Examination of Witnesses (Questions 12740
- 12759)
12740. Ms Lieven: Okay. I think that
deals with that and then the only other thing I wanted to ask
you, so you can confirm the position, Lady Bright referred to
us taking a playing field on the Westminster Academy site which
the Members who were here last week—which I think is everyone
now except for Sir Peter—heard about. The Westminster Academy
site is shown on this plan.[103]
It lies on the other side of the Westway, the A40, from the batching
plant and it is a tiny slither of land along the edge of the railway
which is being taken but are we taking a playing field off the
Academy or making a playing field unusable for the Academy?
(Mr Walters) Certainly from the
discussions we have had with the Academy that is not the case.
As is shown there under our additional provision, we are moving
their retaining wall back over a length of some 140 metres, moving
it back to take the triangular site and it really is a slither
of land there, maximum of 20 metres wide, 140 metres long.
12741. Ms Lieven: Thank you very much,
Mr Walters. Those are all my questions. Lady Bright may well have
questions for you. I am going to ask Mr Taylor questions about
acoustic barriers and so on.
12742. Sir Peter Soulsby: I noticed we
still have that one to come.
12743. Ms Lieven: Yes, I have that in
hand but I will ask Mr Taylor.
12744. Sir Peter Soulsby: Okay. Thank
you. Lady Bright, would you like to cross-examine.
Cross-examined by Lady Bright
12745. Lady Bright: Yes. The turn back
facility, let us just deal with the cost of that dive under first.
Would you like to put a price on it?
(Mr Walters) It would be very much an estimate
at the moment. I would think it would be £50 million.
12746. Lady Bright: Comfortably within
the 80 so that is a good thing. I know nothing about the cost
of these things. It is good to know there is some spare in the
back pocket. It is interesting also about the width available
to you at Westbourne Park. That is a very congested corner. Why
would the bus garage have to be built on stilts like that if there
was space for the concrete bund and the turn back facility? You
did tell us that we were going to have an acoustic barrier which
there now is not room for.
(Mr Walters) I believe we have talked about
the changed operations for the batching plant in that rather than
having a moveable conveyor the new batching plant would have a
fixed conveyor and a fixed hopper and the train would move over
that. We have said that that hopper will have noise insulation.
It is very abnormal, in fact I do not think it happens, to provide
noise insulation to Network Rail sidings. We would never have
talked about that.
12747. Ms Lieven: Might it be helpful
if I clarified this? I have plans which show an acoustic barrier
for the temporary construction phase and that has always been
proposed and continues to be proposed. It has never been part
of the Crossrail project to have an acoustic barrier in relation
to operational railway land. There is intended to be much more
acoustic housing around the permanent batching plant. That is
not the kind of acoustic barrier which I believe Lady Bright is
referring to but it may be that there is confusion because there
are these different things going on. So far as my instructions
are concerned, the acoustic barrier along the side has always
been related only to the temporary construction phase. Mr Taylor
can explain the reasons for that when he gives evidence.
12748. Lady Bright: That was not at all
what we understood. It has to be our mistake but we did not understand
it.
12749. Sir Peter Soulsby: That is fine.
It is certainly clear what is being proposed now.
12750. Lady Bright: Yes. I would say
Old Oak Common is not really half way to Heathrow, Mr Walters,
would you?
(Mr Walters) No. It is two kilometres down
the line.
12751. Lady Bright: On the playing field,
we are talking about 2,800 square metres being temporarily taken
and nearly 800 square metres permanently I think. It is a 65 metre
strip, it is a lot. Other people's maths not mine.
(Mr Walters) We are taking the same amount
of land both temporarily and permanently. We will be building
a revised retaining wall which is shown in red. That will go in
as the permanent structure. We are taking a little bit more temporarily
I guess for the works site and for safety in the Academy which
will be the shaded bit above that but that is purely to enable
the wall to be constructed and then we move back out and down
to the lower level of the depot.
12752. Lady Bright: This is different
from what was proposed in AP2. It looks different to me, it must
have changed.
(Mr Walters) I think that will be the same
with LLAUs and LADs as AP2.
12753. Lady Bright: I beg your pardon.
(Mr Walters) Sorry. I think the red line will
be the limit of deviation for the permanent works and the shaded
upper portion will be within limits of land to be acquired and
used purely for construction purposes.
12754. Lady Bright: Fine. I do not think
I can go further on the detail of that because it does keep changing.
Thank you.
12755. Sir Peter Soulsby: Thank you.
Ms Leiven, did you want to re-examine.
Re-examined by Ms Lieven
12756. Ms Lieven: Just one point to make
clear, Mr Walters. The plan that is now before the Committee,
is your understand that that is the AP amended provisions plan
2?
(Mr Walters) That is my understanding.
12757. Ms Lieven: I will leave it there,
Sir.
The witness withdraw
12758. Ms Lieven: We will call Mr Taylor
now and Mr Taylor is going to ask Mr Taylor the questions on the
basis that I cannot be trusted with noise.
Mr Rupert Thornely-Taylor, recalled
Examined by Mr Taylor
12759. Mr Taylor: Mr Thornely-Taylor
is obviously well known to the Committee and is the noise consultant
to the project. I think we are going to need to refer to the noise
technical report in a number of places, Mr Thornely-Taylor.
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Yes, that would be helpful.
103 Crossrail Ref: P101, Westbourne Park-Additional
Provision Plan (SCN-20060627-013). Back
| 
