Examination of Witnesses (Questions 19247
- 19259)
Ordered: that Counsel and Parties be called in.
The Petition of Land Securities plc.
Mr Robert Fookes appeared on behalf of the Petitioner.
Bircham Dyson Bell appeared as an Agent.
19247. Chairman: We now move on to the
Petition for Land Securities plc and Mr Fookes. Before you start,
Mr Fookes, I wonder, Mr Mould, are you going to give us a preview?
19248. Mr Mould: Yes, I am going to try
and give an overview of what the issues are today. We begin by
saying, of course, that the Petitioner, Land Securities, as the
Committee will be well aware, are one of the major commercial
landowners within London and this Petition is in relation to their
concerns about the impact on properties that they own freehold
in Eastbourne Terrace in Paddington, the impact on those properties
of the AP3 proposals to lower Eastbourne Terrace by some three
metres.
19249. If we can put up, please, page 25 of
the Environmental Statement.[1]
You remember Ms Lieven touched on this yesterday, but there is
an aerial photograph to give a broad sense of what we are doing.
Here is Paddington Station, an aerial view from the north, there
is Eastbourne Terrace with Departures Road, which the Committee
will be familiar with, going to the main taxi entrance to the
station at the present time here, and here we have the Petitioner's
properties and 10 through to 50 Eastbourne Terrace. I will show
you some photographs of entrances in a moment, but essentially
the issues today relate principally to numbers 20 and 40 Eastbourne
Terrace and to proposals for temporary and permanent access arrangements
to those properties arising out of our proposal to lower Eastbourne
Terrace permanently by three metres.
19250. Yesterday Ms Lieven explained to you
in the afternoon the public benefit of the permanent lowering
of Eastbourne Terrace and just to remind you, for the benefit
of the members who were not present, the photograph is at 04-012,
please.[2]
You remember that we pointed out that here is Departures Road
and, in a nutshell, we propose now to lower Eastbourne Terrace,
which is presently at that level, down to the same level essentially
to Departures Road. The benefit which will flow from this is to
eliminate the need for stairs and lifts here from the Crossrail
station, which is to be constructed beneath the current line of
Eastbourne Terrace, providing an improved pedestrian environment,
especially for persons of restricted mobility and an enhanced
road crossing and obvious benefits in terms of interchange in
relation to buses at the Crossrail station and Paddington mainline
station itself, shorter journey times and so on. I do not want
to dwell any further on that; Ms Lieven explained that yesterday
and I just reiterate that to set the scene today.
19251. The Petitioners have confirmed that they
agree with the principle of lowering Eastbourne Terrace. They
recognise the public benefits that would flow from the permanent
lowering of the road we propose, but they are understandably concerned
that that will have an impact on their premises on the west side
of Eastbourne Terrace and, in particular, today they raise numbers
20 and 40 Eastbourne Terrace in that respect. Their concern is
that those impacts which relate to access should be mitigated
and provided for as far as is reasonably practicable. I will say
straightaway that the position of the Promoters is that we entirely
share that concern and the need to secure the best solution both
temporarily and permanently as is reasonably achievable. There
have been negotiations between the parties which have continued
until very recently in which those concerns have been ventilated
and progress has been made towards a process through the instigation
of a joint study in relation to number 20 Eastbourne Terrace with
a view to realising an appropriate solution. I say straightaway
we have no difficulty in principle with that process of joint
study extending to embrace the other building which is of concern
to them, which is number 40 Eastbourne Terrace.
19252. Sir, it may be helpful to see what the
existing arrangements are in terms of access to those two buildings
and first we will deal with number 20. Can we have number 36—04
010, please.[3]
Here we see the entrance to Eastbourne Terrace, a view from the
south. You can see this is the start of 20 Eastbourne Terrace
and you can see here Eastbourne Terrace itself and the arrangement
is there is an entranceway which comes in from here and then goes
round and an exit point here, and this is the current main entrance
to the building. I think almost all along this side of Eastbourne
Terrace you find these areas of wells which extend from the front
facade of the Petitioner's premises out to the point of the western
point of the footpath or pavement and, as you can see, they are
at a lower level broadly commensurate with the level to which
Eastbourne Terrace is proposed to be lowered as part of the AP3
scheme. What you can see here is that beneath the current entrance
to 20 Eastbourne Terrace is a very substantial area of plant and
machinery serving the building which is actually located within
those wells.
19253. Can we go to number 11, please.[4]
Again, this is just a view from the north. You can see we will
be at that point and you see here the point at which the current
access arrangements are. You can see there is a ramp here which
serves the property as well. The other point to note here, which
may become relevant during the course of the proceedings, is that
there are effectively two double levels of fenestration at and
below the existing road level on the facade of 20 Eastbourne Terrace
and one of the advantages that you may think will result from
the lowering of the road is that natural lighting into that area
will be improved.
19254. Can we then turn briefly to number 40,
which is number seven, please.[5]
Here we see an example of the facade of number 40. This is a building
that Land Securities themselves have recently completed a refurbishment
scheme on to modernise it, and one of the features of that is
they have a similar access arrangement across this area, or well
area here, which I showed you in relation to number 20, and they
have enhanced the main entrance by adding what I think is called
an "atrium feature", this glazed feature here. Also,
as I understand it, they have taken the opportunity to work with
that double height fenestration to improve both the outlook and
the appearance of the building you see with this new modernised
fenestration we have here. This is an arrangement they have selected,
which is effectively an atrium arrangement, improving what was
previously the access point and there is a short flight of steps
just here as part of the refurbishment which gives access from
the pavement up to the atrium itself.
19255. Number eight, please.[6]
Again we see here, perhaps, a better view from the north, this
is the atrium structure here. This is the current access arrangement
with a ramp to serve people with restricted mobility and a short
flight of stairs up to the front entrance and here is Eastbourne
Terrace. That is the existing position.
19256. We turn then briefly just to run through
and summarise the proposals that we have to accommodate access
permanently and temporarily. If we can turn, please, to plan 04-002.[7]
This is a plan showing Eastbourne Terrace and summarising the
Crossrail AP3 scheme. Here we have Paddington and this is Telstar
House at Paddington Station. Here we have the western side of
Eastbourne Terrace and you can see a number which is number 20,
and the access point I showed you a minute ago and number 40 with
the refurbished and modernised access point here, and we have
shown that with this elevation plan, number 20 and number 40.
What we have shown here is essentially what we propose as the
permanent solution, to provide access to the lowered Eastbourne
Terrace from that lowered road up to the existing entranceway
and you can see what we are proposing is what is known as a "podium
solution", which would provide stairs and lift access from
the lowered road to the existing entrance and, likewise, a similar
solution proposed in relation to number 40. I did stress that
this is, if you will, an early stage of design and, clearly, there
is a good deal of room for working on detailed design, for example
to embrace the kind of atrium, glazed, covered feature that, in
relation to number 20 we showed you a minute ago, has already
been installed in number 40, but it does represent what we have
in mind as being likely to deliver the optimum permanent solution
to gaining access to these buildings in conjunction with the lowering
of the road. That is what we had assessed and is provided for
in the Environmental Statement.
19257. Before I move on primarily to the temporary
position I reiterate that we believe this is the best way forward,
but our position is not that we are irrevocably wedded to that,
and we have agreed to initiate a joint study in relation to number
20 to look at possible alternatives and, indeed, we are prepared
to extend that to number 40. I think Mr Fookes will explain this
to you in a moment, but as far as alternatives to the podium solutions
are concerned what Land Sec have in mind, if you like the alternative
they would best wish to examine, is to relocate the entrance of
this building, certainly number 20 and possibly number 40 as well,
so that it is at the same level as the lowered road, do you see
the point? The difficulty we see with that is, something which
is going to be investigated by the joint study, that, as I showed
you, there is a substantial amount of plant located beneath the
existing access at number 20 and the same at number 40. We see
that as presenting a particular challenge if one is to relocate
that plant elsewhere within the building if one was to open up
a new access at what are currently basement levels at number 20
and, indeed, number 40. The other point I draw attention to is,
number 40, following recent refurbishment, has now been let on
a 15-year lease, so one would need to take account of disruption
caused by major and substantial internal works to the tenant who
occupies under that lease. But that, as I understand it, is what
Land Sec wish to examine further as part of the joint study that
I mentioned.
19258. Turning then finally from the permanent
to the temporary, plainly access needs to be maintained to these
buildings throughout what will be a very challenging construction
phase in Eastbourne Terrace and we have recently committed ourselves
to that, including access for fire and emergency services, as
you would imagine. The issue here relates to the ability to maintain
pedestrian access to the existing entrances continuously throughout
the construction phase and that we know is Land Sec's aspiration.
Our position is, and Mr Berryman will explain this to you later,
we simply cannot realistically maintain continuous access throughout
the construction of the lowering of the road and the construction
of the Crossrail station in Eastbourne Terrace to the existing
entrance of numbers 20 and 40 Eastbourne Terrace. There will be
what we expect to be a relatively short period during the construction
phase where that simply is not possible to achieve, but what we
have said is that, as far as we reasonably can, we will seek to
maintain access to those entrances during the period of construction.
The other point I should touch on here before I sit down is this:
in recent weeks there has been a misunderstanding and Land Sec
believed that they had secured from us an undertaking that we
would maintain continuous access to the front. I should say straightaway,
having investigated that, I can see as a result of a recent meeting
how that misunderstanding arose and I regret it. I apologise to
them for the fact that misunderstanding arose, but I want to make
it clear we immediately made clear to them in correspondence that
it was a misunderstanding and the position was we simply could
not maintain access continuously on that basis. I hope they will
accept that and the Committee will accept that we have come clean
on that and we move on. I have explained the position as to what
can be achieved, what we can undertake, a few moments ago. I have
been asked to emphasise, as I mentioned a minute ago, that we
will maintain access to the buildings at all times, but there
will be, I hope, short periods of time during the construction
phase when that access will be to the rear of the buildings in
the mews to which access is already available albeit on a secondary
basis.
19259. Mr Fookes: That is, I hope, a
relatively brief overview of the facts and the issues I think
lie between us. I will now sit down and over to Mr Fookes.
1 Amendment of Provisions 3 Crossrail Environmental
Statement, Chapter 3 Route Window C2: Back
2
Crossrail Ref: P140, Pedestrian Access from Paddington Station
to Eastbourne Terrace (WESTCC-AP3-36-04-012). Back
3
Crossrail Ref: P141, 20 Eastbourne Terrace-Entrance viewed from
the south (WESTCC-AP3-36-04-010). Back
4
Crossrail Ref: P141, 20 Eastbourne Terrace-Entrance viewed from
the north (WESTCC-AP3-36-04-011). Back
5
Crossrail Ref: P141, 40 Eastbourne Terrace-Entrance viewed from
the south (WESTCC-AP3-36-04-007). Back
6
Crossrail Ref: P141, 40 Eastbourne Terrace-Entrance viewed from
the north (WESTCC-AP3-36-04-008). Back
7
Crossrail Ref: P141, Paddington-Eastbourne Terrace Study, Building
Entrance Study-Options 9 +5+4(a) (WESTCC-AP3-55-04-002). Back
|
