Examination of Witnesses (Questions 20700
- 20719)
20700. With a more extensive knowledge of double-buggies,
I would agree with that. That is the width issue. What about the
safety issue and the kink in the middle of the bridge, or the
curve, as it has been described?
(Mr Berryman) The curve, or kink, is a very
slow change of direction; it is not a right-angled bend or even
quite an acute angle; it is a very slow angle. It is not the kind
of angle behind which a person could conceal to jump out and surprise
somebody, because as you walk towards the kink, or curve, you
can see round it.
20701. Mrs James: In general, sometimes
when you are looking down it is really quite intimidating.
(Mr Berryman) When you are standing on one
end and you cannot see the other end of the bridge, but similarly
someone could not stand behind the kink and conceal themselves.
20702. Somebody could think twice about using
that bridge, however convenient it would be, if it was dark; you
would think: "I cannot see the other end".
(Mr Berryman) I have to say, straightening
it would be an absolutely monumental undertaking; it is not something
you can just tweak.
20703. Could you have a mirror there so people
can actually see?
(Mr Berryman) You could put a mirror up. We
would be happy to do that. I am not sure how helpful a mirror
would be, actually. We have promised the provision of CCTV, and
Westminster, I think, have indicated that they would make it part
of their supervisory scheme. Obviously, it would be pointless
for us to have CCTV cameras because we do not have any presence
there or even anywhere near it.
20704. Ms Lieven: I think Lady Bright
mentioned the CCTV planned by the Academy on its site.
(Mr Berryman) We could link to that. What we
have basically said is we will put the brackets and the conduit
up but it obviously cannot be part of our CCTV because we have
no supervisory role there.
20705. What about lighting?
(Mr Berryman) Obviously, we will be lighting
the new sections of the bridge in accordance with the necessary
standards, and we can extend—I think I have already told
Westminster City Council this—that to cover the whole bridge.
20706. Thank you very much. Can we move on to
the noise issue, please. I think Mr Thornely-Taylor will come
back to this in more detail but can you explain why from an engineering
point of view we cannot provide a noise barrier on the northern
side of the villas?
(Mr Berryman): Would it be more helpful to
explain what the trains are actually doing, first?
20707. Certainly. I am only reading out the
question I have been provided with!
(Mr Berryman): If we could show the plan of
the existing freight movements, what this shows is the way the
trains currently work at the present time.[16]
What happens is the freight train comes in from the Great Western
mainline and runs right down to point A, and for reference you
can see the footbridge we have just been talking about and Westbourne
Park Villas. The train runs down, reverses back up to a siding,
and it is unloaded in the open air. The train then pulls forward
again and is pushed back into another siding, at which point the
trains splits and pulls forward again and then pushes back into
another siding, at the top left, to have the other nine cars of
the train re-loaded, so there is quite a lot of manoeuvring which
goes on between points A and B, and this takes place in the middle
of the night. The trains typically come at 11.30 and depart at
2.30. There is a path at midday and a path at midnight, so quite
often it is in the middle of the night. In future the furthest
point the trains will come down to is just adjacent to the footbridge
we have just been talking about.[17]
The locomotives will not be able to go beyond that point because
there is insufficient room. Even if we wanted to—and we
do not—there is insufficient room under the new scheme to
extend the siding further down, so that, point Y, will be the
absolute limit of operation of the freight trains. What will happen
then is that the freight train will come through here at the top
left, be pulled slowly through a discharge point, which will be
concealed in a building and soundproofed, until it gets to this
point Y, at which point the locomotive will be detached, will
run round to the other end of the train, will pick up the train
and take it away. So the level of movements required and the level
of manoeuvring and splitting trains and shunting will be enormously
reduced. Moreover, from this point Y to the east there will be
no freight train movements at all, other than what might be required
for maintenance by Network Rail, which is obviously when they
deliver stone and so on for their maintenance operations. So the
impact in any event on Westbourne Park Villas from freight trains
will be enormously reduced; and the impact on the properties shown
in the middle will be no worse than it is now, and probably better.
20708. In terms of the "probably better"
can we just look at a new concrete batching plant to be built
at King's Cross, shown on exhibit 002?[18]
We are not saying this will be exactly like this, and I think
this is a rather bigger one than the one that will be built at
Westbourne Park, but can you explain the benefits to the residents
of having a new batching plant as opposed to the existing arrangement?
(Mr Berryman): The main point
about the new plant is it will be enclosed. On this slide you
can see the aggregate unloading facility which already exists
at St Pancras, and it will be something similar to that—probably
slightly more enclosed because this is not in a residential area—that
will be constructed at Westbourne Park. The bunkers or hoppers
for storage of the aggregate will be something like the one shown,
although smaller because this is a big scheme, and the advantage
of that is that will be soundproofed so that the noise from handling
the aggregates and so on will be much reduced as compared with
the present day.
20709. At the present day it is not enclosed
at all?
(Mr Berryman): No; it is entirely open air.
It is a rather old-fashioned sort of plant and I would guess,
if we were not coming along, the owners would be thinking about
renewing it anyway.
20710. Just one other issue on the batching
plant. Lady Bright and the residents over a long period of time
have said: "Why not move it to Old Oak Common? You have a
batching plant there; take this one away up there." Why is
that not an option?
(Mr Berryman): The two things are serving different
purposes. The first point is that we will be putting a batching
plant at Old Oak Common; that will be for the purpose of pre-casting
the tunnel linings, which will be actually made there, and the
batching plant will be immediately adjacent to the production
line for those segments. The distance from Westbourne Park to
Old Oak Common is quite a long way. We did go on a trip, if you
remember, two or three weeks ago and it is quite a long drive
from Westbourne Park to Old Oak Common. If you were to put the
batching plant at Old Oak Common it would mean that concrete lorries,
before they could even start the same delivery run as they have
now, would have a 20 minute or so run to get into town. Concrete
normally has to be placed within two hours of batching. I have
not been on a site for years but normally we would turn concrete
away at the site gate if it was more than an hour old, so the
fact you have a 20-minute delay before you even get in towards
the city centre would be a major problem for construction sites
in the city centre. The great beauty of Westbourne Park is, first
of all, it is rail-served so aggregates can come by rail which
is less environmentally damaging but, secondly, as far as the
despatch of the concrete is concerned, it is near the areas where
heavy construction is taking place, and that is an obvious advantage
which would not be shared if the plant was moved to Old Oak Common.
20711. Lastly, it appears from the evidence
that we have heard that the principal noise source is the passenger
trains coming into Paddington, particularly the high speed diesel
trains. Is there anything that Crossrail can do about them?
(Mr Berryman): There is absolutely nothing
at all we can do about them. They are part of the national rail
network; they are the HSTs, as you have just said; they are very
noisy; they are diesel/electric trains, the diesel engines are
quite loud and they discharge upwards. They are very loud, I have
to say, but they are nothing to do with Crossrail; they are the
existing railway network.
20712. Stepping outside Crossrail, for a moment,
and this has absolutely nothing to do with us but from your own
knowledge, is there any hope for the future for the residents
in respect of those trains?
(Mr Berryman): There is a plan on which consultation
has just been started to replace those trains in due course. As
I understand it from colleagues, the current plan is to have dual
power trains so that when they are running under the electric
wires they are able to run from using electrical power, which
is relatively quieter, and when they get off the end of the electrics
they can use diesel power. I think there are many unresolved problems
with that proposal but that is certainly the direction in which
thinking is going at the present time.
20713. Mrs James: The tender has gone
out already. The idea is we would replace these high speed trains,
our existing fleet, with a fleet that is uniform across the country.
2010 I think.
(Mr Berryman): I do not think the tender has
gone out but it has gone out for consultation.
20714. 2010, I think.
(Mr Berryman): Yes.
20715. Ms Lieven: Thank you very much,
Mr Berryman.
20716. Chairman: Lady Bright, would you
like to examine Mr Berryman's evidence?
Cross-examined by Lady Bright
20717. Lady Bright: Thank you for explaining.
It is very useful to have a drawing of the full route of the freight
train which goes right round the houses and does cause a lot of
the problems. If you were to move it back to the point indicated
on the previous drawing it would be useful but obviously we cannot
rely on that happening because the drawings are not indicative—and
I was given a strong indication it was more than millimetres we
were talking about. Could you give me an idea how much it costs
to put in a new 350m siding? I mean to the nearest million, probably.
(Mr Berryman): It depends where it is. I do
not want to evade the question, but the permanent way would probably
cost—I do not know, a couple of millions, probably. Maybe
a little bit more. It just depends what the obstructions are,
what point works are required and what signalling is required.
There is not a straight answer that I can give to that. But can
I just make one point about the remark you just made? You suggested
that nothing is definite. I am telling you it is definite that
the end of the freight siding will be at the point where I indicated
on the drawing, and I can tell you that with complete confidence
because it is physically impossible to fit the Crossrail trains
and a siding in the space which is available beyond that point.
That is, in fact, why, as you may recall, we took some limited
compulsory powers over this corner of the Academy site so we could
get the end of that siding in.
20718. I am not sure I completely understand.
It is physically impossible to get the Crossrail trains --
(Mr Berryman): It is physically impossible
to get the Crossrail tracks and a siding in the space between
the London Underground tracks and the boundary of the railway
land.
20719. So that is the only reason for moving
it.
(Mr Berryman): Sorry?
16 Crossrail Ref: P152, Westbourne Park-current turnback
and freight area (WESTCC-AP2-10-04-015). Back
17
Crossrail Ref: P152, Westbourne Park-proposed turnback and freight
area (WESTCC-AP2-10-04-016). Back
18
Crossrail Ref: P152, Concrete batching plant at Kings Cross (WESTCC-AP2-10-04-002). Back
| 
