Examination of Witnesses (Questions 5680
- 5699)
5680. We cannot record it?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) If we could persuade
the hotel to turn the air-conditioning off again, we could indeed
go back and record the sound, but you really need to have the
experience of it being radiated from the structure you are standing
in, and bringing in loudspeakers does not do that. So there would
be some differences and, justifiably, some Petitioners might say
we were not exactly reproducing the right circumstances.
5681. BARONESS FOOKES: I think you said
you had known the Spitalfields area well for 45 years.
(Mr Thornely-Taylor)
I did say that, my Lady.
5682. Can you put your hand on your heart and
say that if you were the owner of Ms Jones's property or any other
property there, you would have no worries about the underground
system?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) I can put my hand
on my heart and say if I lived in those properties I would have
no worries about the underground system.
5683. LORD JONES OF CHELTENHAM: You mentioned
that your practice has dealt with large projects both in the UK
and overseas. Are there any examples of tunnelled railways overseas
which have required a higher track quality than what is being
proposed for this tunnel?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor)
I can describe the range of my experience in overseas tunnel designs.
The normal method of track support is resilient support of the
rail of the kind I have described for the basic system, the standard
system, for Crossrail. In some tunnels where they have a different
type of tunnel—in some cities they are tunnelling through
rock and rather than having a circular, bored tunnel they have
a box-shape tunnel—sometimes conventional ballasted track
is used laid on a resilient under-ballast mat made of a rubber
section. Floating track slab is also widely used. I am aware of
one system which uses floating track slab as its standard from
end to end. I do not think I can think of more than one. There
are many systems which, like Crossrail, have a mixture of a resiliently
supported rail with defined lengths of floating slab to deal with
special cases in exactly the same manner as will be required by
Table 1 on the screen.
5684. So if this Committee—and I do not
know if we have the power, my Lord Chairman—were to say
we think you should do floating slab all the way through the tunnel,
you are saying that would cost considerably more than the projected
cost.
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) Yes, my Lord.
5685. You are probably the wrong person to talk
to (Mr Berryman is the right person), but what proportion of the
tunnel boring costs and track is the proportion of the total cost
of the project?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor) It would be wrong
of me to give you a figure off the top of my head, my Lord. That
figure can be derived.
5686. LORD BROOKE OF ALVETHORPE: Are
Havering coming back?
5687. CHAIRMAN: Havering are coming back,
yes.
5688. LORD BROOKE OF ALVETHORPE: It is
very difficult to take an individual Petition in isolation.
5689. MR TAYLOR: My Lord, I am afraid
that Havering are not actually dealing with the groundborne noise
issue on behalf of the local authorities; that is another Petitioner,
that is the London Borough of Camden. Havering are dealing with
the noise issues relating to fixed installations, so vent shafts
and trackside noise sources—so a slightly different matter.
5690. LORD BROOKE OF ALVETHORPE: So when
do we get—
5691. CHAIRMAN: Camden are dealing generically,
are they, with the noise from the actual underground trains?
5692. MR TAYLOR: They are. I am trying
to remember when they are due to come. I think it is either next
week or the week after. It is quite soon.
(Mr Thornely-Taylor)
My Lord, I can say that the discussions we are having with Camden
are proving very fruitful and it is not impossible that they do
not appear, on the basis of my own experience of the meetings
we are having.
5693. BARONESS FOOKES: Because they will
be satisfied, you believe?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor)
We are working to finesse the approach to the procurement of the
railway that I have been describing which will be put in terms
which satisfy their objectives because they have policies in their
own boroughs that need to be consistent with the approach that
we are adopting. We are working on the detail of the information
paper to satisfy their concerns and implement the procurement
process that I have described from the Crossrail point of view.
5694. LORD SNAPE: So if Camden do come
to give evidence, Mr Thornely-Taylor, will they be calling you
as an expert witness again so that we have another opportunity
to cross-examine you?
(Mr Thornely-Taylor)
I believe that will be the case, my Lord.
5695. MR TAYLOR: Indeed, we would. Can
I just say, in answer to the question that the noble Lord, Lord
Jones, asked about the additional cost of providing floating slab
through the whole of the underground section over and above that
which is already part of the project, that is a matter that we
can go away and find the answer to and report back to the Committee,
if that is acceptable. I will make sure that work is done.
5696. CHAIRMAN: Mr Thornely-Taylor, I
hope you are not going to be too successful. At the present moment
Camden are due to come on Tuesday 1 April. I hope that you are
not going to be so successful that they do not tell us anything
at all.
(Mr Thornely-Taylor)
I will take my foot off the accelerator then, my Lord.
5697. No, I do not want you to do that, but
what we want, I think, from the generic exercises with various
councils is a conclusion about the extent to which they have reached
agreement with you and what that agreement is. I do not want Camden
to get put off doing that exercise, because that is going to be
of very great interest to Parliament, apart from individual Petitioners.
5698. MR TAYLOR: What we are hoping to
do, my Lord, is to agree the precise form of words in the information
paper so that we can, hopefully, present an information paper
which is agreed between the Promoter and the lead local authority
on that particular noise issue. For example, with Havering it
would be an agreed Information Paper D25. With Camden we hope
to have an agreed form of IP D10 that you would then have and
you can see the system that both sides think is acceptable and
put forward. We are still crossing our fingers that we are going
to get to that point, because if we are not you are going to have
a lot of interesting debate about various technical aspects of
groundborne noise, my Lord.
5699. CHAIRMAN: Whatever it is that is
agreed as an information paper will take the place of whatever
it is that we have got now.
| 
