Examination of Witnesses (Questions 21708
- 21719)
Ordered: that Counsel and Parties be called in
21708. Chairman: Today the Committee
wishes to announce a number of further decisions we have made
on the cases presented to us. As many of you will know, following
the request of the Committee, the Government has introduced four
sets of amendments to the Bill which alter the proposed railway
works so as to extend the impact of the Bill and all the people
affected by these amendments have had the opportunity to object
to them and appear in front of the Committee.
21709. Counsel will be relieved to learn that
we do not intend to ask the Promoter to bring forward any further
additional provisions. However, in the last five months we have
heard many cases and feel that some action is required to address
the concerns presented to this Committee. Therefore, I will now
set out the issues we wish the Promoters to take action on and
report to us before we report the Bill to the House.
21710. First, the Fairfield Conservation Area
Residents Association. The Association appeared before the Committee
in October 2006 concerned about the impact of Crossrail on Grove
Hall Park, the only green space in the area. The Committee is
satisfied that the Promoter has taken necessary precautions to
minimise the disruption to the park. However, we are concerned
about the possible effect on the park and we would like to see
Crossrail have a positive long-term impact on this valuable green
space. We ask the Promoters to liaise with the Association and
the community to agree a suitable further enhancement of the park
following the Crossrail works.
21711. The case of Barbara and Tony Wheeler.
Mr and Mrs Wheeler appeared before the Committee on two occasions
concerned about the impact of the Crossrail tunnels beneath their
property. They are also affected by the placement of two worksites
in close proximity to their home. The Wheelers requested that
floating slab track be used in the tunnels under their house to
minimise the noise of trains in the tunnels. We also heard a petition
from Emma Jeffery whose property is located 15 metres above the
same tunnel; she had similar concerns. We accept the Wheelers
will be clearly affected by these works and we are keen to see
that efforts are made to protect them in addition to the mitigation
offered by the Promoters. To ensure a fair and consistent approach
to the Petitioners' concerns, we ask the Promoter to ensure that
floating slab track is installed in all tunnels which are routed
under residential property at the depth of 15 metres or less.
We would also like to receive a note detailing the expected reduction
in noise and vibration that would be experienced in residential
housing when using this technology at all such points on the line.
This note should indicate the depth of tunnels in each case. We
also wish to make it clear that should a better technology arise
before the construction of the tunnels takes place, it should
be considered for use as a substitute to floating slab track.
21712. We wish also to point out to the Promoters
that the Committee were minded to recommend that the entire Crossrail
route uses floating slab track. Crossrail has the potential to
be the jewel in the crown of London's transport system. It offers
an incredible opportunity to significantly reduce the disruption
experienced by London residents and workers as trains pass in
the tunnels below them. However, we recognise that such a decision
may have a considerable impact on the cost of the construction
of the railway, so at this stage we merely ask the Promoters to
explore the practicality and feasibility of such a recommendation
and then report back to the Committee in October.
21713. As an aside to what I am saying on this
report, just to add that during the course of the break in the
last few months there was some concern about a request which was
made by the Committee to the Chief Executive of Crossrail about
this question of floating slab track and its cost. I want to note
in the minutes that this was a request from the Committee members
in private following a short discussion with the Committee and
we are grateful to Mr Berryman who responded and we ask Crossrail
to be aware that it was our request.
21714. The case of Eleanor Ferguson and others.
We are convinced that Eleanor Ferguson and her fellow Petitioners,
Mona Hatoum and Gerry Collins, and Caroline Hamilton, should be
afforded the same level of comfort in the compulsory purchase
of their properties as that afforded by Crossrail to the Petitioners
EMI. It was not our intention that the Promoters should treat
these Petitioners differently. Therefore, we ask that the properties
overlooking the Hanbury Street shaft which are subject to compulsory
purchase orders should be purchased at the same time as the EMI
building. This must be as soon as practicable after Royal Assent
and, in any case, as soon as the funding for the Bill is secured.
We find it not acceptable to purchase these properties merely
nine months before construction actually starts. It has always
been our view that Crossrail would be able to rent or sell these
flats in due course and should not experience undue expense in
the process.
21715. The National Council of the Cycling Touring
Club. The Committee looks to Crossrail to continue its dialogue
with the National Council of the Cycling Touring Club to ensure
that the policy of the carriage of cycles is well informed. We
accept that the train operating company, not Crossrail, will decide
the final policy but we expect that the policy should be cycle-friendly
and in line with Transport for London and London Underground policies.
We would also ask the Promoters to highlight such stations on
the route which would be suitable for cyclists to safely enter
and exit the Crossrail service.
21716. The Great Western Allotment Association.
We ask the Promoter to prepare and till the new site for the allotment.
We expect Crossrail to work in liaison with the Association to
ensure that the location proposed by the Promoter will provide
the allotment owners with workable plots with enhanced compensatory
service arrangements incorporated. That means electricity, water
and footpaths. We expect the Promoter also to enter into meaningful
discussion with the Association as soon as practicable to agree
the terms of such services and facilities. In terms of facilities,
that may mean the odd shed and greenhouse.
21717. Spitalfields Community Association and
others. We note that Crossrail has taken action to engage an independent
charity, Planning Aid for London, to facilitate the meeting to
appoint representatives to the local liaison panel. We are grateful
to Crossrail for the action taken to comply with our recommendation
and we are glad that the local liaison panel is to have an ongoing
relationship with Crossrail using the facilitation of the local
authority. We note that it is now for the panel to consider how
it wishes to operate and take this forward.
21718. GE Pensions. We agree with the Petitioners
that they should have the option of entering into an Over-Site
Development Agreement with the Promoters. We were encouraged to
hear that further discussion will take place between the two parties
on this issue and we now ask the Promoters to ensure that such
an agreement is offered to the Petitioners.
21719. The London Borough of Havering. We re-emphasise
the need for recognising disability-friendly policies and we are
grateful to the London Borough of Havering and Crossrail for the
re-design of the station to ensure that passengers can access
the building readily. We remind the Promoters that we expect the
same level of regard to be shown in providing access for those
with disabilities across the entire breadth of the Crossrail operations.
| 
