Examination of Witnesses (Questions 20040
- 20059)
20040. In fact, until recently, my clients were
under the impression that Crossrail would be willing to carry
out such surveys and I hope that is still the case. It is disputed
that he said it, but I have a note of a meeting in which Mr Thornely-Taylor
said that he would carry out as many surveys as my clients wanted.
We are not so unreasonable as to hold him strictly to that, but
the validity of the logic of establishing a baseline survey of
the existing noise pollution in Soho before the arrival of Crossrail
seems unarguable. You may well ask what the point of taking these
measurements would be? The obvious answer is that once Crossrail
has been constructed and up and running, it will then be easy
to determine whether additional noise is attributable to Crossrail
and if such is the case to quantify the extent of the increased
noise pollution. Without such a baseline noise survey, Crossrail
will be unaccountable for any damage they might cause to the Soho
post-production industry, let alone the theatres and numerous
other entertaining venues in Soho.
20041. Next if I could come on to floating slab
track and/or other mitigation measures. The Promoters have already
assumed, I understand, that floating slab track will need to be
installed beneath the London Palladium, in recognition of the
noise sensitive use to which the theatre is put, and now we have
heard that it will be installed under GCS's studios. My clients
have no issue over whether the Palladium should be treated as
a special case but what they would say is if a theatre, which
is more likely to put on musicals and variety performances and
high drama deserved it, then the post-production industry deserves
it too. I would remind you of my words about Ms James' experience.
My clients ask that the nominated undertaker be required to use
the very best noise mitigation measures available at the source
and if that is floating continuously welded slab track, so be
it, for the section of the railway passing beneath Soho between
Regent Street and Charing Cross Court Road both east and westbound
in both tunnels.
20042. I should remind the Committee of the
evidence which was heard from the Promoters about the need for
floating slab track and its cost and it was a long time ago, a
case brought by Camden on behalf of the local authorities. The
evidence came forward during the generic ground-borne noise which
the Committee will remember hearing from Camden as long ago as
days 10 and 11 on 8 and 9 February last year. You may or may not
remember but the whole issue of the cost of floating slab track
arose and Mr Thornely-Taylor was required to put some figures
to the Committee for the cost per kilometre. I have turned up
the note which was handed in which I will circulate. The document
is called "Crossrail Tunnels—Predicted Floating Slab
Track Costs".
20043. Chairman: Call that A226.
20044. Mr Lewis: You will see in Mr Thornely-Taylor's
paper it says that the additional cost of floating slab track
comes out at £1.49 million per km.[7]
It goes on to say in paragraph five that the total cost of FST
so far is approximately £7 million, see paragraph five. In
paragraphs two to four there is an explanation of where the floating
slab track was likely to be needed. The Palladium section is amongst
the sections mentioned in paragraph two and I think that is the
Argyll Street section. There are a few more areas mentioned in
paragraph three referenced by window numbers, none of which is
near Soho. Paragraph four mentions that nine other buildings may
require floating slab track. I am not sure if they are in Soho,
they may be and if they are I may have misunderstood the position.
20045. In any event, my clients do not dispute
Mr Thornely-Taylor's calculations as to the cost per km because
they do not have the technical expertise to do so. Using a ruler
against the scale provided on the deposited plans I worked out
that between Regent Street and Charing Cross Road, that is the
Soho section, the track length east and westbound combined is
about 1.8 km. I am sure I will be corrected if that is wrong.
That comes to £2.69 million extra cost using Mr Thornely-Taylor's
figures for the whole of Soho.
20046. The position of my clients is that this
figure of £2.69 million is not an excessive amount of money
to spend in the context not just of the overall costs of Crossrail
but also set against the value of the post-production industry
to the UK. It is less than the cost of fitting out one of the
top quality studios in Soho.
20047. I would reiterate that I am not saying
continuously welded rail will necessarily provide enough mitigation
to meet the criteria of every existing studio, and I would stress
again that individual members have their own views of what those
criteria should be. You will no doubt ask yourself why put FST
in over the whole of the section? The answer to that is that Soho
is unquestionably the leading area in Europe, if not the world,
for the type of noise sensitive activity which I have described.
If floating slab track is used throughout Soho, first, it may
well have the effect of ensuring that stringent noise criteria
applicable to the studios already there are not breached. You
will know from the map of sound studios in Soho that they are
concentrated in the centre of Soho, which is currently a tube-free
zone. Crossrail will change that fundamentally,
20048. My second point is that the use of FST
will also have the real advantage of ensuring, if Crossrail are
right about its noise mitigation capabilities, that new studios
will continue to be attracted to the area in the future. That
is vital to my clients' members' interests because whilst they
might be in competition with each other for business, the whole
reason they are all so successful is because of the reputation
of the Soho industry as a whole and that should not be jeopardised
by Crossrail.
20049. I will finish off by using a well-worn
adage—these Petitioners are concerned about noise pollution
and in their view the principle that the polluter pays should
be adhered to. The Promoters have a duty of care to minimise the
damage that Crossrail will cause as it is constructed and operated
afterwards. That they appear, from Information Paper D10, to have
taken no serious account or consideration of the needs or even
the existence of a Soho-based post-production industry seems almost
unbelievable. The Promoters should behave in a responsible way
towards the UK post industry, not in a cavalier way, but which
I am afraid my clients believe is the case based upon the comparatively
benign treatment of other noise sensitive industries.
20050. I must make clear that the submissions
made today are without prejudice to any that may have been made
or may be made in the future by individual members of the two
organisations. As already stated, the APRS and UK Post and Services
fully support their individual members' cases.
20051. Mr Taylor: Sir, I am afraid that
in order to respond to that I am going to have to ask for an adjournment
for a short period. The reason that I say that is we have been
asking for some time from the APRS and UK Post and Services for
an indication of the undertakings they are seeking. The first
indication we have had was from Mr Lewis just now. So there are
matters raised in relation to the uncertainty, particularly with
regard to background noise for which I need to take instructions.
20052. Chairman: How long do you need?
20053. Mr Taylor: I would imagine I would
need five or ten minutes.
20054. Chairman: Ms Lieven?
20055. Ms Lieven: I was only going to
suggest that we might proceed to the City's petition which would
take Mr Cameron and I between 45 minutes and an hour and then
perhaps Mr Taylor can interpose back when that is finished.
20056. Chairman: I think that is reasonable.
The Petition of City of London.
Mr Neil Cameron appeared on behalf of the Petitioner.
Bircham Dyson Bell appeared as an Agent
20057. Mr Cameron: I would be very grateful
for that because we have been waiting, I would say, patiently
and we are anxious to complete our presentation today if we can.
The sooner the better, as far as we are concerned.
20058. Chairman: We know the feeling.
Mr Taylor, if you can come back, thank you very much.
20059. Ms Lieven: We do of course have
the Residents Association of Mayfair who we would like to complete
this afternoon if possible at all.
7 Committee Ref: A226, Crossrail Tunnels-Predicted
Floating Slab Track Costs (SCN-20070221-005). Back
| 
