Examination of Witnesses (Questions 16880
- 16899)
16880. Could you explain in just a little bit
more detail what you actually have to do about the sewer?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, the sewer
is almost certainly a standard concrete pipe. Because the railway
at this point is on an embankment, we will have to widen the embankment
slightly. We would normally put in a strengthening pipe to do
that, either a steel sleeve or possibly just a more substantial
pipe section.
16881. Mr Binley: Mr Berryman, I am worried
about the consultation again. I have been in marketing for a very
long time, so I know how difficult it is to get messages through
to people, but I am back to that old monitoring issue again because
you do state the consultation vehicles and routes that you use,
but there is nowhere in here where your response talks about monitoring
to know that the people received those communications. Indeed
we have heard from Ms Cousins that in fact she was invited to
the wrong consultation which underlines the difficulty. I sympathise,
but when I look at the consultation rounds advertised in local
newspapers, I know from my canvassing how many people have notices
on their doors, "No local newspapers", and I know how
many people, given free newspapers, would throw them away without
even looking at them. Therefore, I have a concern about simply
saying that you have gone through these consultation channels,
a concern that that does not mean to say that you have consulted.
The only way that you know is by monitoring quite sizeably and
that is an expensive exercise, so how can you be sure that you
have consulted?
(Mr Berryman) Well, I think
evidence was given on this in the last session of the Committee
when we explained—
16882. Yes, and I did not accept it then, sir.
(Mr Berryman) Well, we did
explain that we had done two—I have forgotten what the technical
word is—surveys to see how many people had picked up the
information. I was rather surprised myself to hear what Ms Cousins
has just said about being invited to the Whitechapel Centre and
I will look into that and find out what happened. It is the first
time I have been aware of it.
16883. Do you accept that it is quite unbelievable
that Ms Cousins did not know about this situation? I can understand
your view that it is unlikely, but it is quite conceivable that
she did not. That is the point I am putting to you.
(Mr Berryman) I am sure
you will know from your canvassing that it is quite difficult
to get messages across to—
16884. And from being in marketing for 30 years.
(Mr Berryman) Yes, indeed
that too, but it is very difficult to get to every single person.
The problem with consultation on a scheme like this is that you
are actually aiming for single people, you are not aiming for
a segment of the market or that sort of thing, you are aiming
for individual householders. It is quite difficult to make sure
you reach every one of them. We have had major problems with this
issue particularly in other parts of London, not so much here,
where we have actually gone round and I have personally supervised
things being stuck through doors by our own staff and yet people
have still said, "We didn't hear about it".
16885. I sympathise enormously, I really do
sympathise, but I think the point Ms Cousins is making has some
validity in this respect and that is the point I am making.
(Mr Berryman) I do not think
we would have ever claimed, and I do not think we could ever claim,
to reach every individual house. We have done our best to try
and do it and we have focused on hard-to-reach groups. I would
not have put Ms Cousins in that category, by the way.
Re-examined by Ms Lieven
16886. Ms Lieven: Just on consultation,
Mr Berryman, once the Bill was published, would Ms Cousins have
had individual correspondence addressed to her about the situation,
that land was to be acquired?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, she would
indeed. As an owner of land to be acquired or, for that matter,
as anyone impacted in this way, she would have received an individual
letter.
16887. Mr Binley: Can I ask whether that
was after planning permission was sought? That is the relevant
point here. If it was after planning permission was sought, it
really does impact on Ms Cousins' case in truth.
(Mr Berryman) When a planning
application is received, and, as I understand it, it was a late
planning application, in other words, the building was already
existing, on 20 January 2003.
16888. Ms Lieven: So was that actually
before the land was safeguarded in any event?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, it was.
The safeguarding did not take place until quite late in this area.
16889. The only other thing I wanted to ask
you about, Mr Berryman, was vibration which Ms Cousins is obviously
very concerned about and quite understandably being next to a
railway which carries freight.
(Mr Berryman) Indeed.
16890. Can you just say in lay terms how the
vibration effect from a Crossrail train will compare to that of
a freight train which Ms Cousins experiences at the moment and,
secondly, whether your understanding is that there will be any
vibration threat from Crossrail?
(Mr Berryman) There will
be certainly no discernible vibration from Crossrail. It does
not get away from the fact that there will still be freight trains
on the line of course, that is nothing to do with us, but the
Crossrail trains should be significantly smoother even than the
existing passenger trains which operate on this line. It should
not be causing the kind of vibration that Ms Cousins referred
to.
16891. Chairman: What about sound-proofing?
Would that improve the situation?
(Mr Berryman) Well, we are
proposing to put a two-metre-high noise barrier in. The noise
from railways comes from quite a number of different sources.
The biggest part of it comes from the wheel-rail interface, the
actual roughness of the wheel and the rail interacting with each
other. By putting up a two-metre noise barrier, you can mitigate
95% of that noise. These noise barriers now are very, very effective.
The noise barriers which have been put up on the M1 in Bedfordshire
have been absolutely brilliant and we will be putting something
similar up.
16892. Ms Lieven: Those are my only questions,
sir.
16893. Chairman: Ms Cousins, would you
like to come back?
Cross-examined by Ms Cousins
16894. Ms Cousins: Thank you for asking
about the consultation. I did receive this notice, but that was
after and I have got that and I have written on it. I tried to
ring up for information, so I have got that, the so-called consultation
which I think is meant to be prior, so there are gaps in the process.
We ended up talking about noise and vibration. I can see that
with construction going on there is a barrier between the property
and the line which would affect the noise, but the vibration is
something else. If you are putting in a new line that will take
freight and possibly while they maintain the old lines, I do not
know if they are going to be maintained, can there not be a commitment
of vibration-isolating mounting?
(Mr Berryman) On what?
16895. On the track, I presume, on the track
itself.
(Mr Berryman) Well, in this
area the track will be on ballast on the ground which is not amenable
to vibration-free mounting. In any event, that would be a problem
which applies over the whole of the National Rail network, it
does not just apply to this house.
16896. So nothing can be done about the vibration
and we could have freight trains travelling a bit closer?
(Mr Berryman) There will
of course be the noise barrier, as I mentioned. The track will
be new which will also have beneficial effects.
16897. I do not know what the Committee can
do, but maybe in looking at that, if you are coming nearer to
the property and there is vibration, there is a difference between
noise and vibration as one is aerial and the other is through
the ground, or that is what I assume, that if you are in your
bed and rocking, there is no way that is aerial, so perhaps the
Committee could give consideration to whether if it is right across
the whole system, and maybe that is a reality that has to be taken
into account, but could serious consideration be given to vibration-isolating
mounting? Do not ask me what they are, rubber pads or something.
(Mr Berryman) They are rubber
pads, but, as I said, they are just not appropriate for lines
which are built on an embankment. I think the track down there,
and I should not say this about colleagues' lines, but I think
the track down there is pretty poor at the moment and it certainly
will be significantly better when it is rebuilt.
16898. Chairman: Mr Berryman, there are
a number of questions. Ms Cousins was very clear about compensatory
matters which we do not want to discuss here, but also about the
scale and size of buildings that are going to be left there. I
wondered if you could establish some liaison so we can get someone
to sit down with Ms Cousins and actually go through all of that.
(Mr Berryman) Yes, we can
certainly do that.
16899. Chairman: We would be very, very
grateful if you could examine whether or not this cesspit was
a similar situation which might be rectified which would give
a cost benefit to the property owner in relation to all the works
which are going on and the loss which will be incurred.
(Mr Berryman) We will certainly
look at that.
| 
