Examination of Witnesses (Questions 20640
- 20659)
20640. Mr Binley: You are a man of many
talents, Mr Kelly.
(Mr Kelly) Thank you.
20641. Lady Bright: Shall we show them
slide 013, which is how not to do it.[10]
You see that extension, they spent a lot of money doing a nice
long bridge and then how come they put that extension right in
the middle of the bridge? Do you think you could get past that?
It would be a squeeze?
(Mr Kelly) It would be a squeeze.
20642. It is how to ruin it and the point about
our insisting that they stick to inclusive mobility is all these
things are tried and tested, you do not have to make it up as
you go along, and we propose a disability audit by Mike's organisation
to check that it is right.
(Mr Kelly) If I could close with one final
statement. The one thing I would like to see coming out of this
is that consultation exists both with residents on the north side
and the south side, that is quite important because although Lady
Bright is here specifically for the north side, it does have an
impact on the south side. The consultation on the south side has
been more extensive than the consultation on the north side, so
I think that needs to be addressed. With regard to the bridge,
I would also like to see a regulator, somebody to take responsibility
for the bridge itself, and the reason I suggest that is I have
been involved as part of my work in Stadium in lots of broader
projects where we have consortia and we generally find if you
have a regulator who deals with the issue and re-charges to other
organisations that you get a much better result.
20643. Mr Binley: Thank you very much.
Ms Lieven?
Cross-examined by Ms Lieven
20644. Ms Lieven: Can I ask a few questions,
sir, really for clarification. Mr Kelly, first of all, as far
as details of the ramp, the light, the canopy, raised sodium lighting,
perspex are concerned, all of those matters will be subject to
detailed design stage and approval of Westminster Council, so
I am not going to deal with them now, sir. They are all in Westminster's
hands ultimately as to whether they approve what we are doing,
the right kind of lighting and matters such as that. I hope I
can put your mind at rest with one thing, Mr Kelly. As far as
lighting is concerned, we are quite happy to light the bridge,
I think the original proposal was to light the bridge we are widening,
but we are quite happy to say to the Committee that we will light
the whole bridge if neither Westminster nor the Academy will do
it. I hope that at least makes you happier. Could we work out
what is going on here. At the moment, as a wheelchair user, you
cannot get across the bridge at all, is that right?
(Mr Kelly) Not at all.
20645. Under the Academy proposals the Academy
is intending, and indeed may have already done so, to upgrade
the north end of the bridge to provide full disability access,
is that right?
(Mr Kelly) It is my understanding that they
are in the process of doing that, it is not yet complete.
20646. They are going to do it. You have spoken
about how many Academy students will use the bridge, they are
likely to be the main users, and a significant proportion of them
may be disabled in, or not in, wheelchairs but as far as the Academy
is concerned it has been sufficient, in their view, to make one
end of the bridge DDA compliant but not the other end. Is that
right?
(Mr Kelly) I think there are two issues here
and one of them is to do with the very last issue I raised in
my formal comments to do with the consortium. It has been very
difficult to get agreement between all the bodies involved in
what is going to be suitable for everybody and how that can best
be achieved. The Academy is opening in September 2007 and, with
that in mind, they have tried to progress the issues from their
end as quickly as possible to ensure that side of the bridge is
compliant and is accessible by the time they propose to be able
to use it. I understand similar agreements might have yet been
reached on the other side because of the issues about the platform
itself of the bridge and the access to the ramps on the other
side.
20647. So, as far as the Academy is concerned,
if you take Crossrail out of the equation and assume no Crossrail
at all, you will have a situation where the north side of the
bridge is DDA-compliant but disabled people cannot get off the
south side of the bridge under the present proposals. Is that
right?
(Mr Kelly) That is my understanding, but, as
I say, these works have not yet been completed, so I cannot—
20648. Lady Bright: I think it is a bit
unfair to ask Mr Kelly to answer that.
20649. Ms Lieven: I am so sorry, sir,
I thought he knew about—
20650. Lady Bright: He is not here to
represent the Academy.
20651. Mr Binley: Bear with me a little,
ladies! It is perfectly correct for Ms Lieven to ask questions
of that kind, and whilst they might not be overly helpful to what
you are trying to say, that is the point of this Committee.
(Mr Kelly) Can I make a point of clarification,
though, Chair? I have not actually had any direct consultations
with the Academy in respect of that bridge.
20652. Mr Binley: That is helpful. Thank
you.
20653. Ms Lieven: I am sorry, perhaps
I slightly misunderstood Mr Kelly's role at the Academy. Let us
move on to Crossrail. Crossrail is coming along and is now proposing
to make the south side of the bridge fully DDA-compliant.
(Mr Kelly) Yes.
20654. So, assuming that Crossrail happens,
as we all hope it will, and works go ahead, you will then be in
a situation where as a wheelchair user you will be able to get
on the bridge, get across the bridge and get off the other side.
(Mr Kelly) Yes.
20655. A major benefit over the existing situation.
(Mr Kelly) Yes.
20656. As far as this situation—is the
bridge wide enough—is concerned, the bridge is, as I understand
it, presently 1.8 metres along its width. Is that so? It sounds
about right.
(Mr Kelly) It sounds about right. I have not
been able to use the bridge. All I have been able to see is the
drawings and pictures.
20657. Lady Bright: It does go down to
1.6 at one point.
(Mr Kelly) It is my understanding, if we go
back to one of those earlier pictures, that the curve that occurs
at the far end of the overview of the platforms—it does
narrow to 1600 at that point.
20658. Ms Lieven: My instructions, and
Mr Berryman will pull my gown vigorously if I have got it wrong,
is that the entire span of the bridge—Can we just work on
the 1.8 for the moment, even if there is a short stretch that
is 1.6? As far as 1.8 is concerned, let us use, if we may, your
wheelchair as a comparator. I guess your wheelchair is the right
size to get through doorways, is that right?
(Mr Kelly) As a rule mine would not get through
the average doorway. This is not an atypical wheelchair; the wheelbase
of this particular wheelchair expands outwards. This is a sports
wheelchair, so it is slightly wider.
20659. The average wheelchair is about 700mm,
I ascertained from the Department for Transport document. Is that
right?
(Mr Kelly) It varies according to the weight
and size of the users. They generally start at, I think, 700 and
they go through to 950, at the top of the range.
10 Committee Ref: A236, View of footbridge at Paddington
Basin (WESTCC-AP2-10-05-013). Back
| 
