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
| 
