Examination of Witnesses (Questions 17600
- 17619)
17600. Mr Binley: Can I ask if you will
be discussing that with the residents' association as well, as
they seem to have ownership of a sizeable piece of this?
(Mr Berryman) We will certainly
keep them informed, yes.
17601. Mr Mould: Just before I sit down,
I have got the relevant page from the combined settlement report
to set out the accurate position on geology—you can see
it is under section 3 there—so that we do not mislead you
unintentionally in relation to that.[45]
I will give a moment for you to read that.
17602. Mr Binley: Does "Made ground"
mean disturbed ground over the years? Is that what that means?
(Mr Berryman) In actual
fact, it looks as if it would be London clay at that particular
point.
17603. There is only 11 metres of London clay.
(Mr Berryman) Yes.
17604. And that is rather shallow in terms of—
(Mr Berryman) this particular
house is the shallowest of running tunnels under anybody's house,
anywhere on the network, but it is 11 metres of—London clay
is pretty solid stuff.
17605. That is one of the reasons why you cannot
go any deeper?
(Mr Berryman) No, I am not
saying that. The reason we cannot go deeper is because of the
geometry of getting under the river and getting over the Northampton
Interceptor Sewer.
17606. Mr Mould: I do not want to go
into any more detail about this particular property now because
I think Mr and Mrs Wheeler are coming along a little later. Thank
you very much.
Cross-examined by Ms Bradshaw-Price
17607. Ms Bradshaw-Price: Mr Berryman,
can we go back to your drawing 001?[46]
I am going to go backwards because this is fresh in people's minds.
It is the one of the two tunnels underneath. That house is 5.8
metres wide. You said the tunnel underneath is 6.6 metres wide.
There is no way that tunnel underneath, in comparison, is 6.6
metres wide. It has actually been drawn a great deal smaller.
I know that Mr and Mrs Wheeler will be talking to the Committee
about the scale of perception that they have asked for but I put
it to you, do you think that is an accurate, to-scale drawing
of what you are doing to do?
(Mr Berryman) This was drawn
by our surveyors—
17608. No, no, I asked you if you think it is
accurate.
(Mr Berryman) I was just
about to tell you that it was drawn by our surveyors and they
are usually pretty accurate.
17609. Does it look accurate to you, given that
the house is 5.8 metres wide?
(Mr Berryman) I do not know
the dimensions of the house.
17610. Ms Bradshaw-Price: I am telling
you what it is. We have measured it.
The Committee suspended from 3.00 pm to
3.26 pm for a division in the House
17611. Ms Bradshaw-Price: The point I
wanted to make here, and it is a very simple one really, is that
if that house is 5.10 metres, which it is, the Wheelers have measured
it several times, and that tunnel underneath is supposed to be
6.6, then that is not an accurate-scale drawing and that is what
concerns me. If Crossrail is letting us know that that is an accurate-scale
drawing, it is incorrect and I think they should be producing
accurate-scale drawings at this juncture.
(Mr Berryman) During the
break, I had a chance to scale off the drawing and it seems that
the 6-metre-diameter tunnel and the 11-metre-diameter distance
from ground level to the tunnel are in scale. I am not sure that
the house is in scale. I think the house may have been drawn too
big, or it may have been drawn because the house is at an angle
to the tunnel. It may have been drawn to take in both the front
and the back of the house, but, without checking with my surveyors,
I would not know what the answer to that question is and I would
have to check with them overnight. There is a possibility that
the house is drawn too big. If that was the case, it would have
a smaller appearance.
17612. Chairman: The point has been made
and perhaps you could have a look at that.
(Mr Berryman) I will certainly
get the surveyors to check that. It is extremely unusual for them
to make a mistake, but I will check.
17613. Ms Bradshaw-Price: I also have
another question, Mr Berryman, about the footpath. Perhaps I could
have our slide 23, or whichever one, which shows the works on
Wick Lane and Wrexham Road.[47]
I am very concerned that it is going to be closed at any point,
and I speak for the Residents' Association, not just me, because
a lot of kids come down here, through here, through the park to
Bow Boys here. They also come from Bridge Estate and down here
and along there. That would cause a major obstruction for them.
They come from across the way as well. The pictures which I showed
this morning of the community policemen, they walk down there
and around here for security reasons. There are also mounted police
that use that route very often, both ways. Then there are all
the people from here who walk down to Tesco's. It is going to
cause major problems. That is a very well-used route.
(Mr Berryman) I think the section
of the footpath from here south can be kept open. There should
not be any particular problem with that. As I said earlier in
my evidence, it will be necessary for a short closure of perhaps
a few weeks of this section just here. This would happen with
any scheme for the alteration of these sewers simply because it
is required to pick up the existing sewer that runs down this
street here. There really is not a way round it completely. We
can minimise it and we will certainly make the best endeavours
to minimise it, but we cannot make it go away completely.
17614. Ms Bradshaw-Price: You also mentioned
consulting Leaside Regeneration and the local authority. I would
like to remind you that they are actually consulting us and that
is why it has taken so long to come up with a master plan, that
they are not consulting us and telling us what to do, but they
are actually coming into the community and they have had plans
there. On 18 March of this year there was quite a big exhibition,
asking us what we wanted, where we wanted to go, what we needed
and what we wanted it to look like. That is why the plans have
not been finished, so when you say you are consulting them, I
would like to remind you that it is a people's park as well and
you are not just dealing with the local authority and Leaside
Regeneration because they are not doing it on their own. I think
it is symptomatic of Crossrail's approach to we, the public, that—
17615. Chairman: I think you have reminded
me of the fact that he liaises with the statutory authority on
what Crossrail do and you also made the point that he should be
liaising more frequently with yourself.
17616. Ms Bradshaw-Price: I would like
to return to your plan, Mr Berryman. You showed an outline of
the park. It was a sketch. You put it up to show how big the park
was and how little the worksite was.[48]
South of the work area, that is a memorial garden and children
cannot play in there. It is a flower garden. Also the worksite
is right across the middle of that path which you see running
through and that is a well-used path as well. I just want to point
out that actually the area there is not as big as it looks on
the plan. The area that people use to run around in is just on
that top right-hand side because there is a football pitch there
and there is a playground at the top part, so effectively that
is already used, and then there is a grassy bit just to the west,
so it is not actually what it seems from that plan. I wondered
what the costs of the sewer diversion were over going deeper at
Stratford. I think you will find that Mr Mould said something
about us wanting to miss out Stratford completely. We never, ever
even considered that. We were considering that Crossrail could
go deeper and we just wondered what the cost of the sewer diversion
and all the attendant works would be as against going deeper at
Stratford. That is what we wondered about, whether you had any
figures.
(Mr Berryman) Well, I do not
have exact figures, but it would be of the order of £3.5-4
million for the sewer diversion to £300-400 million or more
actually, £500-odd million, for going deeper at Stratford
because you would have to have an underground station at Stratford.
You may recall that we discussed this when we were taking evidence
from the people from Shenfield as to how complicated an underground
station at Stratford would be and how much it would cost, so we
are really talking about very, very substantial differences, thousands
of a%.
17617. I have one more point and could we have
image 28 please.[49]
Crossrail are already acquiring all of this, so I was wondering
why it would be such a problem to acquire this. Even if you do
not have the powers, I am sure Thames Water have powers. It just
occurs to me that maybe it might not be so insurmountable as you
seem to think. The other point is that if you already know your
route so well and you have all these clear and scaled drawings,
surely when they build this complex here, could they not build
that shaft at the same time? Since Crossrail know exactly what
they are doing and the way things are being planned, I would not
have thought that would be a major expense to build that shaft
while they are constructing the foundations of that new development
there.
(Mr Berryman) Well, it would
depend on the funding of the scheme as a whole and the decisions
to be made by the Secretary of State in due course as to whether
the scheme goes forward in its current form or not. As regards
using the powers of Thames Water, I think that is a legal question.
Our advice is that that would not be possible as a general rule
and that it would need someone other than myself to explain why
that officially is, but we have been given that steer on many,
many occasions.
17618. It would be nice, Mr Berryman, if you
just looked at me once during our discourse.
(Mr Berryman) I am sorry,
but the convention of this place is that I have to face the Committee
when I respond.
17619. Chairman: That is correct, I am
afraid. Mr Mould?
Re-examined by Mr Mould
45 Crossrail Ref: P126, Generic Phase 2, Settlement
Assessment, Geology (TOWLB-29104C-012). Back
46
Crossrail Ref: P126, Tunnel Gradient and Long Section-Mrs Barbara
Wheeler, 1 Baldock Street, Bow E3 2TP (TOWHLB-31204-001). Back
47
Crossrail Ref: P126, H.A.M. and Wick Lane Sewers Diversion-Sketch
10, Wick Lane and Wrexham Road Worksite Layout (TOWHLB-29104-040). Back
48
Crossrail Ref: P126, H.A.M. and Wick Lane Sewers Diversion-Sketch
5, Option 5-Additional Provision Plan and Construction Sites (SCN-20061018-001). Back
49
Committee Ref: A???, Fairfield Conservation Area Residents Association,
H.A.M. and Wick Lane Sewers Diversion (TOWHLB-29105-028). Back
| 
