Select Committee on Crossrail Bill Minutes of Evidence


Examination of Witnesses (Questions 11160 - 11179)

  11160. It is to be hoped that the Committee can go back and look at the southern route again and assess its viability. It would be a chance to avoid risking damage to irreplaceable buildings of national significance.

  11161. The Spitalfields Historic Buildings Trust urges you to adopt the southern route, avoiding the historic core of Spitalfields. Crossrail promises so much for London, it will benefit us all if it built in the right place.

  11162. Mr Liddell-Grainger: Thank you very much. Mr Mould.

  11163. Mr Mould: Sir, the Committee has heard a good deal of evidence during the course of the proceedings in relation to Spitalfields and Hanbury Street, and a good deal of that evidence has been concerned with the need to take great care in relation to potential settlement impacts as they affect all buildings, but for obvious reasons listed buildings in particular. I do not propose to repeat that evidence. All I would draw to the Committee's attention is that we referred last week to our understanding of the importance of Christchurch, Spitalfields, the location of Christchurch in relation to the scheme and, as you will recall, it lies somewhat to the south of the running tunnels proposed under the Crossrail scheme.

  11164. We referred to the fact that Christ Church has been the subject of careful consideration as part of our detailed assessment process in relation to settlement impacts and I simply, for the record, draw attention to volume two of the technical report to the Crossrail environmental impact assessment statement headed "assessment of separate impacts on the built heritage", which on page 125 summarises the position in relation to Christ Church.[2] Let me put it up on the screen. You can see there we are showing the proposed works, segmental line tunnels; the church lies outside the tender of the settlement lines. That is the position, as I understand it. No significant potential impact is predicted and, for that reason, no action by way of mitigation and you will see there the residual impact is described as "not significant". We have described to you the ongoing process of assessment in relation to listed buildings. The Committee need have no concerns as to the Promoters' desire to take whatever steps remain necessary in order to safeguard that iconic historic building. The only other point I would make is this: I think the Petitioner also mentioned 17 and 19 Princelet Street. The Committee knows we have made a considerable commitment specifically in relation to 19 Princelet Street and, as to the Petition of Ms Symes last week, the occupier of that building, 17 the neighbouring building also listed has also been subject to individual assessment. The report is available to the Petitioner and the process which we have outlined is under our Information Papers and documents available to the Petitioner also.


  11165. As to the question of ground water, I just ask what our position is in relation to that, the position is in so far as ground water is concerned, the tunnels will be bored through the clay, as you have heard, and the water in the chalk will be below that, so it will not be affected by the tunneling works. Any deposits of shallow water will lie above the lie of the tunnels and, therefore, there is not expected to be any interface in relation to water of that level either. Sir, unless there are any other points that you would like my help on, that is all I propose to say.

  11166. Mr Liddell-Grainger: Thank, you, Mr Mould. Mr Harris, thank you very much. Is there anything else you want to add?

  11167. Mr Harris: May I respond to Mr Mould?

  11168. Mr Liddell-Grainger: Of course.

  11169. Mr Harris: Mr Mould has mentioned to do with settlement impacts the fact that Christ Church is to the south of the scheme. It is precisely those outlying on the edge of settlement buildings which are of risk in that they will have differential settlement as the levels of settlement spread out from the core. I am afraid I am very much disagreed with his advice to you that you need not have any concerns. On visiting 19 Princelet Street for the first time recently, Alan Baxter Associates have upgraded its sensitivity from two to three. They only visited three buildings on that day. Prior to that, their assessments had been on desk-based archaeological research and visiting Spitalfields with me. It surely should be of concern if one of only three buildings visited should have had its sensitivity upgraded. All these buildings on Princelet Street, Wilkes Street, Brushfield Street and Gun Street are all complex early 18th century buildings built 300 years ago to last possibly 60 or 80 years. It is a miracle that they still stand at all. They have been added to, I think you heard last Thursday from Ms Symes, how 19 Princelet Street is effectively two buildings, 18 and 19th century were built in totally different ways that will settle very differently. It has been my argument today and I hope you will understand that it is the importance of these buildings, the soul of these buildings not necessarily just the historic fabric that will be destroyed by filling them full of bracing.

  11170. Similarly, I would urge the Committee to have the same concerns over ground water. There has, I do not believe, been any dig or research done to ascertain where this water is and from other advice I have, I understand that it is running into unknown sources of water, particularly when I took Crossrail's engineers around Spitalfields in 2004, their biggest area of concern was to know whether I knew of any water courses because they were what gave them the most cause of concern. I hope the piece I have given you of the National Coal Board who mined at random under historic buildings with assurances of everything would be fine and virtually destroyed buildings will give you a hint of concern today. Really what I am saying is that now we no longer need to dig here because of Pedley Street tunnel. Surely, given the importance of this district to future generations of people in this country, it is worth looking briefly at the southern route which I feel concern certain you will discover to make a lot of sense.

  11171. Mr Liddell-Grainger: Thank you Mr Harris, you may stand down. Could I call the Reverend Rider.

  The Petition of Christ Church PCC

  The Reverend Andy Rider appeared as Agent.

  11172. Mr Liddell-Grainger: Mr Mould?

  11173. Mr Mould: Just a very brief introduction in the usual way. The Petitioner I think is the Rector of Chirst Church.

  11174. Reverend Rider: Yes, indeed.

  11175. Mr Mould: As you know, we described that building to you in the past in its value to the nation. Also I think the Petitioner has an interest through his office in number 22a Hanbury Street which is an unlisted building, but I think it is proposed to be listed and 35 Buxton Street which I think is the rectory.[3] All of these are in the vicinity of the proposed Crossrail running tunnels and not lying beneath them and, indeed, in the vicinity of the Hanbury Street shaft site.


  11176. Reverend Rider: Thank you, Chairman. Inevitably, I am going to touch on some arguments that have been heard before. I will try not to reiterate them, I will refer to them, I may even reinforce them but will try not to take too much of the Committee's time. There are four areas of concern I want to a raise.

  11177. First, I understand the current building spend of this project has risen from £15 to 18 billion, whilst at the same time we hear promises of a quicker build time than was first envisaged. I wonder what provisions there are for overspending and the effect of these time delays which both seem endemic to large-scale building projects in Britain. I need not mention those we are all aware of.

  11178. Secondly, I want to echo the concerns of Judith Serota who spoke to you last week on behalf of the Spitalfields Festival. The proximity of the tunnels at Christ Church does indeed indicate that the northwest corner of this fine Grade I Listed building sits between one millimetre and five millimetres of settlement contours. We, as the PCC, are concerned about construction noise and vibration, settlement problems and subsequent running noises. These obviously could have adverse effects on the place of worship which is also used by the community for a number of events. The PCC would want all assurance possible of reasonable sound levels and restitution expenses if there were to be a sinkage or cracking for the building as a result of this project.

  11179. Thirdly, local concern from residents from the conservation area have also led to an agreement, I understand, to do proper internal assessments of our Grade I Listed church and the settlement effects upon it, the map shows the settlement contours on the screen before you, coming under our front portico which supports a huge spire, which if it were to move could have, of course, disastrous consequences.[4] Our architect of some 30 years had already met with some of the Committee and shown them around.



2   Crossrail Ref: P97, Impact Assessment, Crossrail Schedule Impact, Alan Baxter & Associates, Volume 2, p125 (SCN-20060620-001). Back

3   Crossrail Ref: P97, Location Map of Christ Church PCC (TOWNHLB-22103-001). Back

4   Crossrail Ref: P97, Liverpool Street to Pudding Mill Lane, Sheet 2 of 8 (TOWNHLB-22104-001). Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2007
Prepared 14 November 2007