Link, they looked at numerous alternatives including minor
alternatives to see whether the best route could actually be put
forward.
(Mr Berryman) That is true.
6783. And that is an exercise that you have
not done, is it not, Mr Berryman?
(Mr Berryman) No, that is not the case. We
have looked at a very large number of alternative alignments.
It happens that in the central section there is a limit to how
many alternatives one can look at because the physicality of London
means there are only a limited number of alternatives.
6784. Have you looked at the Wigmore alignment
which takes in Cavendish Square as part of your consideration?
(Mr Berryman) We have not looked at that in
the same detail as we looked at the other two, certainly.
6785. That suggests that you have not considered
the alternatives adequately, does it not?
(Mr Berryman) Well, not to me, no, because
the features of that alignment are substantially the same as the
Baker Street alignment. It is probably slightly better in that
it relieves the Victoria Line a little bit but not really significantly
so.
6786. The Wigmore alignment/the Wigmore shift,
as Mr Wimbourne suggested this afternoon, would utilise Cavendish
Square as a station?
(Mr Berryman) It would, yes.
6787. And where do I find in Chapter 6 any reference
to Cavendish Square in that section as part of your consideration
of alternatives?
(Mr Berryman) You would not find it there,
no. It is not there.
6788. Or whether or not Cavendish Square would
be a more suitable place for a work site than Hanover Square,
for example, again another comparative exercise. We do not find
it, do we, Mr Berryman?
(Mr Berryman) No analysis has been done of
Cavendish Square. A superficial analysis would indicate there
would not be very much difference but certainly no analysis has
been done.
6789. No. Bearing in mind the environmental
impacts that will take place finding the least worst option can
be significant, can it not?
(Mr Berryman) Indeed it can, that is what it
is all about.
6790. In terms of whether or not a scheme is
going to have a heavier compensation bill to have to fund or not,
for example?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, but whichever option you
take, if you take the Cavendish Square option you will still be
affecting the same number of landowners albeit different ones
than in the Mayfair option.
6791. How do you know that, Mr Berryman?
(Mr Berryman) Simply by looking at a plan of
London.
6792. With the greatest respect, you just told
the Committee a few minutes ago that you have not actually looked
into Cavendish Square so how can you express an informed view?
(Mr Berryman) You can express an informed view
simply by looking at an A-Z. You do not need to take it
any further than that.
6793. Not even a land ownership map the investigation
of land registry titles, and things like that?
(Mr Berryman) Generally speaking, the distribution
of the different kinds of property across the area immediately
to the north of Oxford Street and immediately to the south of
Oxford Street is not much different.
6794. I see. Of course, one of the benefits
also of having an alignment north of Oxford Street is there are
commercial opportunities, are there not, as well? You can link
in other shops as they have done at Bond Street. Have you looked
at that?
(Mr Berryman) You certainly could do that if
you came fairly close to Oxford Street. I do not think you could
do it at Cavendish Square, you would be too far back. The answer
is no. Our Bill is about promoting the railway. Any commercial
opportunities which arise incidentally to that can be considered
but we are specifically precluded from promoting matters relating
to commercial development, as I think you know.
6795. I see. Mr Berryman, the evidence to this
Committee is that no commercial opportunities are being considered
as part of the funding of the railway?
(Mr Berryman) No, that is not what I said.
I said we are only allowed to consider taking powers for building
the railway. If there are commercial opportunities as a result
of taking those powers, of course they will be considered, but
that is different from what you just said.
6796. Of course, commercial opportunities again
are reflected in the extent to which a scheme is commercially
attractive and capable of funding; agreed?
(Mr Berryman) They are but they are a very
minor consideration.
6797. I will move to one other matter and that
is operational issues. You were talking to the Committee about
concerns about platform waiting and the potential for overcrowding.
My understanding, and indeed it remained unchallenged when Mr
Schabas raised it, is that only one in six trains is going to
go to Heathrow. Is that right?
(Mr Berryman) Only one in six trains is going
to go to Heathrow, that is correct, yes.
6798. So as five trains go by there will be
a growing number of people on the platform waiting to go to Heathrow,
will there not, by way of example?
(Mr Berryman) There may be and that is probably
not a very desirable feature of our scheme, but 10 of those 24
trains will be going to Ealing Broadway and other intermediate
stations on the way, so most of the passengers for that branch
will be able to get on the first train that comes along.
6799. If so directed?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, if so directed, but the
majority of them will not be going to Heathrow. Perhaps it is
worth just pointing out that the actual passenger numbers going
to Heathrow will be relatively low for a railway of this type.
The demand at Heathrow is really not enough to fill Crossrail
trains on anything more than four trains an hour.
| 
