Examination of Witnesses (Questions 11320
- 11339)
11320. As a result of our meetings with Crossrail,
we have been able to boil these issues down to one major issue
which we say is overarching: the local impact of decisions yet
to be taken during the detailed design phase. This forms section
one of the exhibit, which is now on the screen, and is broken
down into two subheadings, as you can see. Virtually all the other
issues set out in the exhibit depend on decisions on detailed
design which will be taken later. In section two, which is at
the bottom of the page, we have included the most striking example
of present uncertainty about detailed design, and the potential
impact of it upon the local community, that is the design of the
Crossrail station at Paddington and its impact, after the end
of construction, upon local bus stops and stands, and upon short-term
parking facilities near the station which are needed because of
Paddington being a major transport node.
11321. On the next page of this exhibit we set
out the position as we now understand it on noise from trains
in tunnels; this being the major element, for us, of groundborne
noise and vibration. My witness will explain why, despite the
agreement of the local authorities to Information Paper D10, we
wish to bring this issue to your Lordships' attention. As you
know, Mr Payne will be appearing before you tomorrow.
11322. At this point I will merely observe that
to the south of Paddington Station the tunnels pass under an almost
wholly residential area, much of which has very low levels of
background noise, where the tunnels are relatively shallow. If
I may be permitted to contradict what Ms Lieven has said. at the
northern end of the section the tunnels are less than 15 metres
deep because there are three houses at the northern end which
qualify for floating slab track. The depth of 24 metres is at
the southern end where the tunnels pass under the Central Line
and run under Hyde Park. The tunnels are declining from some 15
metres to some 24 metres in this section, which is less than half
a kilometre long.
11323. In section 4 of the exhibit, starting
on page 6 out of 9, we show the key elements of present uncertainty
on six other issues, which are also issues where we say that the
local impact of later detailed designs is, to a degree, indeterminate
at present.[10]
11324. We accept that detailed design may well
alleviate our concerns, but the difficulty is that we do not know
what it is at present. We accept that the local authority will
consult us under the Schedule 7 procedure when matters get to
that point.
11325. I also indicated to the Promoter, that
despite the words in italics at the head of section 4, where I
say that these issues are included as further examples of uncertainty
but we may not produce evidence on them, we do wish to allude
to the problem of the off-road capacity of the taxi rank, which
is part of the first issue listed in section 4 at the bottom of
the middle section, and to the question of the environmental impact
of lorry routes towards the railhead at Paddington New Yard.
11326. Finally, for the sake of completeness,
the headings of a large number of issues included in our petition
where we are content with the assurances now offered.
11327. I call Mr John Zamit.
MR JOHN
ZAMIT, Sworn Examined by
MR WALTON
11328. MR WALTON: Mr Zamit, will you
please tell the Committee who you are and where you live?
(Mr Zamit) Good morning,
my Lords. I am John Zamit and I have lived for many years at 2
Claremont Court, Queensway, London W2 5HX, which is in the northern
section of Queensway, in Bayswater, and not far from Paddington
Station. I am chairman of the South East Bayswater Residents'
Association, S-E-B-R-A, or SEBRA for short.
11329. SEBRA is one of the four founder members
of PRACT?
(Mr Zamit) Yes, its area runs westwards from Paddington Station
into Bayswater. SEBRA was founded in 1970 and is recognised by
Westminster City Council as the amenity society for its area..
The alignment of Crossrail, from the footbridge up to Sussex Gardens
which can be seen on the third map, 05-003, runs at the end or
underneath SEBRA's area.[11]
11330. What is the general attitude of SEBRA
to Crossrail?
(Mr Zamit) Along with the other founder
members of PRACT we support the principle of Crossrail for the
benefits it will bring to the local community and to London's
economy but seek protection from the adverse effects of construction
and operation. We have kept our members well informed about the
Crossrail project. For instance, our last newsletter had a three-page
article with colour illustrations devoted to PRACT's petition
to your Lordships' House and our prospective appearance before
you. Our members take a great deal of interest in Crossrail, and
many of them hope they are still going to be alive when it finally
gets going to take a ride on it!
11331. I too, if I may say so! Could we please
turn now to detailed design issues.
(Mr Zamit) PRACT's concerns are summarised
in section 1 of the synoptic table which is on page 5 out of nine
in the exhibit. Let me say at the outset that we generally welcome
the establishment of the Paddington liaison group, following the
conclusion of the Select Committee in the House of Commons; and
PRACT and its founder member associations will participate in
the meetings of this group.
11332. What then are your concerns?
(Mr Zamit) The Promoter has told us that
all designs for rail-connected structures, for which planning
permission is conferred by the Bill once enacted, will be subject
to the Schedule 7 procedure, under which the nominated undertaker
puts detailed designs to qualifying local authorities, with an
eight-week period for the authority to state reasonable grounds
for objection. We are confident that, if this eight-week period
can be observed, the City Council will go through consultation
procedures with PRACT and its founder members as best possible,
probably in a similar way to consultation on ordinary planning
applications. The difficulty as we see it is about what happens
before then. I hope it will not sound too presumptuous when I
say that PRACT believes it could offer useful inputs to the design
process at the formative stage from our local knowledge, and also
could feed in thoughts about the impact of alternatives upon local
residents and businesses, where there are feasible options being
considered as alternatives.
11333. What do you see as the solution to this
problem?
(Mr Zamit) I believe that it lies through
a straightforward adaptation of the liaison group already established.
We realise that as the detailed design proceeds there will be
pressure for rapid progress in order to keep on the critical path.
We therefore ask that Crossrail should undertake to call on an
ad-hoc basis for more frequent meetings when required during the
detailed design stage, probably of a small subsection of the large
main group and not confined to long evening meetings. The long
evening meetings have tended to take on-board some of the views,
but it is a very packed-out meeting, a long meeting, and much
of it is, "We'll get back to you later" or "We're
still working on it" or "The design's changing".
Above all, we ask that Crossrail should not forget, even when
under pressure from deadlines, their offer to bring detailed design
issues to residents. PRACT is willing to act as a framework for
participation in such meetings if the liaison group so decides.
When a firm design has eventually evolved and is put to the City
Council under the Schedule 7 procedure, there will still be a
formal opportunity for all concerned to comment, but at that stage
it becomes cumbersome and time-consuming to get into the consideration
of possible alternatives. It is sensible to have discussions earlier
rather than later, and in this way time can be saved in the long-run.
11334. What are your concerns about the design
of sub-surface installations, in particular those under Eastbourne
Terrace where, as we understand it, the design of the sub-surface
section is not covered by the Schedule 7 procedure?
(Mr Zamit) Our understanding is that the sub-surface construction
is covered by the Environmental Minimum Requirements which deal,
amongst other things, with the construction and heritage impact,
but apparently do not place an obligation upon Crossrail to consult
with qualifying authorities about the designs as such, except
to the extent that the sub-surface design impacts upon the surface.
An example of this at Paddington would be the location and design
above the surface of the two ventilation shafts which are to be
located between Eastbourne Terrace and the Departures Road, whose
impact on the surface is part and parcel of the sub-surface design.
On the new options for the design of this station, they can be
seen, where indicated, on the Promoter's Exhibit 04-002.[12]
Their impact above the surface would be covered by the Schedule
7 procedure, but not the sub-surface design of the station. We
trust, therefore, that Crossrail will consult about the sub-surface
design through the Paddington Liaison Group in just the same way
as on the above-surface design.
11335. Let us turn, therefore, to section 2
of the synoptic table, page 005, still on the first page.[13]
What are your concerns about the three options of the design of
the Crossrail station at Paddington which, I understand, may now
have been reduced to two options?
(Mr Zamit) Yes, on the direct impact of construction,
we rest upon the Environmental Minimum Requirements and welcome
Crossrail's undertaking, as set out in the Environmental Statement
published with the Bill, to keep either Eastbourne Terrace or
Departures Road open for a single lane of traffic in each direction
throughout the construction period, except for occasional possession
over the weekends or for very short periods.
11336. What concerns do you have about the permanent
impact of the construction of the station underneath Eastbourne
Terrace?
(Mr Zamit) Well, here there will be a
substantial narrowing of Eastbourne Terrace and some widening
of Departures Road under all options, it seems. The Promoter's
Exhibit 04-002, headed `Possible layout of Eastbourne Terrace',
indicates that the carriageway of Eastbourne Terrace between the
kerbs of pavement, now over 15 metres wide in most places, will
be reduced to about 10 metres, except where there are bays for
bus stops and the like, and these would not exist on the option
which retains the light spine, although maybe that has now been
dropped. In our meetings with Crossrail last month, at each meeting
we were shown a revised scheme of what was proposed, and no doubt
it will change again in the future. Since the ventilation shafts
need to be near the centre of the space between the frontages
of buildings, the carriageways of Departures Road will become
somewhat wider and would be at least 8 metres wide, it seems,
between the pavement, which is mostly needed on one side only,
and the wall or barrier on the other side. Another way of looking
at it is to note that now Eastbourne Terrace is a four- to five-lane
road with two pavements and that Departures Road has only two
lanes for much of it, and three lanes in the centre, with only
one pavement. After Crossrail, however, there must be the equality
in the widths, unless the ventilation shafts are displaced a lot
from the centre line.
11337. What are the present uses of the two
roads?
(Mr Zamit) Very extensive at present.
Eastbourne Terrace now accommodates extensive bus stands at its
northern end and a bus stop on either side, crossing the middle.
These stops are much-used for boarding and alighting by not only
our members in the area, but for people using Paddington Station
or the Underground station. Eastbourne Terrace also has 33 pay-and-display
bays which are always full, two disabled bays, two or three drop-off
spaces, a motorcycle bay which, I recently saw, contained no fewer
than 54 motorcycles or scooters and two coach parking bays. Departures
Road accommodates a set-down for hire cars and chauffeur-driven
cars as well as taxis and space for delivery vehicles, and in
fact under the present arrangements Departures Road is not solely
for the use of taxis and you could drop off people or arrange
to pick them up if they are waiting for you. Our concerns are
two-fold. First, there will be an extensive loss of space for
these necessary activities on all options for the design of the
station and especially, we were fearing, on the light spine, although
that has now perhaps fallen away. It is easy to say, as the exhibit
suggests, that space for these uses can be found elsewhere, but
I do not see where the space can be found and I am concerned that
it could only be found at the cost of existing spaces for residents'
parking in the highly residential streets where already residents'
parking spaces are much in demand. The second aspect of our concern
is that this overall loss could be alleviated somewhat if any
spare space in Departures Road, a private road, beyond the necessary
set-down and delivery spaces remained available for uses not directly
related to the station, such as the motorcycle parking which is,
as I say, full up and is really solely for the use of people using
Paddington Station and it is not used by our members who have
cycle parking elsewhere. Our understanding is that the ownership
of Departures Road reverts to Network Rail once Crossrail construction
is completed. In our opinion, it is essential that the widened
Departures Road should be put to the best possible use for the
benefit of everybody.
11338. Can we now turn to noise from trains
in tunnels.
(Mr Zamit) I am no expert on this, but
my understanding is that the design standards are based on the
predicted outcomes from the use of standard form track with an
uncertainty margin added. We suppose that there has been experience
of predictions and outcomes in the case of similar modern standard
form track when the Jubilee Line Extension and the London section
of the Channel Tunnel Rail Link were built, but, in answer to
our question, Crossrail told us in their letter of 1 May, "We
are not aware of any published outturn measurements of groundborne
noise from either the Channel Tunnel Rail Link London tunnels
or the Jubilee Line Extension and so have no such information
to pass on to you. In practice, measurements of groundborne noise
from these services would only take place in the event of complaints,
and we are not aware of any complaints to date". There is
little comfort for Paddington residents affected by these works.
We do not know whether there are comparable incidents of shallow
tunnels under quiet residential areas in these lines, so we do
not feel that Paddington residents can put much weight on the
absence of complaints. Once the line is built, it is built and
people may not see much point in complaining. They would just
have to put up with the noise that they hear, especially in the
early morning when background noise is very low. Whilst we welcome
the inclusion of a five-decibel margin for uncertainty, it does
occur to us that there must be some basis for this margin and
we are not aware of what the basis is.
11339. Do you have any thoughts on local conditions
as they might affect the predictions for the PRACT area?
(Mr Zamit) Well, we know from the Government's
response to the conclusion of the Select Committee in the House
of Commons that three houses at the north end of Spring Street
qualify for floating-slab track or non-standard track form of
similar effectiveness on the basis that the foundations are less
than 15 metres from the apex of the tunnels. The only named house
was the pub, the Pride of Paddington, which is on the corner of
Spring Street and Craven Road. The response stated that, where
there are basements, an allowance of 2.5 metres was made. We do
not know whether all these houses have basements, but the pub
has a cellar, even though the Circle Line runs beneath it, so
presumably the foundations are correspondingly lower which implies
that, at this point, the tunnels are some 17.5 metres below the
ground level.
10 Committee Ref: A61, PRACT- Outstanding Issues-Synoptic
Table (WESTCC-6_05-006) Back
11
Committee Ref: A61, Paddington Station-Crossrail proposals (WESTCC-6_05-003) Back
12
Committee Ref: A61, Paddington Crossrail-Possible layout of Eastbourne
Terrace (WESTCC-6_04-002) Back
13
Committee Ref: A61, PRACT- Outstanding Issues-Synoptic Table
(WESTCC-6_05-005) Back
|
