Examination of Witnesses (Questions 7540
- 7559)
7540. "The Promoter agrees to continue
discussions with the London Borough of Bexley, in consultation
with the London Borough of Greenwich and with TfL, with a view
to updating the Crossrail transport assessment and developing
a better understanding of local highway performance in response
to the opening of Crossrail. The proposals for Thames Gateway
Bridge and the Greenwich Waterfront Transit are both local projects
which have the potential to have an impact upon the local highway
network. The Promoter therefore further undertakes to work with
the London Borough of Bexley, in consultation with the London
Borough of Greenwich, TfL and others, as part of the update work
to ensure the potential cumulative impacts of these projects on
the Abbey Wood highway network are properly understood",
and then if your Lordship goes back to undertaking 153, I read
this to the Committee yesterday but just to remind you, "The
undertaking we propose is this: the Promoter agrees to continue
discussions with the London Borough of Bexley, in consultation
with the London Borough of Greenwich, with a view to agreeing
the highway improvements that may be necessary to mitigate the
impact of the Crossrail scheme associated with passengers arriving
and departing from Abbey Wood Station."[2]
7541. So that is really what we have expanded
in the recent undertaking, and then this bit is what will happen
next: "The Promoter will fund reasonable transport measures
that are agreed by the London Borough of Greenwich, the London
Borough of Bexley and the Promoter to be reasonably necessary
in order to mitigate the impact of the Crossrail project as a
result of passengers arriving at and departing from Abbey Wood
Station."
7542. Just to put that in context, my Lord,
what that is seeking to do is to acknowledge some of the concerns
that Mr Carrier has made that there is a level of uncertainty
in this area about impact on highway network because of the uncertainty
over Thames Gateway Bridge and the Greenwich Waterfront Transit.
The only way to deal with this uncertainty, and this has been
agreed with both the relevant highway authorities, Bexley and
Greenwich, is to undertake further assessment work, which will
be done and is covered by both undertakings, and then for all
the relevant parties to get together and decide what works, if
any, need to be done and who pays for which bits, because obviously,
it is self-evident, my Lord, the majority of any traffic impact
is going to come from the Bridge and not from Crossrail, so there
is going to have to be a dividing up, if there are any works necessary,
between who is responsible for the cost of which works. It is
the view of the highway authorities, TfL and Crossrail that the
sensible way to do this is through future discussions as various
matters become clearer and then future agreement, and that is
all covered by these two undertakings.
7543. CHAIRMAN: So that is your contribution
to solving this problem?
7544. MS LIEVEN: Yes. First of all to
discuss, consult, to agree works, and then to do the works with
a division of cost responsibility, depending on who is responsible
for which bits, and I would like to emphasise to the Committee
that there is plenty of time to do all this because the Committee
knows Crossrail is not programmed to open until 2017, and so there
is no question that there is enough time to carry out the assessments,
promote any relevant traffic or road orders, if there were any
needed, and then to carry out the works, so there is absolutely
no justification for delaying the Crossrail project, as Mr Carrier
would like to do, for all these works to be placed in the schedule
now. In fact, to do so would be really impossible because, until
we know what is happening with the Bridge and the Transit, nobody
knows what works will be necessary. There may be many works; there
may be no works; it may be somewhere in the middle.
7545. Just having a look, then, at Mr Carrier's
paragraph (17), if we go through each aspect, "(a) there
is available a full TIA with reliable assumptions and traffic
figures", that is wholly covered by the undertakings which
will require us to carry out such a full TIA; "(b) the scheme's
conflict with the TGB, Crossrail and GWT schemes has been appraised",
that is part of the assessment which is covered by the undertaking;
"(c) the mitigation measures have been fully identified and
funded", again, that is part of the undertakings that such
measures will be identified and then the funding agreed; "(d)
there has been public consultation on the mitigation measures"—any
traffic or road orders that are found to be necessary through
this process will be subject to the normal statutory consultation.[3]
Because they are not works within the Crossrail Bill they will
have to be carried out under other statutory powers and will be
subject to precisely the same consultation as would normally be
the case. What that consultation is will depend on the nature
of the work to be carried out and decisions of the boroughs in
question, but it is not a matter that the Committee need to be
in the least bit concerned about because it is all covered by
the normal rules of consultation. It is not that anything can
be slipped through under the Crossrail Bill umbrella that will
not be consulted upon.
7546. CHAIRMAN: There will be plenty
of time for the reopened inquiry into the traffic from the Bridge
to take place and be concluded before anything needs to be done
about this undertaking?
7547. MS LIEVEN: Absolutely, my Lord.
Because Crossrail is such a major project and is going to take
so long, I do not want to speculate as to the timing on the Thames
Gateway Bridge inquiry because it is nothing to do with us, but
even on the most pessimistic series of assumptions there would
be plenty of time for the inquiry to be reconvened, for the Secretary
of State to make a decision, for appraisals to be carried out
and, then, any necessary road orders to be promoted and implemented.
It is inconceivable that time would run out given that Crossrail
does not open until 2017.
7548. CHAIRMAN: The other thing is this,
Ms Lieven. We all understand the Register of Undertakings and
Assurances but I am not certain that Mr Carrier knows what is
the effect of this putting in of the text that you have just shown
us on the screen this morning. What is achieved by that?
7549. MS LIEVEN: My Lord, these are undertakings
to the borough that the two boroughs, the highway authorities,
can place complete reliance on, and we can be absolutely confident
from the history of these matters that they will ensure that those
undertakings are abided by, and it is the Secretary of State who
gives the undertakings. So Mr Carrier can entirely rely, one,
on the Secretary of State giving the undertakings but, two, on
the two local authorities in question being able to act upon them
and take appropriate action to enforce them. If Mr Carrier has
any questions about that we have the relevant Petition manager
here so he can answer any questions outside.
7550. CHAIRMAN: Mr Carrier, you are perfectly
entitled to ask questions about this and there is a witness here
that you can ask them of, if you would like. Please do not feel
inhibited; there is plenty of time.
7551. MR CARRIER: Thank you, my Lord.
I would like to.
MR DAVID
ANDERSON, Sworn Examined
by MS LIEVEN
7552. MS LIEVEN: Mr Anderson, you gave
extensive evidence in the House of Commons but I do not think
you have given evidence to this Committee before.
7553. CHAIRMAN: No.
7554. MS LIEVEN: Can you explain, first
of all, what your position with Crossrail is, and then something
of your professional background?
(Mr Anderson) Yes. I am currently the
engineering director for the project. I was previously the head
of planning and it was in that role that I was extensively engaged
in the transport assessments at Abbey Wood. My background is in
transportation projects, planning and development of them, over
20, 25 years. I was previously at BAA plc before joining Crossrail.
7555. CHAIRMAN: Mr Anderson, to get the
ball rolling two of my colleagues have questions for you even
before you have started.
7556. BARONESS FOOKES: Mr Anderson, I
would like to inquire about the impact of Crossrail on the station
itself, bearing in mind that we find it more difficult obviously
to look at the Bridge project. What is going to be the impact
of cars arriving? What ability is there for parking or not parking?
Can you go into that practical side which we know will happen?
(Mr Anderson)
Yes. There will be a significant increase in the use of the station
when Crossrail starts to serve the station. There will be twelve
Crossrail trains an hour serving the station and that will obviously
attract a number of passengers. The situation in relation to access
is that, going forward, increasingly we would expect passengers
wanting to access the station either to walk or to use public
transport modes or, should the Transit be provided, obviously
to use that improvement. It is the case generally in developed
urban areas that extension of parking is unlikely to be possible:
we have not assumed any extension of parking. Indeed, there is
some loss through the construction of the station itself. I am
not sure whether that answers your question fully, my Lord, or
is there a specific matter on which I can provide more information?
7557. I am trying to foresee the impact of the
opening of the station on the roads around. Presumably you have
done studies of pedestrian and other movements?
(Mr Anderson) Correct. We would not expect
there to be an increase in the number of people travelling to
the station by car and parking because of the constraints on parking
provision. There will be some increase in car access to the station,
people dropping off passengers, but the majority of the increase
we would expect to be through walking, increasingly cycling and
the use of bus services.
7558. Are there provisions for cyclists to leave
their cycles?
(Mr Anderson) That would be part of the
station redevelopment, yes.
7559. And, for people dropping off, are there
plans to make this easy without impeding general traffic flows?
(Mr Anderson) Again, as part of the detailed
design of the station there would be measures outside the station
for that provision.
2 Crossrail Ref: P48, Crossrail Register of Undertakings
and Assurances No. 153 (SCN-20080402-002) Back
3
Crossrail Ref: P48, Petition No. 4-Mr Roy Alfred Carrier (SCN-20080402-003) Back
|
