Examination of Witnesses (Questions 420
- 439)
420. Finally, we have opted for a 7-metre Crossrail
tunnel as opposed to the 8-metre link for the Channel Tunnel.
Is there any reason for that?
(Professor Mair) I am not the best person
to answer that question. I think there are operational reasons
for train sizes, and so on, which others could provide the answer
as to why Crossrail is requiring only a 7-metre diameter, compared
with the Eurostar that needs an 8-metre diameter.
421. BARONESS FOOKES: My Lord Chairman,
I take it there is no other method of tunnelling which anybody
is likely to come up with, superior or different from the two
that you have outlined?
422. CHAIRMAN: The Brunel?
(Professor Mair) I can confidently say there will be no other
method of tunnelling that would be proposed.
423. LORD SNAPE: Arising from that, Professor
Mair, I was on the hybrid bill in the other place 20 years ago,
on the Channel Tunnel Bill. What has changed, as far as tunnelling
and construction generally, in that 20 years?
(Professor
Mair) I think there have been very substantial changes, both to
earth-pressure balance machine technology—and that has advanced
considerably. It was barely in existence 20 years ago—that
is, the technology of having a pressurised space. That has immediate
effects on settlement control, of course. Sprayed concrete technology
was in existence 20 years, but, again, there have been very substantial
technical advances in that process as well.
424. Have they been learnt from overseas practice
or has it just developed in the UK? I am thinking, particularly,
of some of the Japanese tunnelling.
(Professor Mair) I think tunnelling is very much an international
industry. There has been a huge amount of development in places
like Singapore and Tokyo as well as in Europe. So it has not been
a solely British series of innovations; it has happened worldwide.
425. CHAIRMAN: Ms Lieven, do I see that
you might have been given the answer to why 7 metres?
426. MS LIEVEN: I have a couple of answers,
my Lord. First of all, why 7 metres? It is because the Channel
Tunnel Rail Link was designed to the European gauge, so it has
a slightly larger tunnel than Crossrail needs to have. The other
point to make at this stage is that it was certainly the case
in the other place that no Petitioners came into Committee and
argued that a different tunnelling method should have been used—so,
for instance, tunnel-boring machines in their location rather
than spray-concrete lining. To the best of my knowledge, none
of the Petitions before your Lordships raise such an argument.
That is not to say that nobody may raise it orally before your
Lordships, but I am not conscious of it being raised specifically
in any Petition.
427. Unless there are any questions for Professor
Mair, I just need to say something about the settlement policy
and the settlement deed. I do not know if that is an appropriate
moment.
428. CHAIRMAN: Are there any more questions
for Professor Mair? Professor Mair, thank you very much. We may
have the pleasure of seeing you again, and, if so, so much the
better for us.
(Professor Mair) Thank you.
The witness withdrew
429. MS LIEVEN: I am very grateful, my
Lords. The settlement approach which Professor Mair has just outlined
is set out in our settlement policy which is contained within
one of our information papers, in this instance D12, on ground
settlement. As is explained in that policy, in order to put the
policy approach into effect the Promoter will enter into what
is called a settlement deed with any qualifying owner so that
the policy which has been described to you is contractually enforceable
between the qualifying owner and the nominated undertaker—it
gives a direct and easy enforceability mechanism. What is meant
by a qualifying owner is set out in appendix 1 to paper D12, and
in essence the owner must have a legal interest in all or part
of the relevant building. The building in question must be within
30 metres, on plan, of the relevant works—they might be
a tunnel, they might be a station, they might be a shaft, or whatever
the works in question are. What I need to make clear today is
that the policy set out in D12 has been amended to state that
in order for a building to fall within the policy and, therefore,
to meet the qualifying criteria, it must have been granted planning
permission by 1 March 2008. So buildings which gain planning permission
after 1 March will not be eligible for a settlement deed.
430. CHAIRMAN: Is that something that
local planning authorities will tell applicants?
431. MS LIEVEN: My Lord, the position
is that we believe that the people who are likely to be most directly
affected by this are aware of it because it has arisen in discussions
that have taken place between Crossrail. The number of properties
affected by this change we believe to be very small, and in instances
where we may be aware that there may be an impact and a change
they have been discussed either directly with the developers in
question or with their legal representatives.
432. CHAIRMAN: Do the local planning
authority planning departments know about it?
433. MS LIEVEN: I cannot answer whether
there have been any discussions with the planning authorities
yet, but everybody will know about it after today's announcement
because we are going to put it on the website and it is going
to be flagged up on the website. Obviously, the only planning
authorities that are affected are those which cover the area of
the central tunnels (this is not a point for the limbs), and we
will ensure that it is expressly brought to their attention.
434. The other point I need to make clear is
a clarification to the policy rather than a change and it has
just been clarified what we believe was already implicit within
the policy, that the buildings in question must have been substantially
completed by the time that the owner has to serve notice on the
nominated undertaker under the terms of the settlement deed. In
effect, that is ten months before the relevant part of the works
are intended to commence. That is not a change to the policy but
when we came to look at the change we thought we would make this
absolutely clear. So the policy has been clarified in that respect.
I just needed to draw those two points to the attention of the
Committee.
435. CHAIRMAN: As you say, they will
go on the website.
436. MS LIEVEN: Yes. My Lords, the only
other thing I need to do before we break is that I think the Committee
would like to be informed as to the likely course of next week,
so if any Members of the Committee are minded to do any pre-reading
I can minimise the amount of wasted time. I do not know whether
that would be helpful. I am conscious that we are not going to
meet again in formal session until next Monday.
437. CHAIRMAN: Can you do it on the bus?
438. MS LIEVEN: I can certainly do it
on the bus, my Lord, yes. I will not take more than one minute
but I can do on the bus.
439. LORD BROOKE OF ALVERTHORPE: Are
there any documents we need to take with us?
| 
