Examination of Witnesses (Questions 7180
- 7199)
7180. Tell me this: if there is consistency
between the two, Thameslink and Crossrail, why can you not have
the approach set out in LBH45 duplicated to Crossrail?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) For the reasons set out
in the paragraph just above this extract from LBH45. I will not
read it again but it says given the context where no ventilation
is required. That is why.
7181. If we just pause and keep that to hand
but go back, please, to your draft information paper, we see trackside
equipment dealt with at 4.1, page 121 of 125.[87]
Yes?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Yes.
7182. Is there any great significant difference
between the trackside equipment in Crossrail and trackside equipment
in Thameslink 2000?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Crossrail bases its obligation
on: "The nominated undertaker will be required to use reasonable
endeavours when designing trackside equipment to reduce the noise
below the assessment criterion where it is practicable to do so."
It is most likely, in the other areas where this equipment occurs,
that each individual local authority will look to achieve their
own particular policy requirements for that equipment. Technically,
it will be possible and there will be no particular cost obstacles
to achieving that.
7183. Let us just take it in steps. As far as
the equipment is concerned, there is going to be no difference
of character, is there, between the equipment trackside for Crossrail
compared to Thameslink?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Exactly.
7184. What is being proposed by you is that
there is going to be criterion which is plus five dB—your
paragraph 4.1.
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) That is not the whole
criterion. That is the same criterion copied across from the basic
criterion we saw on page 119, but it is substantially modified
by 4.2.[88]
It is unfortunately not possible to have 15 different criteria.
If the trackside equipment, if we were to, say, adopt the local
authority requirements in each case, as we see from the exhibit
which sets out the extract, LBH29 and 30, Crossrail will have
to have 13 different policies, which I do not recommend.[89]
I think paragraph 4.2 lays the ground work to achieve local authority
objectives for this kind of equipment.
The Committee suspended from 4.25 pm to
4.38 pm for a division in the House
7185. Mr Taylor, can I ask you, please, to go
within your information paper to page 1, paragraph 1.2, which
will be found at page 118 of 125.[90]
I just want to have a look at 1.2 and I would like your help,
please, as to the differences between the items itemised here
and Thameslink 2000. Ventilation shafts is a difference is it
not?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Forced ventilation
shafts, yes.
7186. Draught relief shafts—are they present
in Thameslink 2000?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Yes.
7187. They are. Electrical trackside equipment
present?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Yes.
7188. Power supply facilities present?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Yes.
7189. Mechanical ventilation and air conditioning
equipment associated with building is present?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Not in a similar way to
Crossrail. There is revision to stations such as Blackfriars and
Farringdon and that will include plant, but not on the scale you
get at the kind of station that will be constructed for Crossrail.
7190. Very well. Other fixed installations at
depots and sidings such as—and you give examples. Present
with Thameslink?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) No.
7191. And public address systems present at
Thameslink?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Yes, but separately dealt
with.
7192. Apart from those three items, the first
and those last two we have mentioned, all those items are present
at Thameslink 2000 and were capable of being dealt with on a minus
five basis.
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Yes.
7193. And appropriately dealt with on a minus
five basis.
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Not in the view of some
local authorities. It would not satisfy all the policies, but
a good many of them.
7194. In your view, appropriately dealt with
on a minus five basis.
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) It was an agreed way forward
settled between Thameslink 2000 and the local authorities.
7195. Am I, therefore, right in supposing, if
we keep an eye on that list, that you have not included within
"fixed installations" a train which simply happens to
be in a siding overnight but might still be generating some noise?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) If it is not in a depot,
no, it is not included.
7196. Help me about this please: am I right
in this proposition, that as far as forced ventilation shafts
are concerned for the majority of them L90-5 can be achieved?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) For many of them. I will
not be so precise as to say the majority.
7197. For many of them it can be, and for the
balance where it is not presently shown as being achieved further
works could be investigated to see whether it could be achieved.
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Yes, further works are
all the time in progress as our understanding of the consequences
of various aspects of the Crossrail design are proved, and this
is what has given rise, for example, to the problem I have already
mentioned on aerodynamic noise being the controlling influence
in determining whether or not we can meet a particular level.
7198. So we can agree, can we not, that L90-5
can be achieved in a large number of cases.
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) There are many cases where
it can be achieved.
7199. If it could not be achieved then, of course,
it could be the position that you would be required to use best
practicable means to reduce the noise.
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Not according to the Crossrail
approach. The Crossrail approach is that the nominated undertaker
will be required to achieve 90+5, not to use best practicable
means because we do not want to have complaints arising from the
operation of tunnel vent fans.
87 Crossrail Ref: P75, draft Information Paper, Noise
from Fixed Installations (HAVGLB-14704-121). Back
88
Crossrail Ref: P75, draft Information Paper, Noise from Fixed
Installations (HAVGLB-14704-119). Back
89
Committee Ref: A81, Local Authority Standards and Guidance-Part
1 (HAVGLB-14705-029 and -030). Back
90
Crossrail Ref: P75, draft Information Paper, Noise from Fixed
Installations (HAVGLB-14704-118). Back
| 
