Brunel Bridge pylon impressions
Application 15/02485/CROS as at January 2016
This article is intended to contribute to information on the implications of Crossrail for the Parish of Taplow, based on sources checked in March 2005. A further, more specific analysis is also available.
Crossrail is the plan to electrify the Western Mainline from Maidenhead, through London and then extending beyond London, eastwards to Shenfield, and south to Abbey Wood. It is planned to be operational in 2013. Temporary impacts would arise from a construction period at Taplow of approximately four months.
Permanent effects at Taplow (along with Burnham, included as a Crossrail station) would be substantial, and be likely to affect the Parish as a whole. They would include immediate Increases in numbers of rail passengers, Taplow becoming a more practical destination for London bound commuters from the north of the County, and our attractive Parish being more accessible to potential settlers from central London and beyond.
- Taplow Station: will be busier than now!
Thus, although the obvious appeal of Crossrail would be direct and frequent rail services into London, the project would bring with it increased local traffic, environmental impacts at station and along the A4 corridor, and increased pressures on our stock of residential property. This major new piece of infrastructure, planned at our small existing station, would need to be closely monitored by the Parish Council, other Parish bodies and residents.
It should be noted that Crossrail is not yet certain to go ahead, nor is the scope of the project determined, although at this stage it seems that it will proceed. A small part of the £10b projected cost is already funded. The Crossrail Parliamentary Bill was deposited on Feb 22nd 2005, and has a long way to go before being passed.
Local press coverage in February 2005 included lobbyists for Crossrail ending at Slough, and others in strong support of its being extended to Reading. Similar question marks include the extent of benefits for local services between Slough and Maidenhead, and the cost of bridge removal and replacement in the Iver area.
Despite these doubts, Crossrail has strong government support as essential new transport infrastructure for the South East. Local growth engines include expansion of Heathrow to the east of Taplow, and Reading to the west. The possible London 2012 Olympics contributed to increased public awareness in early 2005.
The origins, concept and need of Crossrail are summarised in a Joint Cross London Rail Links Ltd / SRA / Transport for London report (The Crossrail Business Case: Summary, 2003), which deals with Crossrail Line 1, the currently proposed east<>west line. The current Crossrail Bill is a culmination of discussion and negotiation since 2003, as to the preferred route.
‘The Business Case” (CBC) includes a clear position statement on environmental impact, worth quoting in full, since Parish assessment of Crossrail’s Environmental statement (below) suggests that it under-estimates local environmental impacts :
“Temporary impacts during construction would be the most significant environmental effects. These would include temporary severance and traffic impacts arising from construction work sites. Permanent effects are assessed to be relatively slight”. (CBC, 2003, para 5.2).
The CBC includes accessibility as a benefit, measured by improved journey times (5.28). Improved mobility impaired access is included as an integration benefit (para 5.29).
The concept of accessibility in relation to local stations needs to be broken down into distinct aspects, since the general term masks possible conflict between - for example – the sense in which it is used by Crossrail – and the capacity of local roads and station parking to accommodate additional users.
Reduced overcrowding on stations is included as a benefit (5.23).
This benefit is more plausible for for large stations, than for small, local ones. At stations such as Taplow, it seems more likely that Crossrail will increase than reduce office, platform, bridge and entry crowding unless mitigation measures are included in Crossrail station alterations.
The CBC links Crossrail to: government policy (The 10 year Transport Plan, The Sustainable Communities Plan), SRA planning (Strategic Plan 2003) and London transport policy (The Major’s Transport Strategy). These policies (6.1.-6.7) are ones that have since largely carried through to the South East Plan and been incorporated in many respects, at local transport planning level.
Crossrail has gone through several consultation stages, which it has documented. Consultation up to the deposit of the Crossrail Bill (22nd February 2005) ended locally with an afternoon exhibition at Maidenhead on 11th February. The project is now under the direct management of
DfT?, although Crossrail personnel will continue to provide a contact point for the project.
The Bill is expected to take about two years to pass through all its stages. Crossrail has indicated to the Parish Council, that there may be a degree of flexibility within the framework set by its Environmental Statement for Taplow, and has agreed to liaise directly with the Parish Council, as well as through the Local Authorities. The Parish Council has, in addition, set up liaison with Bucks CC. and SBDC, so that local views are represented in the context of local policy.
A Crossrail referee, Prof. Tony Kennerlely, has been appointed to consider any complaints about the dissemination of information about Crossrail.
The main provision in the Crossrail Bill for objections that cannot be resolved by local negotiation, is petitioning. This is a type of formal objection used for hybrid bills, (rather than a mass letter): described as “a summary of objections to particular aspects of the Crossrail Bill”. Petitions may be individual or collective. Petitions will be presented to the Select Committee by the petitioner, a ‘Roll B agent’ (who can be any individual) or a solicitor). The deadline for petitioning will be announced when the Bill has passed its second reading. Details on how to petition are available from the House of Commons Private Bills Office (0207 219 3250).
– Transport Policy Context ? – The South East Plan
• The South East Plan (Core Document, SEERA, 2005) addresses implications of the region’s gateway role to Europe and economic growth, to include increased housing at regional centres such as Reading. Taking a lower end preferred option for development based on RPG9, the Plan envisages increased pressure on an already congested, car/lorry reliant transport system, which suffers from chronic bottlenecks and traffic volumes (paras 1.3-1.4).
• The SEP acknowledges that economic growth is “having an adverse impact on the region’s built and natural environment that cannot be ignored” (1.6). Its global aim is “economic growth without ... concomitant increase in traffic…” (1.10), by use of “measures that encourage modal shift and significantly improve the attractiveness of local public transport services” (1.7).
In accepting there are “wider environmental health and community impact associated with transport systems”(1.7), it provides an important criterion for assessing local Crossrail impacts, based on broad, environmental parameters.
• The SEP preferred solution of a hubs and spokes network, based on public transport (1.12, policy T12), includes Slough and Reading as hubs. It relies on hubs with adequate public transport and car parking infrastructure, fed by spokes with sufficient capacity. The east-west A4/M4 corridor is a major local spoke in this system.
The logic of hubs and spokes lends itself to assessment of sub-regional traffic and transport systems, and is a useful basis for assessing Taplow as a local hub with transport interchanges between rail and buses, and with an impact on “spoke” traffic flows through the Parish that will increase with Crossrail.
• Overall policies and measures include The SEP tasking LAs with making provision for non-car users, particularly cyclists and pedestrians, by increasing the real and perceived safety of these forms of travel (1.18), and improving the local routes they use (policy T3).
This policy is useful in relation to those who might walk/cycle to Taplow station rather than drive short distances, if they regarded the pavements/roads and junctions as secure and accessible.
• SEP rail specific policies and measures include increased use of rail (including the Great Western Line) to carry freight (1.75-1.77, policy T14). At Taplow, such increases would be likely to have a ‘multiplier’ effect on any noise/pollution and environmental damage impacts arising from Crossrail.
Other SEP rail priorities are improved rail access to international gateways, rail service alternatives to orbital road movements and enhanced accessible rail services to regional hubs (1.52). Throughout the SEP, the importance of interchanges between bus and rail services is emphasised, supported by travel plan advice (policy T13).
Improved bus services (both scheduled and demand responsive) are integral to the SEP (1.22, 1.49-1.50, 1.54), and with improved local services at Taplow station, would have the potential to significantly contribute to these SEP policies.
• Parking provision is given great emphasis within the SEP, to enable hubs to accommodate transition from cars to public transport. Park and Ride schemes are suggested for major hubs (1.53-1.54), a policy that has been rejected by SBDC as locally unsuitable.
SEP station parking policies will be useful to assess local Crossrail traffic impacts.
The SEP advises LAs to:
- : favourably consider proposals to increase station car parking; (parking capacity);
- : do parking need assessments to “maximise the increase in accessibility to rail services and minimise the local impact of any increase in local traffic” (traffic impact);
- : safeguard land to allow for parking increases at stations (land allocation);
- : plan for “any increases in rail station parking (to) be part of an integrated surface access strategy whereby provision for public transport, cycling and walking is also enhanced” (sustainable provision) (1.69).
Bucks CC: Local Transport Plan Part 2
The Bucks LTP is under development (Stakeholder Discussion Document, Jan 2005). Many of its policies are shared with the S. East Plan. The SEP is particularly helpful in providing information on east<>west regional transport issues affecting Taplow Parish; the SDD adds a valuable emphasis on north<>south issues. It notes that government multi-modal studies in the region (Orbit, Thames Valley and London to S. Midlands) effectively skirt around the edge of the County (paras 1.6.13-1.6.15).
In addition to overall policies shared with The S. East Plan, the SDD proposes a strengthened, County-wide system of Local Area Committees (4, in all) which will contribute to delivering better accessibility and public transport at local level (SDD section 5).
Local delivery will be geared to small areas, to be known as ‘natural communities. Taplow and Dorney might, for example, be considered as one of the 18-20 ‘natural communities’ across the County.
The SDD flags up national and regional policies which LAs are expected to deliver: these include accessibility based on sustainable transport (The Future of Transport, White Paper, 2004), better air quality, reduced congestion, better safety and accessibility (Shared Priorities
DfT??/Local gov.) and a hubs and spokes transport model (Regional Transport Strategy). A plethora of other plans and policies such as the ‘Sustainable Communities Plan’ contribute to the Bucks LTP, which treats bus and rail services as central to delivering sustainable transport.
One dilemma that the LTP does not yet address, is a risk that the hub/spoke approach might worsen traffic, congestion and environmental impact on local road systems, whilst pursuing overall improvement. This is a potential problem at Taplow station, even without Crossrail.
Both S East Plan and the LTP concentrate their attention on the need for parking infrastructure at major hubs.
There is a gap in proposals concerning impact of increased public transport provision at ‘mini-hubs’, such at Taplow station. At Taplow, Crossrail may be expected to generate increased car traffic, in addition to additional use of the station as a result of successful LTP sustainable transport policies.
Accessibility, as in the Crossrail Business Plan, is a key policy aim, although defined differently. The LTP defines it as “the ability of individuals to reach desired goods, services and activities,” and uses it both in relation to those at risk of social inclusion, and as improving general physical access to transport.
The LTP’s ‘overarching objectives’ include support for “the development of Crossrail (and ensuring) that it meets the travel needs of residents in the south of the County” (p.38).
For Taplow station rail users, relevant LTP policies/ measures include management of peak-time traffic and congestion in hot-spot areas, reduction of proportion of sole car users, parking provision, “road and junction improvements where other measures are not sufficient to tackle congestion”, inter-urban bus routes, improved cycle storage at stations, “improved conditions for commuters who walk to stations”, rail station car share, school travel planning, improved cycling/walking routes . • ? The LDD
Under the existing Local Development Plan, Taplow Station abuts the adjacent Green Belt. SBDC has already expressed concern at Crossrail’s potential to urbanise the Green Belt (SBDC response to Crossrail, 2004).
The Taplow Parish Plan (2005) reiterates these concerns.
• Initial feedback from residents after Crossrail’s Maidenhead exhibition flagged up a number of concerns about physical / environmental impacts.
Of these, the greatest number dealt with construction period disruption, impact on the fabric of Taplow station and on the Brunel Bridge.
Local environmental impacts included increased traffic, noise and other pollution and loss of existing trees along the Crossrail route. Crossrail provided verbal advice that no compulsory purchases were entailed by current plans.
Other issues were carried forward into examination of the Crossrail environmental statement.
• Following the exhibition, Crossrail’s ‘Environmental Statement’ became available on 22nd February 2005. This contains a Crossrail assessment of individual “route windows”, of which Taplow is one and the Maidenhead Railway Bridge another. Study of the relevant chapters confirmed that issues flagged up by HTPS and others following the Exhibition, were indeed reasons for concern. In summary, the following issues were identified:
1. Potential benefits: service improvements include direct journeys into London and beyond, services on a seven day a week basis, and more frequent weekday services (up to four per hour in the morning rush hour).
Journey time improvements are provided, but these are more variable than expected. Other local organisations have queried the adequacy of on-train accommodation, and the effect of loss of existing local services between Reading and Slough.
OVERALL PERMANENT IMPACTS
2. A first impression of the Environmental Statement is that it does not adequately capture the project’s local environmental impacts. The locality assessment: appears to set a misleading baseline for the ES as a whole, by failing to capture Taplow’s green corridor topography, green belt and conservation area status, and the environmental fragility of the A4 corridor.
3. Overall: environmental impact appears to be damaging, without more environmental mitigation than the ES provides for.
4. Traffic: the ES appears to substantially under-estimates traffic impacts;
5. Parking. the ES appears to over-estimates existing station capacity, and under-estimates Crossrail impact;
6. On-station impacts: the ES omits Crossrail impact on facilities, ticket machines etc.;
7. Associated transport: the ES does not adequately characterise issues and impact;
8. Pedestrian access: the ES does not adequately characterise issues and impact;
SPECIFIC PERMANENT IMPACTS
9. Taplow station: more information is needed from Crossrail on increased usage and its impact on station fabric;
10. A4 corridor. no mitigation is identified in the ES for this vicinity, there is definite need for mitigation, especially tree-screen protection/enhancement;
Brunel Bridge: visual impact:
11. Brunel Bridge. more information needed on bridge alterations, and the impact on visual amenity.
PREPARATORY WORKS IMPACT
More information than the ES has provided, is needed on a range of issues. They include timing, time to be taken, work areas, loss of parking, lorry routes, lorry traffic levels, re-sitting of waste bins, noise/dust etc.
The next stage of local examination of the Environmental Statement will be to fully relate relevant SEP and Bucks LTP policies as they have been described, to Crossrail impacts.
Additional feedback, comment and opinion to the Parish Council or via the Taplow website, would be very welcome.
Jon Willmore, March 2005.
• Useful sources of further information Crossrail home site: www.crossrail.org.uk House of Commons Private Bill Office: www.parliament.uk/about_commons/prbohoc.cfm Bill text:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmbills/062/05062.i-v.html DfT?? (railways in general):
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_railways/documents/sectionhomepage/dft_railways_page.hcsp
CrossRail? Stations and Route:
--
JonWil - 10 May 2005
18 May 2005 11:20:42 ZoeHatch:
If I've read this corectly, I gather that crossrail would provide better access for Taplow station. As a mother with and 18 month old I would be very glad to have an easier access for our pushchair. The current arrangement with countless steps over the bridge makes any journey really hard work. I know that this point covers just one aspect of a very complex arguement. However, as young families and their struggles seem to be so rarely considered I thought it worth mentioning.
21 May 2005 22:18:15 JonWil:
Zoe,
You're right! Also, quite apart from
CrossRail, more frequent services from Taplow introduced at the end of 2004 are going to increase the number of pedestrian passengers in the near future.
Better access to Taplow station has two aspects: there needs to be much better pedestrian access to the station across adjacent junctions and along pavements well before
CrossRail comes (if it does). There also needs to be MUCH better station car-parking.
I've been pushing this with Bucks CC, SBDC and the Rail Operator (after all, it's their policies that commit them to better public transport as a basic aim) ... and with the support of the Parish Council, we're beginning to make progress on the "SGT" junction, on pavement access and on overspill parking and associated car crime, especially in Station Road.
CrossRail doesn't presently have provision for easier access to the central platform ... as I understand it after pursuing this on behalf of the the local disabled access group, the thinking is that anyone who can't cross the footbridge will have to travel via Maidenhead/Slough on the part of their journey that would require them to use the central platform. This is explained as a matter of the cost, which given the format of the station would make a new tunnel/lifts hugely expensive. When I last discussed this with
CrossRail, I seem to remember mention of lift facilities at Burnham as a possibility.
CrossRail will bring Sunday services to Taplow, but these will run from the "fast platform" that requires access via the footbridge.
At this stage, it is probably a very good idea to make the awkwardness using the footbridge clear to
CrossRail when negotiating with them over improved facilities at Taplow.
The entries/access/bridge and ticket office will have to absorb what is estimated to be more than twice as many passengers as at present. Imagine that in peak morning / evening periods and when the schoolchildren are on the afternoon train! Not to mention cars dropping off / picking up commuters. It's pretty obvious that the configuration of the station and its vicinity needs to be considered as a whole.
Hope this makes you feel that young families are being considered when thinking about what's needed to improve our rail services (But keep telling the Parish Council, too!)
Jon.
TaplowRailServices
Being a daily user of the 'pavement' along Approach Road, I think there should be dramatic improvements for pedestrians. Currently it is too narrow, with loads of potholes and weeds making it quite dangerous. However, I would like to show my support for more frequent trains at Taplow!
