Examination of Witnesses (Questions 15480
- 15499)
15480. So far as the protection of trees is
concerned, I would say that trees will be adequately protected
by the safeguards that are set out in the Construction Code.[41]
Section 10.4 is an entire section on the protection of trees and
that makes it abundantly clear that protective measures will be
taken in accordance with the relevant British standard to protect
trees during the construction process.
15481. Mr Liddell-Grainger: I think it
was also said in relation to Shenfield that there would be a policy
of trying to replace trees where practically possible. Is that
still the case?
15482. Mr Taylor: That is still the case.
15483. Mr Liddell-Grainger: You would
be trying to replace like for like if possible on all sites.
15484. Mr Taylor: Indeed.
15485. Mr Liddell-Grainger: Thank you
very much, Mr Taylor. Mr Pout?
15486. Mr Pout: Thank you very much indeed.
That is very useful. There is one issue that I would therefore
like to raise, if I may—and looking at the time, I realise
it is pressing. It would be very helpful to have a few moments
of examination of Mr Berryman to clarify a couple of issues around
Maryland Station.
15487. Mr Liddell-Grainger: I am not
sure we can do that because he has not been called as a witness
by the Promoter. I suggest, Mr Pout, that you tell me, as the
Chairman of the Committee what your feeling is. If we have to
ask Mr Taylor just to have thoughts on it, then we shall do so.
Would you like to fire away.
15488. Mr Pout: Okay. Thank you very
much. That is very useful guidance. The original Crossrail project
of a decade or more ago included Maryland Station. At that stage,
Crossrail was going to be designed to operate mega-length 12-car
trains. The current scheme is for slightly shorter trains of 10
carriages. Initially the proposal was not to incorporate Maryland
at all, but, if there was a residual service during the peaks,
these trains could stop at Maryland, but off-peak and at weekends
probably others would not. I only identified that as a problem,
because at that stage I said, "What trains are you going
to use because the existing trains will be over 30 years old and
you have a new fleet of Crossrail trains and if they have been
sued even out of Liverpool Street you cannot stop them because
they are too long."
15489. They came up with the idea of what is
politely known as selective door opening, which means that you
use an electronic or satellite system which says that you do not
open the end-most doors of the outer coaches of each train, so
that the existing platform length will accommodate those doors
that are open. What I am wondering is why they made this decision
to exclude Maryland this time—Maryland was considered so
unimportant—but it had been included in the previous scheme,
and some assurance that there will be a decent level of service
to Maryland.
15490. At the present time the latest operator
now actually ensures that all of their off-peak services stop
there, whereas until a couple of years ago our old friends First
Group did not stop their trains there. I think that is the issue
around Maryland: to ensure that it is adequately serving that
community and that its business will grow.
15491. Mr Liddell-Grainger: This is a
bit unconventional because you have gone slightly round the wrong
way, it is 4.30 and the House has adjourned, but I am feeling
very generous. Mr Taylor, would you like to address us?
15492. Mr Taylor: I would. In fact, I
intended to address this matter and skipped over that part of
my notes, unintentionally. So if you will forgive me, and I am
very grateful to Mr Pout for drawing it to the Committee's attention
that I failed to deal with that matter. I think probably the best
way is if I deal with it, and we will see whether that is satisfactory
from Mr Pout's point of view.
15493. I am instructed that the earliest scheme
in the early 1990s was a scheme not for 12-car trains, as Mr Pout
suggested, but for 8-car trains. Eight-car trains can stop at
Maryland without the need for any platforming. The current scheme
before the Committee is a scheme for 10-car trains and the reason
that Maryland was originally left out was because that would have
required platform extension works which would have been very extensive
because they would have affected a road bridge. So there was a
disproportionate cost.
15494. The matter is being pursued by the London
Borough of Newham, as the Committee may recall, and undertakings
were given to them on Day 28, paragraph 7494. The position is
that the undertaking provided is that trains will stop at Maryland
because selective door opening will be used, but that is subject
to the approval of the Railways Inspectorate.
15495. So far as the level of service is concerned,
that is a matter on which we are continuing to discuss undertakings
with the London Borough of Newham.
15496. Mr Liddell-Grainger: I look forward
to hearing how those deliberations get on, especially as I certainly
know all the interested parties. Once you have that information,
Mr Taylor, would you let us know? Mr Pout?
15497. Mr Pout: I think I would disagree
with Mr Taylor—
15498. Mr Liddell-Grainger: I am not
having ping-pong played in this Committee.
15499. Mr Pout: Twelve-car coaches—neither
here nor there, but we will worry about that outside the room.
I think that covers most of the issues we are concerned about,
and obviously we are now being given regular updates from the
team and if there are any other matters which come to our concern
before this Committee concludes—may I ask how much longer
you are likely to be—
41 Crossrail Environmental Minimum Requirements, Annex
1-Crossrail Construction Code, billdocuments.crossrail.co.uk Back
| 
