Examination of Witnesses (Questions 12340
- 12359)
12340. Sir Peter Soulsby: I understand
from what you said earlier on, Mr Mould, that Mr Taylor will,
in a little while, be calling Mr Anderson.
12341. Mr Mould: That is right; to deal
with the remaining two points.
12342. Sir Peter Soulsby: I think it
would be convenient, before we hear Mr Anderson, for us to take
this opportunity to suspend the Committee for 15 minutes to have
coffee and tea in the upper waiting hall. I therefore suspend
the Committee.
After a short break
12343. Mr Taylor: Thank you, sir. I am
going to call Mr Anderson.
Mr David Anderson, recalled
Examined by Mr Taylor
12344. Mr Taylor: Mr Anderson, can I
ask you to explain your relationship to the project, for the benefit
of the Civic Society?
(Mr Anderson) I am the Head of Planning for
Crossrail.
12345. There are two issues for you this morning,
Mr Anderson. Firstly, the implications of Crossrail for changes
in services from Maidenhead and, secondly, aspects relating to
the current infrastructure at the station. Can we turn, please,
to exhibit D 025.[27]
Here we have got a series of four tables, Mr Anderson, headed
service frequencies and journey times from Maidenhead. Can you
explain to the Committee what these tables show?
(Mr Anderson) Yes, I can. Beginning
with the table at the top, that table shows the difference in
train service frequency and the average journey time with and
without Crossrail in 2016. So we can see, in the second column,
that the total number of trains running into Paddington is the
same in both cases and we see that the journey times are also
very similar. We have then broken down the train frequency into
journey time bands so we can see how many fast trains there are
and how many trains in the bands of 30 to 35 minutes. This is
the detail behind what Mr Berryman was saying. So we can see,
broadly speaking, there are 5 fast passenger trains with Crossrail
and 3 to 4 in the other columns. There are more in the brackets
31-35 minutes and so on. I would suggest there is a broadly comparable
spread of services over that range. The table below takes the
middle peak hour—i.e. the hour from 8 o'clock to 9 o'clock—and
again we can see the frequency and the journey times are comparable
in the middle of the peak.
12346. To meet the point the Civic Society makes
that the service from Maidenhead would be worse with Crossrail
compared to without Crossrail, what would you say to that?
(Mr Anderson) I would suggest, on this basis
it would not be; it would be comparable.
12347. In terms of the effect Crossrail might
have upon people beginning and ending their journeys at Maidenhead
station, comparing the with-Crossrail situation to the without-Crossrail
situation in 2016, what effect will the change in the nature of
the service have on passenger numbers?
(Mr Anderson) It is very little. We do use
these assumptions in modelling and forecasting the effect of Crossrail
on the number of passengers using the station and we get very
similar numbers with and without Crossrail in our forecasts for
2016.
12348. Turning to parking aspects, can you just
explain to the Committee briefly what is the general policy with
regard to shifting the mode people currently use for transport
into the future?
(Mr Anderson) In terms of the work we have
done, we have generally assumed that parking provision will stay
roughly at current levels, and that, therefore, would constrain
the ability of people to drive to a station and park up. We also
take into account, obviously, local factors, but at places such
as Maidenhead where we see very similar numbers with and without
Crossrail we are not going to see a particularly big change in
that position. So the parking provision with or without the project
would be similar, as are the passenger numbers.
12349. If it were contended—I believe
it is—by the Civic Society and others that additional parking
should be provided with Crossrail, what assistance would additional
parking provide in meeting the general policy objective with regard
to the shift of transportation mode used by members of the public?
(Mr Anderson) Well, we take the policy presumption
to promote low-cost alternatives to the car. Clearly, further
parking provision, particularly where there is no obvious increase
in demand with Crossrail, as here, would allow more people to
drive to the station.
12350. Would that accord with that policy or
conflict with it?
(Mr Anderson) Generally not.
12351. The Civic Society, and I believe others,
raise concerns about the effect of Crossrail on potential proposals
in future for a transport interchange on the forecourt of the
station. Start, if we may, with the position as it is at present
and without Crossrail. What is the forecourt currently used for?
(Mr Anderson) It is a car park at the moment.
There is, obviously, a pick-up and set-down facility and taxis
pick up passengers as well.
12352. So if a transport interchange were desired
on the forecourt without Crossrail, what would have to occur?
(Mr Anderson) There would be, presumably, displacements
of those facilities, particularly for parking, I would imagine.
12353. Would displacement of parking spaces
accord or conflict with policy that seeks to take motorists away
from the private car?
(Mr Anderson) Clearly, if one was to take the
parking away and, therefore, reduce the attractiveness of driving
by car that would accord with that policy.
12354. So if we then turn from that position
to the position with Crossrail, what effect does Crossrail have
on the ability to provide a transportation interchange at the
station?
(Mr Anderson) The general proposition is that
we put the parking back, broadly, at the same level as before.
Clearly there would be an opportunity to develop the facility
there if the Borough so wanted to do, and there would be additional
take-up for that irrespective of Crossrail.
12355. Can we just turn lastly to exhibit F-016
please?[28]
This is an extract from the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead
Parking Strategy, May 2004. We can see under the heading "Maidenhead"
five paragraphs. Paragraph 10.3.3 explains, "The combination
of future forecast traffic growth and proposed developments within
the town centre are likely to result in a deterioration of traffic
conditions in terms of increased congestion and delays. In order
to manage these predicted future conditions an effective parking
strategy must be developed as a demand management tool."
We see at 10.3.4 the guiding principles, "1. To ensure that
parking and loading restrictions are effectively introduced to
ensure an effective turnover of spaces for short-stay parking.
2. To use a pricing mechanism to reduce the demand for long-stay
parking within the town centre and increase utilisation of spaces
for short-stay parking... 3. To direct demand for long-stay parking
to locations on the outer edge of the town centre." 10.3.5
says that the fundamental elements of the strategy are, "1.
Introduce effective enforcement of on-street parking controls.
2. Introduce tariff structures that support the objective of redistributing
long-stay parkers to edge of town car parks. 3. Introduce residential
parking schemes on the edge of the town centre to manage the potential
effects of displacement." If the parking was constrained
at the station in accordance with that particular parking policy
what other constraints might one expect the council to be bringing
forward in order to restrict the opportunities for people to park
and ride at Maidenhead station in the future?
(Mr Anderson) My immediate impulse
here is that it is part of the overall approach for managing traffic
conditions in the town centre. Obviously, parking controls are
one aspect of that. Improving public transport and accessibility
to public transport services might be another aspect of that.
12356. And if there were concerns that people
might be displaced from the station to park on residential streets
what does this policy indicate the step would be that the council
would take?
(Mr Anderson) There is a clear indication that
they would seek to introduce on-street parking controls.
12357. Mr Taylor: Thank you very much
indeed, Mr Anderson. Those are all the questions I have.
Cross-examined by Mr Cockburn
12358. Thank you for producing the schedule
which shows that the train service would be comparable in the
future but what I do not really understand is that you also said
that passenger numbers would be comparable. Is that right?
(Mr Anderson) Yes, that is right.
12359. My fundamental question is, if the passenger
numbers are going to stay the same what is the point of having
Crossrail come to Maidenhead or Slough or anywhere else? Why extend
it out?
(Mr Anderson) To answer that question we need
to look at Maidenhead in the context of the overall Great Western
service and Mr Berryman has explained some of the operational
reasons why we are serving Maidenhead, so that would be the first
point Secondly, although the passenger numbers may be similar
it does not necessarily mean that is not a good reason. Clearly,
the passengers from Maidenhead will have a choice. Those who wish
to take the fast train into Paddington will still be able to do
so. Those who might want to take advantage of the Crossrail service
to continue their journey more directly into central London will
also have that opportunity.
27 Crossrail Ref: P102, Promoter's Exhibits: Service
Frequency and Journey Times from Maidenhead (WINSRB-14604D-025). Back
28
Crossrail Ref: P101, Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead
Parking Strategy, May 2004, Paras 10.3-10.3.5 (WINSRB-14604F-016). Back
| 
