Select Committee on Crossrail Bill Minutes of Evidence


Examination of Witnesses (Questions 12620 - 12639)

  12620. If I could go on to the next photograph please.[94] In the final analysis, if it is deemed necessary to use land on the Guards Club side of the bridge there is a large area of land beyond this fence that you can see on the photograph which belongs to Network Rail. This photograph shows the fence, the perimeter of the park at the car park end where Crossrail wish to position their site offices, et cetera. This land belonging to Network Rail stretches right down to the river and it is possible to just make out, if you are lucky, the arches of the Brunel Bridge on the bit that is on land. It is a sizable area. We believe that it may be sufficient land for the "small amount of storage" and the "small quantity of site accommodation" required. Those are Crossrail's words. This would mean the Guards Club Park would not need to be used for these purposes.


  12621. If I could return to photograph 7 please.[95] This shows the path beside the river in the park. The far end of the park is right next to Network Rail's own land so they would have easy access on to their path. If it is deemed that the river cannot be used for access to the island, access would still be needed along Oldacres for lorry traffic. Crossrail assures us that there will only be a small amount of lorry traffic which we can only believe "a very small amount" means different things to different people, and the people living on that road do have concerns.


  12622. Also access to the island along the path that we see by the river and via the footbridge would be needed. The footbridge on the photograph, as I said, could easily be accessed from Network Rail's own land just by the bridge there.

  12623. Finally, if the Select Committee decide Crossrail should be allowed to use the park, we would really like to be assured that the site will be cleared immediately the work is finished and returned to its original state within six months and not kept as a convenient, useful site for Crossrail to continue to use when it moves further along the line towards Maidenhead Station. 13 months is the latest estimate from Crossrail for the Brunel Bridge work and that is taking into account the nesting season on the island, which we are pleased to see acknowledged. Normally there are gates at either end of the footbridge from the end of January until the end of June so that is a considerable length of time. During that time these site offices would be sitting in the Guards Club Park—just sitting not used very much presumably. Work invariably takes longer than estimated and we are worried that occupation of that site should just go on and on.

  12624. So, in summary, we would ask the Select Committee to consider: if this small and beautiful park should be used at all for this project; if serious consideration should be given to the use of the river for the purposes that have already been mentioned; and if the river is not judged to be a viable option then that Network Rail's own land beside the park should be used for site offices and storage materials, not Guards Club Park. Thank you for listening to me.

  12625. Sir Peter Soulsby: Thank you very much indeed. Mr Mould?

  12626. Mr Mould: I wonder if we could put up 04A002.[96] Sir, whilst that is being put up, all I want to say really in response is this: as the Petitioner has fairly pointed out, we have given an undertaking that we will limit the use of the park as a work compound to ten per cent of the total area. We have explained to you through Mr Berryman's evidence this morning why we do not consider that river access by using a barge is an acceptable alternative to the works compound to serve the west side of the Maidenhead Bridge. I do not propose to repeat that now. That point has been made.


  12627. So far as the second suggested alternative, which is the Network Rail land in the area immediately to the southern boundary of the park, the position is that we have looked at that area and the minimum requirements for the works compound that we propose in the south-western corner of the Guards Club Park, and I put up again for the Committee's convenience the layout that I explained to the Committee this morning, those facilities, small and limited as they are, we have looked at the Network Rail site and there simply is not enough space within that area of Network Rail land to accommodate the facilities that we require. So that is not, I regret to say, a suitable alternative.

  12628. Turning to the final point that was made by the Petitioner, I can certainly give an undertaking to the Committee that once that first phase of work to prepare the Brunel Bridge for overhead line electrification has been completed (and you will recall I mentioned there were two phases and the first phase involved creating foundations) the site will then be cleared and it certainly will not be used, as it were, as a site in later stages of the Crossrail programme to serve other remote works within the Crossrail project. I can give that undertaking.

  12629. As to the more detailed merits of the points that I have just outlined to you, the Committee will be aware that we have dealt with some of those points this morning. We are going to be returning to the issue of Guards Club Park in more detail when the Committee hears the resumption of the petition of the Royal Borough, and I think Mr Stoker indicated that that would be the second issue on which he would be calling evidence. We will come back to the points in more detail in response to that petition but in the meantime we have, as the Petitioner indicated, written recently to explain in a little more detail what our proposals are for this works compound and for the works on the river. What I can tell the Committee is this: I shall make sure that we write further to the Petitioners because we have got some further details that we can provide in relation to what is proposed and we will do that to give them some more details about our proposed arrangements for the operation of the worksite and environmental mitigation and so on and so forth, if that is convenient to the Committee.

  12630. Sir Peter Soulsby: Do you have at this stage a plan from which we can see the relative position and size of the Network Rail land?

  12631. Mr Mould: Do I have a photograph of that?

  12632. Sir Peter Soulsby: Either a photograph or a plan. If you do not obviously we could return to that when we come to the other Petitioner. I think it would be very helpful for us to see just how big that site is and quite where it is in relation to this.

  12633. Mr Mould: I do not think I have a plan that will give you any great assistance. 04A001: the area of land in question is—and I will be corrected if I am wrong—this area here.[97] It is an embankment and it has a substantial amount of tree coverage and it is an area that for the reasons that I have given is simply not suitable and available to accommodate the works compound that we need.


  12634. What I propose to do is to provide the Committee with a better scaled plan to be able to compare the alternative locations that have been put before it for consideration and provide that to the Committee as soon as possible and also provide a copy of the plan to the Petitioners.

  12635. Sir Peter Soulsby: I think that will be very helpful. Obviously the Committee, as has been remarked, has heard considerable evidence about the difficulties and possibilities of using barges earlier in the day. What we did not hear was any evidence about this particular site, and whether this was perhaps an alternative. I think it would be very helpful for us to see some detailed plans of that when we return to that issue and perhaps some photographs of what is on that site and what might in whole or in part be an alternative to the proposal you have got at the moment.

  12636. Mr Mould: I can tell the Committee that on my reading of the Royal Borough's presentation, the material we have from them, that is a site that they will raise as well so we can come back to that point.

  12637. Mr Binley: Through you, Chairman, could I ask looking at this area of land it seems to extend under the line and on to the other side. Is that so?

  12638. Mr Mould: It is difficult for me, Mr Binley, to see precisely where you are talking about.

  12639. Mr Binley: If you look at the area of land you are talking about and then you look at the railway line and then you cast your eye down a bit you will see another similar piece on the other side of the railway line. Is that okay? Are we together now?


94   Committee Ref: A140, View of boundary to Guards Club Park (WINSRB-12005-009). Back

95   Committee Ref: A140, View of Maidenhead Bridge (WINSRB-12005-007). Back

96   Crossrail Ref: P102, Maidenhead Railway Bridge-Guards' Club Park Compound Layout (WINSRB-14604A-002). Back

97   Crossrail Ref: P102, Maidenhead Railway Bridge-Compound Locations (WINSRB-14604A-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