Examination of Witnesses (Questions 10800
- 10819)
10800. Chairman: Well, that is absolutely
marvellous. Then we can say that the engineering impact survey
similar to the one for Stepney Green can be done here?
10801. Mr Mould: Can I just explain very
briefly the detail. As you have heard, this building was the subject
of individual assessment as an important Listed building in accordance
with our approach to it. That process identified it as being at
a certain level of risk. Now, the Petitioners, entirely understandably,
it is their building, they are concerned about it, they say, "We
would like you to have a look at the building because we think
there are certain features that we need to take particular account
of and we would like you to review the assessment which you have
made here at Spitalfields", and we did so. You have heard
that recently we went on a site visit to the building and we did
identify certain features and we took the view that the building
merited a rather higher level of risk categorisation than had
been attributed to it. Now, that is not the process not working;
that is the process working. That is precisely what the process
is designed to achieve. It is designed to enable through the process
of including the Promoter's expert advisers, English Heritage,
who, I can assure the Committee, have received the individual
assessments for all the Listed buildings we have assessed along
the route—
10802. Chairman: Did that include an
audio assessment of whether in the basement area of this building
it would be below 25 decibels?
10803. Mr Mould: Well, that is the noise
aspect and I will come to that in a moment. English Heritage,
as you know, are concerned with their statutory function which
is to do with the protection of the nation's built heritage, of
which this building forms an important part, so they have been
consulted not only on the process itself, which they have not
just been asked to look at, but they have positively approved
as being acceptable, but they have been sent each individual assessment
report for each individual Listed building which is affected which
falls within the 10mm contour which Professor Mair told you about
earlier in the process. They have been sent that. We have not
had, unless I am corrected, any expressions of concern from English
Heritage that the assessment report that they have seen in relation
to 19 Princelet Street is—
10804. Chairman: But the point I was
trying to get to was that as it was sent to English Heritage rather
than to this Petitioner, then it is unlikely that we would get
it. What I am saying is that now we have sorted out that impasse,
could we not now get the report directly and then perhaps we would
see some of the concerns?
10805. Mr Mould: When you say "get
the report", you mean the Committee would like to see the
report?
10806. Chairman: Yes.
10807. Mr Mould: I am sure we could make
the report available for the Committee, yes. The Petitioner has
it, or the Petitioner has not had it, but we have made clear that
the Petitioner can have it.
10808. Chairman: All I am trying to say
is that if there are concerns after the proceedings to go back,
you would agree, as in the case of Stepney Church, to have another
look at it?
10809. Mr Mould: Yes, of course. Can
I make this clear: if you remember, we talked about the deed and
every proprietor of a Listed building is entitled to call for
a deed and that deed includes a number of mechanisms for consultation,
for the Petitioner in appropriate circumstances to engage the
services of their own independent engineer to carry out an assessment
and for Crossrail to pay for the costs of that exercise, so we
involve the proprietor through that mechanism, we involve English
Heritage, as I have explained to you, and we also involve the
Borough Council, Tower Hamlets. Tower Hamlets have their own advisers
in relation to historic building matters. They have seen all of
these reports and they have had the opportunity to comment and
to criticise. Sir, I hope what I am doing is to reiterate that
this is an inclusive process.
10810. Chairman: Yes, okay. Now that
we have got past that, we have got the agreement that they will
get the report and—
10811. Mr Mould: If I am repeating what
I said before, I apologise and I hope I will not have to repeat
it again, but that is the position. The only other point I was
going to make is that we are at a stage in the process, we have
not completed the process, and you know that point, but this is
a process of consultation. We seek to get to the level at which
we are satisfied, along with these consultees, that the appropriate
arrangements for assessment, monitoring and protective works have
been identified for the needs of the building in question. I think
I have probably overstayed my welcome on this, unless there is
anything else I can help you with.
10812. Chairman: No, thank you. You have
the last word, Ms Symes.
10813. Ms Symes: Well, I did want to
come back on that because I do not think it does not show the
process working, but it shows the process staggering and stumbling.
It was under a great deal of pressure not from this Petitioner,
but from other people that finally persuaded the Crossrail team
to come and look at the building. I have brought with me a copy
of the revised response, and I thought Crossrail would have provided
that to you before, but I have copies for you. I do not think
it is satisfactory. I do think that we must not lose sight of
what has really gone on here which is that a great deal of information
which was freely and publicly available over several years was
not used in doing the original assessment and I think that does
demonstrate, apart from the impacts on us, real flaws because
sending a great pile of Listed building assessments out to busy,
busy, busy English Heritage people, simply saying, "We're
sending them to you", does not put any obligation or duty
on English Heritage to respond by commenting on whether these
have been thoroughly, properly or adequately done.
10814. Chairman: I understand that, Ms
Symes. You have made your point and we have made it also in support
of you.
10815. Ms Symes: I did want just to clarify
two extra points. Therefore, English Heritage now have the revised
assessment as well? I have got one with me for you if you want
it. English Heritage have the revised assessment?
10816. Mr Mould: Not as yet, no, but
we will make it available.
10817. Ms Symes: There is just a small
point on this deed. In a sense what you are saying is that we
can, at the Promoter's cost, instruct our own independent engineers
and such other experts as we need to do to make our independent
assessment of the consequences for this building of what is proposed
and that there is some agreement, as I have understood what you
have said about arbitrators if there is a disagreement between
experts, that that arbitration is to come back to this Committee?
10818. Chairman: Ms Symes, what I have
just enabled, I think, a little bit earlier on is a similar situation
to what we had with Stepney Church, which is that the two organisations,
your organisation and Crossrail, go away and consult and you will
have a new opportunity to look at the significant importance of
your building. What you requested earlier on, which was an engineering
impact assessment, and what Mr Mould was saying is that that was
already built within the structure of the arbitration—
10819. Mr Mould: The deed.
|
