Examination of Witnesses (Questions 8000
- 8019)
8000. And on Monday I think you had a conversation
with somebody who worked for the Promoters and you declined to
provide a copy; is that right?
(Mr Chard) I explained that it was a working
document that was still in draft, and in fact I also received
a later version of the draft on Monday, which is the version you
now have.
8001. I was handed a copy of the draft at 20
to ten this morning; that is right, is it not?
(Mr Chard) Yes.
8002. Mr Taylor: I will do my best to
deal with the points that I can in the limited time I have been
given.
8003. Chairman: Mr Taylor, as I understand
it we are talking about estimates which have actually been done
for Abbey Wood.
8004. Mr Taylor: Estimates from the Promoter.
8005. Chairman: He has indicated that
this has been done but it was not felt necessary to get them to
Greenwich.
8006. Chairman: No, sir. The Promoter,
Crossrail, has produced forecasts for 2031 and provided them last
week to Greenwich. Greenwich have also carried out a forecasting
exercise of their own and that was handed to me at 20 to ten this
morning. I am going to do my best to take the points that arise
in this document, but it is in the context of me having one copy
and 20 minutes to look at it.
8007. Chairman: Is it not a case of being
hoisted by your own petard in that it was late anyway?
8008. Mr Taylor: Sir, I have to say I
do not accept that. There has been a lot of discussion between
the parties and the first that Crossrail knew that consultants
had even been appointed to produce figures by Greenwich was when
they received the proof on Thursday.
8009. Chairman: What I am trying to get
at is what we are doing is crossing between two sets of areas
here and I think that the Committee well understands the points
that are being made, although it is from two different perspectives
of models.
8010. Mr Taylor: I will take the points
that I have and we will see where we get to, and if the Committee
feels that there needs to be more discussion or more time to crystallise
the issues then we will proceed from there.
8011. Chairman: We will do that quickly.
8012. Mr Taylor: Mr Chard, if I hand
over a copy of this draft report to Mr Fry. I am interested in
paragraph 4.4, which is the summary at the end of the forecasting
section of this report.[14]
Here Mouchel Parkman conclude, having examined the capacity of
the links, that is to say the roadways between the junctions,
in the vicinity of Abbey Wood, that the issue of whether or not
the Thames Gateway Bridge is in the baseline assumptions has a
significant bearing. Without Thames Gateway Crossrail can demonstrate
that the highway impact in 2016 is minimal. Yes?
(Mr Chard) I do not know whether
that is the case or not.
8013. That is what your consultants are saying
to you.
(Mr Chard) Indeed.
8014. As I understand it, those conclusions
are drawn from an examination of the implications of the Promoter's
forecasts for 2016 which can be found in table 4.1 earlier in
the document, I think at page 19, and in this table, Mr Chard,
we have an examination of the changes in the link flows on the
various roads in the vicinity of Abbey Wood in 2016, without Crossrail
and with Crossrail.[15]
And columns 1 and 2 are based on the Promoter's forecasts, are
they not?
(Mr Chard) This is the consultant's
document; the consultant is not giving the evidence. I received
this on Monday morning and it is still being assessed by our highway
engineers. The council does not necessarily accept all of it.
We have employed the consultants to do the work and they have
been advising it. I am not really in a position to discuss it
in full detail.
8015. In that case are you prepared to accept
an undertaking that we will continue discussions to resolve this,
Mr Chard?
(Mr Chard) I think that both parties should
continue to discuss to resolve this but we have certain matters
which we would like to be agreed at this stage and we would like
agreement that the TA Guidance will be followed; we would like
agreement that the 15-year assessment period is agreed from the
date of station opening; and we would like agreement that the
Promoters will produce a forecast for 2031 and then we can discuss
the implications beyond that. I think we have to do it that way
in practice because half of the station catchment area is in the
London borough of Bexley and we have yet to hear what—well,
I have some idea of what their views are but not everybody in
this room is aware of their views.
8016. So I think the answer to my question is
you would be prepared to accept an undertaking to discuss, is
that right?
(Mr Chard) Yes.
8017. In that case I will not ask you any further
questions on the forecasting. I just want to turn to some other
matters that you deal with in your evidence. If we turn to page
314, section 9, paragraph 9.1, you address to construction working
hours.[16]
Now, it is the case, is it not, that Westminster City Council
are the lead authority in relation to that particular issue and
discussions are on-going between the Promoters and Westminster
City Council?
(Mr Chard) Yes.
8018. And you are happy, are you not, for those
negotiations to continue and for the Committee to be informed
of progress at a later stage?
(Mr Chard) For normal working
hours, yes.
8019. That suggests that you are not content
about some aspects of the negotiations that are on-going with
Westminster in relation to abnormal working hours?
(Mr Chard) Well, Westminster
is not actually the lead in respect of our concerns about working
hours, so I do not know where those negotiations have got to.
I am aware, however, that the Promoters, as far as I am aware
still, do not agree to the amendment to Schedule 7 to the Bill
which a number of boroughs are seeking, I think including Westminster.
14 Committee Ref: A84, Summary of Highway Assessment,
The Highway Impact of Crossrail at Abbey Wood, Mouchel Parkman
2006, para 4.4 (SCN20060510-002). Back
15
Committee Ref: A84, Table 4 1-Highway flows on roads adjacent
to Abbey Wood station, The Highway Impact of Crossrail at Abbey
Wood, Mouchel Parkman 2006 (SCN20060510-003). Back
16
Committee Ref: A84, Construction working hours (Petition Clause
24) (GRCHLB-3605-314). Back
| 
