Examination of Witnesses (Questions 7940
- 7959)
7940. How important is it, when it comes to
reducing the use of the motorcar, that one can get from one's
home to the station by bus or other public transport?
(Mr Chard) Well, it is very important in Woolwich
because car ownership is very low in Woolwich compared to the
national average and compared to most of London, so many people
in Woolwich at the present time do not have the car option.
7941. So we have the social importance for people
who do not have a car. What about environmental matters?
(Mr Chard) Well, the second issue, I think,
is that anecdotal evidence suggests that, if people cannot get
to a station conveniently or cannot use it, they may try and do
that whole journey or a long part of their journey by car. We
get people, we believe, who abandon part of their journey or more
of their journey by car if there are convenient railway stations
and linked bus services. The other aspect of this is that we are
a borough which is particularly concerned about air quality and,
from an environmental point of view, we want to reduce car use
as far as possible as one of the ways to improve air quality in
the borough.
7942. While we are on air quality, I think today
Greenwich is the only part of the United Kingdom to have a low
emissions zone. That is right, is it not?
(Mr Chard) I am not sure if I am 100 per cent
up to date on that, but I believe we might have been the first.
7943. So someone else might have by now.
7944. Chairman: Mr Jones, just before
you move on, Mr Hopkins has a question.
7945. Kelvin Hopkins: It seems to me
very simple that, if there is only an Abbey Wood station and not
a Woolwich station, people who live in the densely populated centre
of Woolwich might drive to Abbey Wood to make use of Crossrail
if there is no Woolwich station, whereas, if there is a Woolwich
station, they could walk to it.
(Mr Chard) I am not sure that many people in
Woolwich would drive to an Abbey Wood station because, in the
peak am travel period, they would of course be driving against
the flow to get to Abbey Wood, but they would still have to go
through junctions and roundabouts, so their journey would not
be uncongested necessarily. In London there seems to be a great
reluctance for people to drive out of London to go into central
London, even when it is quicker to do so. There is perhaps a psychological
barrier to doing that. I am not sure that they would do that.
They have other options. They could drive to the DLR station at
Greenwich instead and try to go to central London from that station.
It is perhaps something that could be looked at, but I am not
convinced that many people would actually do that.
7946. Kelvin Hopkins: The simple point
I was making is that local car usage will be greater if there
is no Woolwich station than if there is a Woolwich station. I
am just supporting your point really.
(Mr Chard) Yes, I think so.
7947. Mr Jones: Promoters' page 107 please.[9]
As far as that is concerned, is it any part at all of Greenwich's
case that there should be a Woolwich station so that people can
change from a Woolwich Crossrail station to the Woolwich Arsenal
Network Rail station?
(Mr Chard) No, it is not part
of our case. Looking at this diagram, I have not seen the Promoters'
estimate of how many people would need to make this journey. In
my judgment, it is not very many.
7948. Just dealing with the walk time, since
they have put evidence in about it, do you have any comments on
an 8-minute walk time between station platforms?
(Mr Chard) It is longer than desirable. There
may well be so-called interchanges in central London, such as
around the Bank, which have similar times. What I would also say
is that it is not beyond the bounds of possibility to redesign
the redevelopment of Woolwich so that that route and that time
could be reduced. The distance between the closest points of the
station is less than that route.
7949. We now move in your proof to section 5,
"Transport Assessments" and could you read from 5.1
please.
(Mr Chard) The Council normally requires developers
to produce transport impact assessments for proposed major developments
which are likely to generate significant volumes of traffic, in
accordance with Policy M1(a) of the emerging, and soon-to-be-adopted,
Unitary Development Plan. Planning Policy Guidance 13 recommends
that, where appropriate, local planning authorities may require
an applicant for planning permission to submit a transport assessment
where, in their opinion, there are likely to be significant impacts
as a consequence of the proposed development. The London Borough
of Greenwich has agreed to act as the lead borough for all boroughs
or a number of boroughs concerned about transport assessments
at outer stations. It is the boroughs' position that the lack
of full transport assessments was a deficiency in the documentation
submitted in support of the Bill. In response to the Council's
Petition, the Promoters agreed to submit a transport assessment
for Abbey Wood station and, in due course, for some other proposed
Crossrail stations. The Council provided a scoping document for
the work, based on the widely adopted guidelines, which is attached
as an appendix. The Promoters have submitted a transport assessment
report for Abbey Wood station, but there are still unresolved
issues between the Promoters and the Council. It is good practice,
recommended by the guidelines, for the transport assessment to
cover a period of 15 years from the date of bringing into use
the proposed development. Accordingly, the Council has asked the
Promoters to assess the period from 2016, when Abbey Wood station
is proposed to open, to 2031. Perhaps I can just say that the
guidance is the Institution of Highways and Transportation's guidance,
and there is an error in the proof.
7950. So cross out "ICE" and put in
"IHT".
(Mr Chard) So far the Promoters have been unable
to do that because they did not have forecasts of the numbers
of passengers likely to use the station during the 15 years after
opening in 2016. The Council does not have access to use the forecasting
models used by the Promoters. Therefore, the Council have been
obliged to adopt a different methodology to assess passenger numbers
at Abbey Wood, and also at a possible Woolwich station, during
the period of 2016 to 2031. The Council had to undertake some
form of forecasting simply to explain to the Promoters that there
is an important issue to be considered and because the Promoters
failed to produce any appropriate forecasts themselves to clarify
the issue. In the absence of any other passenger forecasts for
Abbey Wood station in the 15 years after opening, the Council
is suggesting that their own estimates have to be used in the
transport assessment because passenger forecasts are an essential
part of any transport assessment. The forecast suggests that in
2031 between 20 and 30 million passengers per annum are likely
to wish to use Abbey Wood station, assuming there is no Crossrail
station at Woolwich. A key issue to be agreed between the Promoters
and the local highway authorities is the assumed modal split for
passengers travelling to the station in the peak a.m. journey-to-work
period. For Abbey Wood, the Promoters would like to assume a high
mode-share for buses and a low mode-share for cars. That assumption
would make it likely that between 90 and 160 buses in each direction
would be required in the peak hour in 2031. However, for a number
of reasons, the boroughs are not convinced that very low car access
can be achieved at stations in outer London and beyond. The estimate
of passenger numbers which the Council has considered suggests
that, whatever modal split is assumed, there will be a requirement
for highway works and bus priority measures in order to maintain
and improve vehicle access to the station. The proportion of works
required for bus priority and the proportion required for general
highway traffic and congestion relief will depend on what modal
split is eventually assumed for station access. In any event,
the Council maintain that the Promoters should give an in-principle
undertaking that the necessary works will be built to ensure that
congestion on the highways does not frustrate the desire of local
residents to use the proposed station conveniently and to its
full potential.
7951. Has such an undertaking been sought by
the Council?
(Mr Chard) We have had a number of meetings
with the Promoters and we have made—
7952. You do not need to go into great detail.
I will ask for more detail if we need it. Has one been sought?
(Mr Chard) Yes.
7953. Has one been given?
(Mr Chard) No.
7954. Please read 5.10.
(Mr Chard) In order to establish what works
to highways the Promoters should reasonably be asked to underwrite,
the Council have appointed consultants Mouchel Parkman to undertake
an independent preliminary assessment.
7955. In 5.11, it should read "The consultant's
draft report", should it?
(Mr Chard) Yes. The consultant's draft report
suggests that, in accordance with Policy M27 of the Council's
draft Unitary Development Plan and similar policies in the London
Borough of Bexley, the Promoters should contribute between £20
million and £30 million towards off-site highway works at
Abbey Wood. It can be appreciated that the Promoters might be
reluctant to accept such an additional cost to the project without
further scrutiny. It may be that the highway works can be funded
from some other source and, if the Promoters wish to offer an
undertaking to that effect, then an amendment to the Bill might
be unnecessary. We also understand the Promoters' estimate that,
if a Woolwich station is included in the project, then about 25
per cent of potential passengers at Abbey Wood could transfer
to Woolwich, and possibly it might be more with appropriate highway
management and new bus services. The required highway works would
then be less; hence one of the financial benefits of a Woolwich
Crossrail station would be cost savings to the Promoters at Abbey
Wood.
7956. So essentially what you are saying there
is that, in dealing with the costs of the Woolwich Crossrail station,
one also ought to put into the arithmetic the saving in terms
of highway works in the vicinity of Abbey Wood?
(Mr Chard) Yes.
7957. Moving on to the Abbey Wood station access
issues, could you read from paragraph 6.1 please.
(Mr Chard) Greenwich Council accepts that passenger
forecasts undertaken in support of the Bill were generally adequate,
but they are inadequate for the purpose of providing transport
assessments to individual stations on the south-east arm of Crossrail.
That is because: firstly, they only forecast year 2016 passenger
numbers, ie, one year; secondly, they assume an inappropriate
growth profile post opening; thirdly, they do not extend to 15
years post station opening; and, fourthly, the forecasting methodology
is not good at identifying new trips as distinct from reassigned
trips. Consequently, the Promoters' forecast for Abbey Wood is
incomplete and likely to be too low. Based on evidence from the
Jubilee Line Extension North Greenwich Station, the Council have
estimated that, if Crossrail Abbey Wood station has eight million
passengers in year one after opening in 2016, it will have between
20 million and 30 million in 2031, 15 years later, or up to 400
per cent of the 2016 numbers.
7958. There is no need to read the next paragraph,
so paragraph 6.4 please.
(Mr Chard) The Council's own estimate and assumed
growth profile of potential passenger numbers at Abbey Wood is
focused on 15 years after the likely station opening date of 2016,
that is, 2031. In our opinion, the station should be designed
and built to accommodate any likely passenger numbers arising
in the 15 years after opening comfortably and without any need
for major modification. At the public inquiry into the Thames
Gateway Bridge proposals, TfL informed the inquiry (day 56) that
with the bridge traffic and with the general growth in other traffic
there would be no spare capacity in Harrow Manor Way in 2016,
even with the highway mitigation works for the Bridge.
7959. Mr Jones: Can we just pause there?
For those not familiar with Harrow Manor Way, could you confirm
that that is the main route northwards from Abbey Wood Station?
(Mr Chard) North and south is the viaduct and
the roads beyond the viaduct and Abbey Wood Station which goes
north/south.
9 Crossrail Ref: P77, Proposed Woolwich Station walk
times between stations Plan (GRCHLB-3604-107). Back
|
