Examination of Witnesses (Questions 2040
- 2059)
2040. CHAIRMAN: Mr Drabble, I think some
of my colleagues might be helped if there was a plan.
2041. MR DRABBLE: That is a good question,
whether there is a plan.
2042. CHAIRMAN: I know we did go there,
but it does not necessarily follow that we remember exactly which
street was which.
2043. MR DRABBLE: Absolutely. Mr Mould
may assist us with a plan. While that is being found, perhaps
I can just put up on the screen a couple of photographs because
you have, I think, all been on the site visit and you may remember
the location of Fulbourne Street and the proposed station entrance.
This is the view from the hospital side of Whitechapel Road looking
down, as I understand it, Fulbourne Street—and I need to
make sure I am getting it correct—past McDonald's. You will
recall from the site visit that the proposed new entrance for
the station is in an area behind the McDonald's, and the part
of the presentation that I have just been reading is stressing
the Council's concern to ensure that there is a visible and open
entrance, linking Whitechapel Station with the main road and more
particularly with the hospital, and I was just going on to explain
what happened to those concerns in the hearing of our Petition
in the other place and indicate what our present position is.
I do not know whether we have now got to a plan, but I hope that
is sufficient to jog the memory of members on the Committee as
to what we are talking about. Durward Street, which I have also
been talking about, which is the site of major construction impacts,
runs parallel to the Whitechapel Road round the back, and you
will recall from the site visit the school which obviously has
a number of major issues with the construction programme which
are addressed in the undertakings. We can now put up a plan.[4]
2044. CHAIRMAN: Cambridge Heath Road?
2045. MR DRABBLE: It is on the corner
at the east. There is Whitechapel Road, if Mr Mould can show us,
and the hospital is the other side of Whitechapel Road and I suspect
that the logo for Whitechapel Station is roughly in the position
of the existing entrance, and then Fulbourne Street, so the McDonald's
in the photograph we were just looking at is on the corner there
(indicating). My Lord, I hope that is sufficient to put my bare
words in context.
2046. CHAIRMAN: Yes, thank you very much.
The bus did rather go round and round and we were never quite
sure where we were at any one time!
2047. MR DRABBLE: Having been on site
visits myself, I have every sympathy. I will return to the text,
my Lord, and I hope it makes sense. Since there will only be one
entrance to the station in the foreseeable future and bearing
in mind its somewhat hidden location, the Council consider it
essential that this entrance is as accessible and visible as possible.
For that reason, we gave evidence at the House of Commons Select
Committee that the building on the corner of Fulbourne Street
and Whitechapel Road currently occupied by a McDonald's restaurant,
and we have just seen that in the photograph, should be included
within the station site. This will provide a spacious concourse
and entrance area suitably in keeping with the high quality of
the new station itself. Unfortunately the Select Committee did
not agree with us. However, we are still attempting to secure
improvements to both the existing station in Whitechapel Road
as well as the new entrance in discussions with Transport for
London, and we would welcome the Select Committee's support in
achieving this objective.
2048. CHAIRMAN: Is the McDonald's within
the limits of deviation?
2049. MR DRABBLE: No, it is not within
the limits of deviation.
2050. CHAIRMAN: So it is not within the
Bill?
2051. MR DRABBLE: It is not within the
Bill. The Bill could be adjusted to provide for its purchase,
if appropriate.
2052. CHAIRMAN: I do not think so. I
think that starts all sorts of things going on.
2053. MR DRABBLE: To be crystal clear,
we have not petitioned in this House on this issue, but we thought
it was helpful for the Committee to know what our continuing stance
is.
2054. Turning to the route itself, the whole
of Crossrail is in tunnel throughout the borough. However, as
you will have been made aware, there is a requirement for ventilation
and evacuation shafts to be located at one-kilometre intervals
throughout the length of the tunnel. So far as the borough is
concerned, this means that, as well as the two major station sites,
there will be a further ten construction sites, including a major
construction site at Stepney Green in the junction of the two
arms of Crossrail. You may not yet have been made aware of it,
but there will be another major tunnel running north-south in
the Bow area which will carry the diverted Ham and Wick sewer,
which presents its own serious construction impacts. Inevitably,
in such a heavily built-up area, these construction sites will
have major adverse environmental impacts during the construction
period.
2055. One of the shaft sites is in Hanbury Street,
which you have already visited. You will have seen that it is
in a very congested residential area and will result in significant
property demolition. Not surprisingly, there is considerable local
opposition to this proposed shaft. As you will be aware, it was
originally proposed as a major tunnelling launch site which the
Council very strongly opposed, but fortunately, shortly before
the House of Commons Select Committee commenced hearing evidence,
the Promoters adopted a revised tunnelling strategy which no longer
necessitated a launch site in the area.
2056. However, the Council considered that Crossrail
had not fully justified the case for the use of Hanbury Street
as the optimum location for a shaft in Spitalfields and gave expert
evidence that serious consideration should be given to an alternative
site in Woodseer Street just to the north. This would have involved
a minor variation in the route alignment which the Council considered
would cause no serious construction or operation problems. Unfortunately,
the Select Committee did not agree with the Council and decided
that Hanbury Street was the better location for the intervention
shaft.
2057. The Council still seeks to mitigate the
construction impacts and, to this end, has secured undertakings
that Crossrail will minimise the size of the intervention site
and that it will continue to review the Crossrail ventilation
and evacuation strategy which could obviate the need for any shaft
in Hanbury Street. In this respect, we were pleased to have been
advised by Crossrail that it seems likely the site will no longer
be required as a ventilation shaft which would reduce the size
of the site and period of construction. The Council will continue
to press Crossrail to consider the possibility of eliminating
the Hanbury Street shaft. Although the Hanbury Street shaft has
caused most local opposition, there are a number of other sites
where the construction of intervention shafts will cause serious
disruption and disturbance.
2058. The site in Eleanor Street involves the
displacement of the Council's only permanent travellers' site
in the borough, and originally there were no proposals for its
replacement or relocation. The Council first secured a commitment
to relocate the site and then, following further pressure from
the Council and the travellers themselves, Crossrail agreed to
include additional land within the Bill proposals in order to
ensure that the travellers could be relocated in a single move
rather than in two moves, as was originally proposed. Since then,
we have been working with Crossrail in order to agree a project
plan which deals with both the design of the new site and the
relocation process. We are pleased to say that in the last few
days we have reached agreement with Crossrail that the design
of the site will comply with the recently published guidance on
the design of gypsy and travellers' sites produced by the Department
of Communities and Local Government, and that the Council will
have the right of approval over the final detailed design of the
site, and, as Mr Mould explained first thing, final agreement
on the way forward has been reached in the way that he explained.
2059. A number of other construction sites have
been located in the borough's very scarce open spaces at Stepney
Green and Mile End Park. In addition, one of the construction
sites for the Ham and Wick sewer is located in the middle of Grove
Hall Park in Bow. As a result of the construction works, two of
the borough's few and heavily used football pitches will need
to be relocated, and Stepping Stones City Farm will lose part
of its site during the construction period. We have secured undertakings
to ensure that the football pitches are relocated prior to construction
work commencing so that there will be no short-term loss of a
very scarce local facility. At Stepping Stones Farm, Crossrail
will finance the reconfiguration of the site to enable the farm
to continue in operation during construction works. At Grove Hall
Park, we have secured undertakings to minimise the impact of the
construction works on the use of the park and to secure its full
reinstatement after completion of the works.
4 Crossrail Environmental Statement, Impacts arising
from the Amendments of Provisions (SCN-20080304-002) Back
|
