Select Committee on Crossrail Bill Minutes of Evidence


Examination of Witnesses (Questions 15900 - 15919)

  15900. Thank you. Now just sticking with that plan, in so far as we can use this one to save changing too much. If we need to go to another one, please say so and take us to the relevant exhibit, but I think we could probably do it on this. A number of questions were put to you, the gist of the argument of which was: "Okay, there is lots of carparking around at the moment. Crossrail is going to come along, throw lots of offal over the site and you are going to be able to turn some existing carparking spaces into parking for articulated vehicles" and the like. Do you recall those questions?

   (Mr Melrose) I do.

  15901. Where are those additional carparking places at the moment, please, Mr Melrose?

   (Mr Melrose) On this drawing?

  15902. Yes.

   (Mr Melrose) From when I understood the question, it is to the right of this roundabout area.

  15903. Okay. Now you also referred to some under-croft parking, just confirm so nobody is under any illusion about where we find that. Where is this under-croft parking?

   (Mr Melrose) The under-croft parking, which we have just opened as a commitment to our Phase 2 development, sits underneath the ExCel building venue, as you see it, and that provides 1,600 spaces and that is to compensate for the spaces that are lost when we build Phase 2.

  15904. There are additional phases of the development, outline planning permission and there are negotiations yet to be had with the London Borough of Newham, but let us move on from the proposition, the basis, the matrix of Ms Lieven's questions to the future situation. What is happening in terms of development as regards the ExCel site?

   (Mr Melrose) Certainly, as we have discussed with Phase 2, we then have a number of considerations for the further east end of the site in terms of a casino, as I have said, hotels et cetera, a number of opportunities to support the business. These are services that are critical again to attracting major shows. One of the key difficulties that ExCel had when it opened was the lack of hotels on site. As the venue gets bigger, we host more events, the density of the site becomes more populated, so we are going to need more services to support these events.

  15905. Given the importance, which we understand is common ground, of the ExCel centre, would you help us with this, please: what do you regard as being the advantage or disadvantage of sterilising future development proposals for the purposes of remedying the adverse impact of Crossrail? Could you draw that balance for us, please?

   (Mr Melrose) I think if we put in context what we are trying to achieve strategically as a venue, London is in a position where it has a 21st-century venue. Its ability to attract major events from all over the world, bringing in conferences, key events, consumer events, all of our services—and if you want the expression "back of house"—are pushed to the north, so the visitor experience, the arrival experience is all about what people see, what they feel. That is a passion that we at ExCel hold true. If then we are talking about a blighting of one end, the east end, of the site we are going to potentially put a marshalling yard at what is the front door to ExCel and potentially blight one end of it.

  15906. So far my re-examination has been directed to on-site matters, but we know again, as a matter of common ground, there are places off-site where alternative parking can be located. I am going to ask you a couple of questions about that. Firstly, Ms Lieven was suggesting to you a combination of looking around and seeing at any given time, when you are breaking down show A and putting up show B, just going around doing a tour of the local area, finding what parking is available and using that on a hand-to-mouth basis and setting up an ad hoc communication service, which no doubt will bring deep joy to the shareholders of Vodafone, using mobile phones. Do you recall that line of questioning?

   (Mr Melrose) I do.

  15907. Clearly, those are matters which probably could be done. Help us with this: given what ExCel is, its importance, its 21st-century status and practicality, what do you say about that? Is that a sensible solution or not?
  (Mr Melrose) I think it is unrealistic. What we are trying to achieve is a system of working that operates efficiently, that delivers key services that can attract major events and to keep moving services and re-deploying them I think would be an absolute nightmare, certainly for repeat shows when one year a truck marshalling yard happens to be at the east end of ExCel, and then the next year we move it to the west end, and then maybe the year after that we move it to the south side. I think for consistency and continuity, that would bring disruption certainly to the local area in terms of these trucks driving around trying to find where we are parking one year to the next.

  15908. I want you to imagine you work now for Ford. Coming to the motor show you have got a large area of floor space which you have taken. It is an important international showcase for your goods. What is going to be your reaction if you are told, "Please, will your driver turn up here. We will then give them a piece of paper as to where to go in the local area and we will call him by mobile phone if he has got one"? What view would you form as Ford?

   (Mr Melrose) I cannot see that happening. I think there would be complete frustration on the part of the supplier in terms of asking to change the process. You have to remember when we talked before, we talked about one company. They employ significantly a number of different contractors so they have to manage this piece of information out to all their suppliers. We are just complicating the whole process for them rather than simplifying it.

  15909. You have now heard Crossrail's case put to you in cross-examination. I am going to repeat to you a question I put to you in chief. We know there are sites available with the ExCel area, where alternative provision can be made. We know that as a matter of law and practice it is an obligation on Crossrail to bring forward an additional provision. Are you now in any better position to understand why such an additional provision should not be brought forward having now heard the case put to you?

   (Mr Melrose) No.

  15910. Mr Newcombe: Sir, thank you very much indeed, that concludes my re-examination and that is the case on behalf of the Petitioners subject to my closing.

  15911. Mr Liddell-Grainger: Thank you very much.

  15912. Ms Lieven: I will call Mr Anderson very quickly. I am not going to call Mr Berryman in the light of the way the matter has gone. There is no need to explain why we need to have scope either in temporary or permanent terms.

  Mr David Anderson, Recalled

  Examined by Ms Lieven

  15913. Ms Lieven: Mr Anderson, you are well known to the Committee so I am not going to introduce you. The only matter I want you to deal with in evidence is the benefits to the ExCel centre from the Crossrail project.

   (Mr Anderson) Yes, as we have already heard, there will be new direct services to Custom House Station adjacent to the site from a range of destinations across London, west of London, central London, Canary Wharf and also in the Kent area. I think we mentioned in opening there will be a significant change in the accessibility of Custom House following the construction of Crossrail. To give a couple of examples of that, if you are looking at west London, accessing the site, we would be looking at a reduction of journey times of about 50 minutes down to less than half an hour. Similarly, looking at journeys from the north Kent area to Custom House, again we see a similar pattern, a journey of 50 minutes reduced to about 30 minutes. It is that effect, that change in accessibility that is likely to lead a change in the pattern of mode share to the site, leading to the shift away from car access to public transport use that we just heard about.

  15914. Ms Lieven: Thank you. I am so sorry, I said it was the only matter but there is one other matter that we ought to clarify. Can we put up 003, the proposal on carparking areas.[88] Mr Newcombe in re-examination of Mr Melrose went to this lime green area and suggested that was Crossrail's proposed alternative parking area. Is that correct?

  (Mr Anderson) No, I think we mentioned in opening that the undertaking suggests that we will be looking for other areas away from the site and I think we will be mentioning in discussions with the LDA to identify those.

  15915. Mr Liddell-Grainger: Mr Newcombe?

  Cross-examined by Mr Newcombe

  15916. Mr Newcombe: Mr Anderson, good afternoon. We have not met before, as far as I am aware. As I understand it, you are a planner and a member of the Institute of Highways and Transportation. Have I understood that correctly?

   (Mr Anderson) I am afraid not.

  15917. Can you explain to me, please, what your area of expertise is?

   (Mr Anderson) My background is in transport planning. I am mostly responsible for the environmental assessment of projects. I am a fellow of the Institute of Civil Engineers.

  15918. Thank you very much. When did you most recently visit the ExCel site for the purposes of this Petition?

   (Mr Anderson) I could not give you an exact date.

  15919. When did you visit the site?

   (Mr Anderson) I visited the site on several occasions since I joined Crossrail.


88   Crossrail Ref: P111, Proposed Lorry Parking Areas (NEWMLB-7304A-003). 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