Examination of Witnesses (Questions 2880
- 2899)
2880. We are just putting up the example of
3-5 Princelet Street, the report there, and your Lordships may
be interested to see it covers not only matters of sensitivity
and importance but also matters which appear in the interior of
the building, because some Petitioners have suggested, or at least
suggested in the past, that the reports have not looked at interior
features of importance, because as you can see I hope—as
I cannot—the report for Princelet Street which does deal
with decorative features as well.[7]
2881. CHAIRMAN: Yes, the Petition certainly
talks about various decorative work inside the buildings.
2882. MR ELVIN: Other buildings which
are not listed buildings have been considered in a series of settlement
reports which calculate potential settlement and building impacts
in the same way as the individual reports do for listed buildings.
The settlement reports underpin the Environmental Statement as
technical reports and relevant extracts can be made available
as required. It is fair to say that the technical reports that
do the more general settlement appraisal of the non-listed buildings
have been part of the technical reports which have been available
publicly as the background to the ES, both on the website and
in paper copy form since Bill deposit, so they have been available
for some three years.
2883. Proposed mitigation in the Spitalfields
area consists of monitoring and following best practice during
tunnelling works to minimise the generation of ground movements
at source. In particular as regards listed buildings, the selection
of mitigation measures has been and will be guided by the sensitivity
of particular features which are of historic or architectural
interest and the sensitivity of the structure of the building
to ground movement. Assessments will continue to be reviewed as
appropriate as the design process continues. The Promoter will
also undertake an internal inspection of buildings on the English
Heritage Buildings at Risk Register to ensure that any particularly
sensitive aspects of these properties are considered as part of
the assessment process.
2884. Internal inspections will be undertaken
for all buildings within the 10 millimetres contours as part of
the production of schedules of defects prior to commencement of
the works. The Promoter has agreed, subject to securing the necessary
consent, to continue to undertake settlement monitoring in Spitalfields,
not only during construction of Crossrail but also for an extended
period of seven years following the completion of tunnelling excavation
works, so that monitoring will continue for a significant period
beyond the finishing of the tunnels.
2885. None of the Spitalfields Petitioners'
properties is assessed as being at greater than a negotiable risk
of damage from settlement arising from the construction of Crossrail
. Nevertheless under the settlement policy, which is found in
Information Paper D12, "In the event that material or physical
damage to buildings in Spitalfields does arise from ground settlement
associated with the nominated undertakers' tunnelling work, it
will be remedied, of course, at no expense to those owning or
occupying the buildings. Any repairs required will be carried
out to a standard and quality commensurate with the age and fabric
of the building".
2886. The Committee will also be hearing from
Professor Mair on Wednesday, we hope, to assist the Committee
with any of the issues which the Committee would like to hear
evidence from ourselves and for any further explanation of these
issues following Professor Mair's initial general presentation
on day two.
2887. On the issue of lorries, lorries will
access the worksite from Whitechapel Road via Greatorex Street
and Hanbury Street and I think a plan is being put up now to show
you that and they will return to Whitechapel Road by Spital Street,
Buxton Street and Vallance Road.[8]
Overall there will be a reduction in the number of lorries over
those originally reported in the first Environmental Statement
as a result, as I explained to the Committee earlier, of the revised
tunnelling strategy which meant that the worksite at Hanbury Street
for the new shaft could be reduced. Lorry numbers will vary over
the construction period, so the Committee has the numbers. What
is being assessed is as follows.[9]
During peak construction period, which is the nine months required
for sinking the shaft, what is expected is on average 16 lorries
entering and leaving the worksite each day, working hours being
approximately 8.00 in morning to 6.00 in the evening weekdays
and until 1.00 in the afternoon on Saturdays. The remainder of
the work period, the number is expected to fall to something of
the order to six lorries per day.
2888. CHAIRMAN: But they are not going
to run during the period when the school children are on their
way home?
2889. MR ELVIN: There is a separate arrangement
regarding the schools and I am going to show your Lordships the
undertaking in a moment.
2890. CHAIRMAN: I think one of the things
people want to know is whether the lorries are going to be backing
up waiting for the deadline to pass.
2891. MR ELVIN: Can we turn to undertaking
187, which is the undertaking regarding schools and lorries.[10]
There is an undertaking which has been given to restrict the hours
in which traffic will operate and allows for the introduction
of traffic management measures, which, of course, should deal
also with the issue of lorries which are pulled up on the side
of the road—measures to be agreed with the Council. In fact,
the issue of routing is specifically a matter which requires or
allows the Council's intervention under Schedule 7, paragraph
7 of the Bill, so in addition to the undertaking there will be
statutory controls in Schedule 7 of the Bill which will allow
lorries to be controlled, both in terms of timing and in terms
of the management of their movement. I also should say, and Mr
Berryman can explain this to you when he gives evidence and he
can explain in a little bit more detail the position with regards
to lorries, a lorry holding area is proposed at Burdett Road,
which is sufficiently far away from the schools to ensure that
the lorries are being held in a location which should not conflict
with school children either going to or coming from the school.
2892. I should also say in this context that
a Schools' Liaison Panel has been set up and has been running
for over a year now and it appears to be working smoothly and
provides a proper forum in which the school can pass on its concerns
and these issues can be discussed and agreed between the schools
and Tower Hamlets and ourselves. Turning briefly to the issues
of noise.
2893. CHAIRMAN: Sorry to interrupt, but
this is another European directive which has been referred to
by the Residents' Association, 2002/49.
2894. MR ELVIN: That has gone into regulation
form and our view is that it does not significantly alter the
position with regard to Hanbury Street. We can give a little more
information on this in due course, but what the noise directive
does, and what the new regulations do, is to place an obligation
on the United Kingdom to measure ambient noise levels throughout
the country and to produce a noise contour map which is a basis
for judging impacts. That does not impact on this particular proposal
because the issue is not a concern about the contours to be placed
on a new ambient noise map but what the actual impact of the proposals
will be.
2895. Our position on this is as follows: there
is not any basis, we say, for considering that any noise or vibration
issues will arise with regard to the operation of the tunnels
once they have been constructed. It is predicted that the level
of groundborne noise that would be experienced within any of the
residential properties listed in the Spitalfields Petitions will
be less than 30 dB LAmax. Mr Thornely-Taylor will assist the Committee
and give evidence with regard to those issues to the extent that
the Committee wishes to ask detailed questions and just to remind
the Committee at this stage, of course, the tunnels are deep under
the Spitalfields area, as I said, on average some 30 metres down.
So far as the construction noise is concerned, the residential
properties listed in the Spitalfields—
2896. CHAIRMAN: I am so sorry, the point
that is being made is that the directive provides noise requirements.
2897. MR ELVIN: Well it does, it requires
mapping of ambient noise levels, but that does not actually impact—and
clearly that has to be done on a national basis—on the assessment
of the specific noise effects of the proposal.
2898. CHAIRMAN: I think Mr Thornely-Taylor
will be able to tell us about that.
2899. MR ELVIN: I am quite happy to produce
a short note to the Committee to explain the basis of the directive
and regulations, but our understanding, and we looked at this
some weeks ago, was that although there is a national obligation
to produce noise contour maps, that does not impinge on the issues
which the Committee has to consider, that is to say individual
impacts on the community and specific residential properties of
the proposals.
7 Crossrail Ref: P23, 3 and 5 Princelet Street, Listed
Building Assessments, Mott MacDonald (TOWHLB-XR5A-003) Back
8
Crossrail Ref: P23, Hanbury Street-Proposed Lorry Routes (TOWHLB-XR5E-001) Back
9
Crossrail Ref: P23, Table 8.1-Estimated Lorry Movements on Local
Roads (LINEWD-SES308-006) Back
10
Crossrail Ref: P23, Extract from the Register of Undertakings
and Assurances, No. 187 (TOWHLB-XR5C-013) Back
| 
