Examination of Witnesses (Questions 3560
- 3579)
3560. MR WHEELER: I disagree. I think
the presence—
3561. CHAIRMAN: You are asking questions
"you do not think" at the moment.
3562. MR WHEELER: I am sorry. How do
you therefore assess how a structure is going to behave, if you
cannot get inside it and look at it, if that structure contains
elements like cast iron and underpinned foundations and concrete
basements that are not apparent from the outside?
(Mr Berryman) I am not sure that those matters make any difference
at all to the kind of information that we are seeking. As I said
this morning, it is the strain on the building which leads to
any other damage which might result to the building, such as cracking
of features, and so on. There seems to be an idea that these buildings
do not move. In fact, the strain caused, on the fac"ade of
one of the buildings which I was looking at over lunchtime, by
the sun shining on it in summer will be greater than the strain
caused by tunnel-boring machines passing underneath. We are talking
about very, very, very small movements, typically the kind of
stress/strain ratios we are talking about are 5 millimetres in
a 30-metre long frontage, which is that much (indicating) in quite
a big building of 100 feet long. It is not something that does
not happen every day, due to thermal movement and general movement
of the ground.
3563. Can you tell me, if you do not actually
carry out these internal inspections, how do you record the vulnerable
and the special internal features that your policy says that you
are searching for and that you have stated you are doing these
assessments in accordance with PPG 15, and taking account of vulnerable
features like plastered ceilings and cornices and mouldings? How
do you assess those if you cannot actually ever see them?
(Mr Berryman) We will see them. I thought I had explained
several times now that we will see them before the tunnel-boring
machines come through. I stress, again, it is the strain on the
building which will cause damage to those features. You are an
architect and I expect that you know that as well. It is the strain
on the building which will cause damage to those buildings, and
that is the thing that we are trying to calculate to work out
what it is.
3564. What you have reported, on 15 February
2008 (tell me if this is correct and still your position), is
not that you "will" do it; what it says is that you
"have" established a detailed understanding of the historic
character or significance of these buildings concerned in accordance
with the criteria laid down in PPG 15, and in particular identified
any features of particular architectural interest and sensitivity—for
example, delicate plasterwork and fine stucco mouldings. Now you
are saying you will do it, not that you have done it.
(Mr Berryman) We have done that as far as the external features
of the building are concerned. We have not necessarily done it
as far as the internal features are concerned.
3565. That is not what this statement says,
I am afraid. It says that you have done it, and in particular
you have identified features of architectural interest and so
on.
(Mr Berryman) We have, and the reports that we have put before
you make that clear, do they not? I am sorry, I cannot answer
the question.
3566. What I am confused about is that you say
you will do it and yet what you have published says you have done
it. As you say you have done it and because we know you have not
done it, we are asking for an undertaking that you do it. It is
very fundamental to our undertaking.
(Mr Berryman) I do not think there will be a problem with
that. We need to work on the wording, of course, but I do not
think there will be a problem.
3567. Thank you. I put the undertaking before
the Committee, and if we can make progress on that that would
be good. So you have clarified that it has not yet been done but
it will be done.
(Mr Berryman) Not as far as internal features are concerned,
no.
3568. CHAIRMAN: Mr Wheeler, Ms Cove has
been waiting all afternoon. She did not finish yesterday. I think
it would only be fair if she was allowed to take the stage fairly
soon. I do not want to interrupt your train of thought, but I
think we will have to listen to her fairly soon.
3569. MR WHEELER: Yes, it was that first
point we dealt with that rather interrupted proceedings.
3570. CHAIRMAN: I am afraid, to some
extent, it was to your benefit.
3571. MR WHEELER: Yes. Petitioners are
concerned that they would be put to proof in respect of any damage
caused: is this damage caused by the result of tunnelling or is
it just a natural feature of their historic fabric? How are you
going to approach this?
(Mr Berryman) Where does it say that?
3572. Does it need to say it? I am saying Petitioners
are concerned; that is why we are here today. It may be unclear,
when damage is caused, whether it is as a result of tunnelling
or of the natural historic fabric of the buildings.
(Mr Berryman) The answer to that question is
that we need to rely on our experts on both sides, certainly on
our experts, to assess that. This is why, as far as the condition
survey is concerned, the surveyors involved will be engaged on
our joint behalf, and we will pay for them of course, but they
will be engaged on behalf of both us and you, and we will rely
on their professional expertise to answer those questions properly.
The Petition of Spitalfields Community
Association
3573. How can you actually prove the cause of
damage without monitoring the buildings for an extended period
beforehand?
(Mr Berryman) We will be monitoring the buildings
for a period beforehand. I think that is covered in the Settlement
Deed.
3574. What sort of time frame are we talking
about?
(Mr Berryman) I think it is nine months, but I am relying
on my memory, I am afraid.
3575. LORD YOUNG OF NORWOOD GREEN: It
says for one year, according to your ground settlement information
paper. "Where practical, it is proposed to carry out full
one-year area background monitoring to establish seasonal trends
with building-specific monitoring commencing at least one month
prior to the commencement of the works". It goes on, "Monitoring
will continue until all potentially damaging settlement due to
the Crossrail works has ceased".
(Mr Berryman) As your Lordships are probably aware, London
goes up and down a bit through the different parts of the year,
so it is necessary to have that background position so that we
can identify what is due to tunnelling and what is just due to
the natural cycle.
3576. MR MOULD: I hesitate to add further,
but just picking up on Lord Young's point, in the case of Spitalfields
the monitoring will actually continue for a period of seven years
after the works because that is what we have undertaken to the
House of Commons Select Committee that we will do.
3577. MR WHEELER: Do you agree, in the
light of the substantial alterations that I have described to
a number of these buildings, that a structural survey is really
required of all these properties?
(Mr Berryman) I think certainly some of them which have been
significantly altered may benefit from a structural survey, yes,
but I keep going back to the same point, that we genuinely do
not expect the movement of the buildings to be significant at
all, irrespective of whether they have been altered or not. Certainly
when we inspect the interior of the building, if we find any particularly
sensitive or unusual features, then that will be something that
will be checked.
3578. The reason we have raised that question
is because we are very keen to get to the bottom of the issue
of differential settlement. Would it then be possible to review
these structural surveys together or even your internal inspections
in order to quantify the differential settlement?
(Mr Berryman) Well, we certainly will make that information
available, yes.
3579. At some time we will be able to look at
the buildings together rather than individually?
(Mr Berryman) Do you mean together between ourselves and
the owners or together as a group?
| 
