Crossrail passenger movements investigation

Crossrail Committee investigates 'flawed figures' for passenger movements at Liverpool Street.

The House of Commons Select Committee examining the Crossrail Bill has started work with an inquiry into the scheme for the new Liverpool Street station, where both the British Land Company and the City of London Corporation believe that Crossrail's passenger flow assessments at peak times are based on incorrect assumptions.

In its petition about the impact of Crossrail on its properties in the Liverpool Street area, British Land claims that the number of passengers at certain peak times could be three times the Crossrail assessment.

Whereas the Crossrail scheme places reliance for passenger movements to and from its Liverpool Street platforms on a passageway connecting with the Underground ticket concourse, "your petitioners have engaged consultants who have advised them that at certain peak times, the number of passengers could be three times Crossrail's assessment, that congestion will occur even before new developments are taken into account, and that the Crossrail figures are flawed because they are based on incorrect assumptions regarding the numbers of existing and future employees who would travel by Crossrail and exit via the existing Liverpool Street station".

In its own petition, the City of London Corporation says it has two interlinked concerns about the works proposed at Liverpool Street.

"Both stem from a concern that the number of commuters using the station and the associated Underground station has been under-estimated by the promoters.

"Your petitioners contend that the current design of the concourse linking the proposed railway to the station is wholly inadequate to accommodate the numbers of passengers that can be expected to use it.

The current proposal would result in overcrowding in the existing London Underground Liverpool Street concourse".

The City is proposing that an additional access to the Crossrail station should be added at street level.

Its second concern relates to the impact on commuters of the construction works going on in the area.

Here the corporation makes plain its concern that the works will result in 'very serious congestion', both at the Crossrail station and the Underground station, with consequential effects at the Bank Underground station.

The City of London's petition says that the Secretary of State for Transport (sponsor of the Crossrail Bill), should be required to undertake a full assessment of the impact on pedestrian and bus traffic of the proposed worksite in Liverpool Street.

"The nominated undertaker should be required to revise the plans for the construction of the eastern Liverpool Street ticket hall taking into account the need for unimpeded pedestrian traffic flows leaving the station and effective bus links." Revised plans to ease congestion.

British Land's concern about the prospect of congestion at Liverpool Street arises from the fact that the company owns several properties in the vicinity of the Crossrail station planned to connect with the London terminus of the Great Eastern Railway and the London Underground.

The railway terminus, famously refurbished in the 1980s, attracts more than 120 million visitors every year.

British Land contends that failure to provide a new ticket concourse at Liverpool Street serving Crossrail directly would result in the station having insufficient capacity to support regeneration and employment creation objectives in the eastern areas of the City of London and its fringes.

"The promoter must reassess its plans based on data and a methodology to be agreed with the Corporation of London and others, and on the basis of this reassessment revise its plans for its proposed Liverpool Street Crossrail station to allow for greater capacity at the eastern end of the station".

Without such a revision, the company claims, Crossrail would increase congestion and passenger crowding in the Liverpool Street station ticket concourses.

A lack of capacity here would, it is alleged, inhibit efforts to create new employment in areas served by the station.

British Land is developing its own proposals for a new ticket hall and entrance to Crossrail at Liverpool Street and is, with the support of other petitioners, proposing amendments to the Bill which would enable these to be constructed.

The company has two major property interests close to the station which are subject to partial acquisition or use under the Bill.

They are 100 Liverpool Street held under a long lease by its subsidiary Six Broadgate, and the Great Eastern Hotel in Liverpool Street.

Others close to the station but not subject to compulsory purchase are the freeholds and leaseholds of office premises in Eldon Street, and Nos.1 and 2 Broadgate.

The British Land petition points out that 100 Liverpool Street is the operational headquarters of the UBS Investment Bank where financial services are provided on a 24 hour, 365 day a year basis.

It houses around 2,800 staff of whom approximately 1,000 are involved in dealing operations.

"The building is critical to the global operations of UBS and is also an important venue for holding meetings with external visitors.

The activities of the occupants depend upon a quiet work environment and uninterrupted telephonic and computer communication with others and upon sensitive and delicate computer and other electronic equipment".

Since these activities are particularly sensitive to noise and vibration, British Land is asking that the length and physical effect of the works are minimised.

It is also asking to be consulted on the phasing and timing of the works, and seeks an assurance that there should be no restrictions resulting from the works on the potential for redevelopment of the site.

With regard to the proposed compulsory acquisition at No.100, the company has said in common with other landowners that this is unnecessary because the Department for Transport should be able to reach agreement with them for any use of the land.

Objections to NATM for station caverns.

British Land together with other property owners is objecting to the proposal to use sprayed concrete lining for works below ground, citing the implications of this method of construction for the structural integrity of buildings such as 100 Liverpool Street.

The company is similarly concerned about the impact of the works at the Great Eastern Hotel location where on present plans the main running tunnels are due to pass beneath.

"Your petitioners are concerned that the structural integrity of this Grade II listed building will be threatened by the construction of the works, that its physical condition will be damaged, and that it will be injuriously affected by noise, vibration, dust and disruption to access and services".

The same questions arise at a number of City of Westminster sites where the main running tunnels are due to pass beneath properties owned or leased by British Land.

The objection to use of the sprayed concrete lining method for the stations built underground, otherwise known as the New Austrian Tunnelling Method, is based on its connection with a number of tunnel collapses in the recent past.

Assurances are sought as in other petitions that this technique will be carried out safely and correctly, asking that an independent review of the method is carried out prior to the caverns being constructed.

Back to top