Examination of Witnesses (Questions 19300
- 19319)
19300. Any other comments on point number 3?
(Mr Harrington) No, thank
you.
19301. Then point number 4, the question of
maintaining access to the front of the building.
(Mr Harrington) This has
been described as a misunderstanding. We all have misunderstandings
and I think everyone knows what a misunderstanding is. In this
particular instance, when wording is drafted and accepted and
agreed by both parties and it is very clear in that wording that
access will be maintained to the front of the buildings at all
times, full stop, we fail to understand how that can be regarded
as a misunderstanding six months later.
19302. Could we look at LS12.[19]
That sets out the chronology. Broadly speaking, in June we were
scheduled to appear before the Committee. Prior to that, there
was an agreement. "One of the...important terms agreed which
persuaded Land Securities not to appear was that the Promoter
would guarantee to provide pedestrian access to and from the front
of the Eastbourne Terrace properties during construction of Crossrail's
works. Upon deposit of AP3, both parties agreed to separate out
the provisions of an agreement relating to Eastbourne Terrace,
but on the basis that all the terms which had previously been
agreed in relation to Eastbourne Terrace would be transposed to
the new Eastbourne Terrace agreement". A meeting on 17 January
"confirmed that this provision relating to access would be
incorporated", and then when the draft heads came along on
the 29 January, it had been removed. Therefore, the position is
that we have qualified, I think, the wording we are seeking in
order to include a reference to agreement in advance in writing
to recognise that Crossrail have difficulties. Is that correct?
(Mr Harrington) Correct.
19303. Any more comments on that access? Why
do you need access to the front of the building or at least to
know when you have got it?
(Mr Harrington) I think
there are two points. You have heard today how many people use
the front of these buildings, a substantial number, and in these
days of security and security provision, what we are trying to
preserve is proper visitor management and proper security. That
can only be achieved by visitors coming to the front of the building.
That is for the benefit of the customers we have in our building
and obviously to ensure that we are delivering the right service
to those customers. If visitors were to come to the back of the
building, to the rear entrance which is effectively the fire exit,
they are arriving into the body of the building on what we call
`airside', ie, they are not going through any security provision,
they are not going through any visitor reception provision, and
that compromises the security of the building and obviously compromises
the way in which they can operate and manage the visitors they
have arriving at their building. The buildings have not been designed
for visitors arriving at the back and that would take substantial
consultation, as we have heard, to facilitate that. We have recognised
that visitors cannot be expected to bridge vast gaps and, as such,
we have tempered the wording to ask that there is some consultation
should they wish to restrict visitors to the front.
19304. Are there any other comments you wish
to make?
(Mr Harrington) No.
19305. Mr Fookes: Thank you.
Cross-examined by Mr Mould
19306. Mr Mould: Firstly, as a general
point, I take it that Land Securities would acknowledge that the
value of its properties on Eastbourne Terrace is likely to be
substantially enhanced as a result of the provision of the Crossrail
station immediately next door?
(Mr Harrington) That is
correct, and we have never objected to a Crossrail station being
next door.
19307. Just picking up on the point that you
made a moment ago about access, you have said that you would wish
to have as much advance notice of any temporary withdrawal of
access to the existing front entrances to your buildings during
the construction phase as possible. I can certainly tell you that
we have no difficulty with agreeing to give you advance notice,
as far as we reasonably can, in that respect. I trust that will
be good news to you.
(Mr Harrington) That will
go part way to solving this, yes.
19308. I hear what you say about the sequence
of events in relation to the misunderstanding. You have heard
me publicly express an apology to you for the misunderstanding
which took place. We do not necessarily agree with you on the
historey of this matter, but, having received that explanation,
that apology, and having heard from me that, for engineering reasons
which Mr Berryman can explain in a moment if necessary, we simply
cannot guarantee continuous access, are you prepared to accept
that that is the end of the matter?
(Mr Harrington) I accept
that it is the case, but I would not go as far as saying that
it is the end of the matter in terms of reaching a solution to
this particular point.
19309. But you accept our apology, do you?
(Mr Harrington) I will always
accept an apology, yes.
19310. Thank you very much. In relation to the
joint study, I have indicated that we would be content that the
joint study that has been discussed already in relation to numbers
10, 20 and 30 Eastbourne Terrace should also extend to number
40, and I take it that that is good news to you?
(Mr Harrington) That is
the first time it has been said.
19311. But it is good news to you nonetheless?
(Mr Harrington) Positive
news, yes.
19312. I am also told that our position is,
and we can ask Mr Berryman to explain the detail behind this in
a moment, that we would extend our willingness to meet half of
the reasonable costs of that extended study, that that commitment
is made to you also.
(Mr Harrington) Sorry, can
you repeat that?
19313. We would extend our commitment to meeting
half of the reasonable costs of this joint study and that would
extend obviously to the study embracing number 40 as well as those
other buildings.
(Mr Harrington) To clarify
it, does the cap remain?
19314. I have said "reasonable" costs.
Finally, the general point that you made about the impact of the
Crossrail scheme on the commercial value of these buildings of
which you are the freeholders, essentially that value is realised
in their letting value, is it not?
(Mr Harrington) Yes.
19315. I think we can agree, can we not, that
you and the Promoter, you as landowner and we as the Promoter
of the scheme, share a common interest in seeking to mitigate,
as far as possible, any impact whether during the construction
phase or permanently that the Crossrail works will have on access
to your buildings? The reason for that is that you want to mitigate
it because you want to reduce, as far as possible, any reduction
in the letting value of your properties and we want to mitigate
it because the more we mitigate it, the less we have to pay you
ultimately in land compensation. That is fair, is it not?
(Mr Harrington) Yes.
19316. If there is a dispute between us about
that matter, then the Lands Tribunal is there to resolve it, is
it not?
(Mr Harrington) Yes.
19317. We do not really think this is a realistic
worry, although we understand that you have concerns about it,
but that extends to any argument that there may be that the impact
of the works has been so severe as to cause what we call `material
detriment' to number 40 and you can take that to the Lands Tribunal
and ask them to adjudicate on it.
(Mr Harrington) I do not
see the difference, but if that is what you say.
19318. Well, you have the remedy and the Committee
can take that into account in deciding what it needs to do in
relation to your Petition. Is that fair?
(Mr Harrington) Well, the
same circumstances apply in 7 Soho Square and the remedy was not
put forward on that building, so I do not understand why you are
suddenly putting that remedy forward on this building.
19319. That is my final point really, that at
Soho Square the Crossrail scheme involves tunnelling beneath your
property, does it not?
(Mr Harrington) Part of
it.
19 Committee Ref: A219, Access to the front of properties
along Eastbourne Terrace (SCN-20070207-007). Back
| 
