Examination of Witnesses (Questions 11820
- 11839)
11820. We do not want the back of an envelope.
Has it been done properly?
(Mr Berryman) It has certainly been looked
at properly, yes. Whether it has been worked up into a fully designed
scheme, I doubt.
11821. Mr Clarkson: We wait with interest
and I make it quite plain I shall be asking the Committee that
there be an undertaking of the sort. That is all I have, sir,
thank you.
11822. Mr Liddell-Grainger: Thank you,
Mr Clarkson.
The committee suspended from 4.00 pm to
4.11 pm for a division in the House
Re-examined by Ms Lieven
11823. Ms Lieven: Mr Berryman, could
I ask you to look at paragraph 5 of the Promoter's response document,
which is dealing with the impact at Paddington operational railway
and the link to the Hammersmith and City Line.[30]
"A number of options have been considered to reduce this
travel time. A direct low level subway link between the Crossrail
station box and the Hammersmith and City Line was rejected because
of a number of reasons including (a) the difficulty of providing
adequate vertical access ... (b) the engineering difficulties
of constructing a low level subway beneath the throat of Paddington
station ... (c) although this option would provide the quickest
and only paid side route, it would still involve a journey of
around three minutes ... ." At paragraph 6, over the page,
it says, "Consideration was given to the use of the disused
subways ... but this was rejected."[31]
Do you see that?
(Mr Berryman) I do.
11824. So far as you are aware, thinking about
what is said in paragraph 5, sent to Westminster six weeks ago,
have they carried out any engineering appraisal that you have
seen as to the validity of the point made in 5(b) about engineering
difficulties?
(Mr Berryman) Have they carried out any?
11825. Yes.
(Mr Berryman) If they have, I have not seen
anything.
11826. So far as you are aware, have they come
back to us, in respect of that paragraph, and asked for any further
detailed information since they got that six weeks ago?
(Mr Berryman) Not to my knowledge.
11827. Stepping back from that, in your expert
engineering opinion, given matters that you gave in evidence in
chief on this link, is it worthwhile to carry out further engineering
appraisals of this proposal?
(Mr Berryman) We certainly would not think
it was worthwhile, no.
11828. I think you made a slip in evidence in
chief—there is some division within the team as to whether
you said it or not but I think we need to be really clear about
it—so far as PRM accessibility from Crossrail to Hammersmith
and City Line. Under the current proposals, although there is
a lift up to a footbridge across the tracks, is there any PRM
accessibility onto the Hammersmith and City Line?
(Mr Berryman) No, there is not at the present
time. I understand that part of the reconstruction of the Hammersmith
and City Line which we have been talking about already—that
is the new platforms and so on—would include putting PRM
lifts down from the concourse to the platforms for that station,
but there is certainly nothing there at the moment. Indeed it
is a very unsatisfactory arrangement for people with restricted
mobility at the moment, as I think was seen yesterday by the Committee
members.
11829. Would putting lifts down all depend on
the Hammersmith and City Line platforms being rebuilt?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, it does.
11830. Ms Lieven: Thank you very much.
11831. Sir, we could produce a note on planning
station guidance on the escalators, the point which Mr Hopkins
was asking about: two escalators or two escalators and a staircase
and run-off distances and so on. It is quite technical but there
is detailed guidance on that which we could produce if that is
helpful.
11832. Kelvin Hopkins: I am sufficiently
reassured from what has been said. If this is not physically possible,
I will accept that.
11833. Ms Lieven: I do not want to go
into the detail if it is unnecessary but the offer is there.
11834. Mr Liddell-Grainger: Now, closing
statements.
11835. Ms Lieven: Sir, I was going to
call Mr Anderson on the batching plant. I can deal with it in
closing.
11836. Mr Liddell-Grainger: If you are
happy to deal with it in closing, I am happy.
11837. Ms Lieven: I am happy to deal
with it in closing if you are happy, sir.
11838. Mr Liddell-Grainger: We are both
happy. This could not be better
11839. Ms Lieven: I should say it is
important that the rest of the Committee are happy too.
30 Crossrail Ref: P99, Promoter's response document
to the Petition of the City of Westminster Council, p8, para 5
(SCN-20060621-003). Back
31
Crossrail Ref: P99, Promoter's response document to the Petition
of the City of Westminster Council, p9, para 6 (SCN-20060621-004). Back
| 
