Examination of Witnesses (Questions 15860
- 15879)
15860. What we see there, on the left, are artic
HGVs without their cabins and, on the right, a number of transit
vans?
(Mr Melrose) Yes.
15861. That is a fairly fair reflection of what,
from our observation, is quite often going on on that site, with
a mixture of parking?
(Mr Melrose) I will just
challenge that, because that is certainly not a reflection of
how it operates. Certainly at this moment in time that area is
absolutely full for the Motor Show, it certainly is. By the document
that you have got here, the Mott Report, it shows that it was
90% full for the World Travel Market; and 70% full for the Caravan
Show. Those shows are shows that are independent stand-alone in
the venue. What this document does not take into account are multiple
tenancies. To put it into context, in between June 2005 and July
2006 we processed, just through our marshalling yard, somewhere
in the region of 40,000 vehicles. 10% of those will be artics;
50% will be transits; and the rest made up of cars and 12.5 tonne
trucks; and a significant amount of those will use that area.
15862. Can we look at the position as you put
it forward in the permanent scenario. Can we put up ExCel 10,
please.[81]
This is a drawing produced by you?
(Mr Melrose) Yes.
15863. It says "post-DLR realignment",
but that is post-Crossrail?
(Mr Melrose) Yes.
15864. It is the DLR that impacts directly on
you. What that shows is a significant amount of remaining articulated
echelon parking, does it not?
(Mr Melrose) It shows an amount; but I would
also suggest that shows a significant amount of loss of parking.
15865. We can see that if we go from ExCel 10
to ExCel 8 and focus in on the pink area to the left.[82]
It takes some pretty good eyesight. That is the echelon parking
as it exists at the moment according to your plan?
(Mr Melrose) Yes.
15866. That is a comparison between those two.
Can we look at the situation post-ExCel 2. First of all, you have
made something of a complaint that we proposed a solution, both
I think in meetings and then a plan, that failed to take into
account ExCel 2 Can I put up exhibit 6 but in the minutes bundle,
the 17304 bundle, page 6.[83]
This is a minute of a meeting of 26 June this year. It is right,
is it not, that we have a minute with representatives of ExCel?
(Mr Melrose) Correct
15867. You yourself were not at that meeting?
(Mr Melrose) Correct.
15868. It is right, is it not, that we had previous
meetings with ExCel in September and December of 2005?
(Mr Melrose) Yes, that is
right.
15869. The proposals for parking solutions came
out after those September and December meetings?
(Mr Melrose) I have not
seen any solutions after those meetings.
15870. Can we look at the bottom of this page,
paragraph 3, "ExCel's Phase Two development. J Baggs [who
is the Crossrail representative managing this] noted that at the
scoping meetings in September and December 2005, with Paul May
and Steve Melrose, ExCel had not drawn attention to their Phase
Two development and as such the Mott MacDonald studies had not
taken these plans into account. PD [Philip Dowson, who is the
Chief Finance Officer of ExCel]—
(Mr Melrose) Yes.
15871.— said this was not surprising,
since the development proposals had moved rapidly since late last
year. ExCel had outline planning permission to extend the exhibition
centre which would run out on 1st November . . . " At the
meeting in late September 2005, I think it is clear from this
minute, you yourselves were not pointing us to the ExCel 2 development
or suggesting there was any issue with it?
(Mr Melrose) There was no
solution or recommendation by Crossrail to use the east car park;
so I would not understand why that would come up. We were scoping
out the lorry park. In those meetings we had made it perfectly
clear that the lorry park was critical, and all of our discussions
focussed on that end of the building.
15872. Can we just focus on the situation post-ExCel
2, please. If ExCel 2 is built, what is the total number of car
parking spaces that will be provided by the ExCel Centre, both
in the under-croft and immediate adjoining surface level car parks?
(Mr Melrose) Probably in
the region of 5,000 spaces.
15873. How many of those will be surface level,
adjoining the centre?
(Mr Melrose) Very few.
15874. How many?
(Mr Melrose) Probably about
200.
15875. I think the closest we have got to the
situation is likely to be ExCel 9, which is one of your plans?[84]
(Mr Melrose) Yes.
15876. The blue is ExCel Phase 2, and there
will continue to be, it would appear from this plan, surface level
car parking over here? We have surface level car parking here.
There is some issue that you might want to put a casino here?
(Mr Melrose) There will
be a further build-out; there will be a Phase 3 development of
ExCel that will include further hotels, casinos and other regeneration
that would take up those areas of land—-
15877.— where you will decide for your
own interests to lose surface level car parking?
(Mr Melrose) For the interests
of the whole estate, yes.
15878. So far as the impact of the Crossrail
is concerned, the arrival of Crossrail at Custom House will very
significantly improve ExCel's accessibility by public transport,
will it not?
(Mr Melrose) It will certainly
complement the good service we get from DLR.
15879. I will take that as a yes. The effect
of that very significant improvement is that there will be potential
for a significantly increased modal share by public transport,
as opposed to car drivers?
(Mr Melrose) I am not sure
that is the case. I think that certainly since we have opened
the venue we statistically have worked very closely with DLR and
we can show that we have stayed at a very static 70%/30% car parking
split, DLR split; obviously the higher 70% in favour of DLR public
transport. Certainly in terms of domestic shows, it is slightly
less than that but it fairly static.
81 Committee Ref: A176, Impact on Lorry Parking Post
DLR Realignment (NEWMLB-17305-009). Back
82
Crossrail Ref: P111, ExCel Centre- Proposed Traffic Management
Stages 1-6 (NEWMLB-17304A-008). Back
83
Crossrail Ref: P113, Minute of Meeting between CLRL and Excel,
26 June 2006 (NEWMLB-17304-006). Back
84
Committee Ref: A176, Excel London Plan-Phases 1 and 2 (NEWMLB-17305-009). Back
| 
