Dear Sir/Madam,
I wish to object to the Outline Planning Application CB/21/05416/OUT known as HAS20 in the Local Plan on the grounds that inadequate attention has been given to highway safety around access to the site and the proposed new school. Both the highways proposals and lack of, instead “recommendations”, are dangerous and places the lives of residents at risk, particularly the 420 or more children who would be attending the new 2FE Primary School. As well as being the right thing to do, providing safe access to the school is a key policy requirement of HAS20 as specified by the planning inspectors who examined the local plan.
My main points of objection are as follows:
- Station road and the two railway crossings have always been major pinch points and are traffic hazards. The proposed site layout and highways proposals, incorporating changes only on Toddington Road and Westoning Road, fails to provide safe routes for pedestrians, cyclists and horses, and completely fails to address the safety issues on Station Road and the Station Bridge.
- Station Road is already dangerous for pedestrians, children who use the train to commute to the Upper School often have to walk in the road due to the very narrow footways over the railway bridge and along the entire length of Station Road up to the crossroads. Pedestrians are only able to pass each other when there are no oncoming vehicles because they must walk in the road in order to pass. The children who use this road can often be seen taking risks in order to make progress. This issue has been made even worse due to social distancing requirements.
- Due to the footway along Station Road being alongside a tall brick wall (around Harlington Manor), there is no way to escape if a vehicle mounts the kerb. Last year there was an accident where a vehicle parked opposite the Manor wall was hit by another vehicle traveling from the crossroads resulting in the traveling vehicle ending up on its side on the footway against the Manor brick wall. Luckily there was nobody using the footway at the time, otherwise the accident would have resulted in one or more fatalities. The severity of this accident also highlights the actual speeds that some vehicles reach between the crosswords and the railway bridge and vice versa.
- Both railway crossings will involve children and parents with buggies travelling to and from the new School and possibly also the existing school in the village twice a day at peak times (it is not clear if the existing school would close?). Neither provides an adequate safe route to the new school or existing school. In particular, for the Station Road route, parents with children / buggies will be required to make at least 5 road crossings to reach the school from the Crossroads at the start of Station Road. These roads would be Station Road (twice for some), Staton Yard Entrance, Train Station Entrance, Toddington Road and then the secondary site entrance to reach the primary entrance. Anyone involved in the decision making for this application should ask themselves if they would like their own children to be using that route?
- There are no actual proposals to address pedestrian safety on Station Road, only “suggestions” for somebody else to provide something. There is a “recommended” improvement plan in Appendix C4 of the Transport Assessment which falls far short of actually improving pedestrian safety due to the severe traffic issues it would cause resulting in other pedestrian safety issues.
- The “recommendations” for Station Road which include narrowing of the carriageway over the railway bridge with a give-way priority sign and 2 separate build-outs / restrictions further east (also with give-way priority signs) would result in traffic being completely being locked up during busy periods. Willis Dawson and their planning consultants should know this recommendation is inappropriate. I provide further detail on this in the following points. (7 to 14).
- In the “recommendation" plan for Station Road, the close proximity of the 3 give-way points is an obvious issue which will result in blockage of the carriageway forcing vehicles to mount the footway in order to pass, posing a threat to the pedestrian safety that the “recommendations" were probably intended to improve. Overall pedestrian safety would likely to be worse especially due to the knock-on effects at the Crossroads and Toddington Road outside of the site entrances.
- One of the “recommended” build-outs / restrictions on Station Road (the one closest to the crossroads) is at the location of the parked vehicle referred to earlier which resulted in a vehicle hitting the wall on its side. Drivers turning into Station road at the crossroads tend accelerate down the hill and when faced with a restriction and oncoming vehicles are forced to brake hard to give way. Locating a give-way restriction on a gradient is also bad idea.
- Drivers passing the second restriction outside of the cottages will face oncoming vehicles approaching on the same side of the road emerging from over the railway bridge around a blind bend (the bridge has blind bends on both sides). Due to the close proximity of the second restriction and the railway bridge, navigating the restriction will be very dangerous.
- Drivers approaching from Toddington Road and passing over the railway bridge restriction onto Station Road will be faced with oncoming vehicles on their side of the road which are passing the “recommended” restriction on the right hand side outside of the cottages and also the regularly parked vehicles outside of the cottages at the same time. This will result in a traffic and pedestrian safety hazard and will cause chaos and gridlock. The space between the bridge restriction and the first parked car in the right would only allow a single normal size vehicle to pull in on order to let a vehicle pass. There would not be enough space for a bus or other large vehicle to pull in (this is also bus route). Again, the applicant should realise this.
- The pull-in space referred to above would be directly outside the entrance to the new Station Yard housing development, therefore blocking it. Anyone attempting to pull in to station Station Yard after passing over the bridge would be unable to do so if a vehicle is waiting across the entrance. This would result in a stand-off and inevitable kerb mounting. Also anyone attempting to pull out of the new Station Yard housing development would be unable to do so due to it being blocked, or would be risking a serious accident trying to avoid vehicles passing restrictions on both sides with limited visibility. Pulling out would already be unsafe even without the “recommended” “improvements”.
- The “recommendations” for Station Road would also result in a greater safety risk for drivers pulling out of Wentworth Court due to the proximity of the restrictions. Visibility is already limited and the “recommendation” plan shows that this would not be improved. During peak times it is very likely to be impossible to pull out of Wentworth Court.
- In order to be able to have any kind of visibility when pulling out of Wentworth Court, Station Yard and the Train Station entrance, vehicles must stop very close to the stop lines, therefore blocking pedestrian access along the footway. This will pose a safety hazard for pedestrians and children as they navigate around vehicles waiting to pullout.
- The inevitable traffic queue caused by the “recommended” restriction outside of the cottages, would result in chaos and gridlock at the next restriction further up before the crossroads and would likely force vehicles to mount the kerb. The knock on effect from that would block the crossroads, preventing traffic from passing along Sundon Road, Westoning Road and Church Road in addition to Station Road. The village would become completely gridlocked.
- The proposed give-way priority system under the Westoning Road bridge will force greater use of Station Road adding to the existing safety issues. If the “recommended” Station Road improvements were to be implemented by somebody else (the council?) there would be complete grid-lock in the village at peak times. Grid-locked traffic in the village is detrimental to the health of residents, particularly small children who end up breathing in more of the low lying exhaust fumes, this is a proven fact.
- The proposed pedestrian coursing on Toddington Road does not meet the required visibility standards for a 40mph road due to the proximity of the railway bridge and the blind bend heading towards the site entrance. It is not clear if highways can support a reduction to a mandatory 30mph limit. The crossing is also too close to the secondary site access from Toddington Road. The proposed pedestrian crossing is not safe for pedestrians, parents with children and buggies and anyone visually impaired.
- The proposed Primary site access point on Toddington Road is situated between 2 blind bends, the sharp bend towards the railway bridge and the right-left kink in the road when approaching from the roundabout with the A5120. The Proposed turning lane also presents a safety risk due to the resulting bind spot that would occur when cars are waiting to turn into the site and a driver attempts to be courteous and give-way to let a vehicle leave the site to turn right. Refer to the attached marked up plan for details.
- The impact of the proposed future large housing developments nearby have not been considered, this includes both HAS21 on the south side of the village and other planned developments to the east of Harlington, for which Harlington is used as a through route to the M1 motorway. The impact of the almost complete Station Yard development has also not been taken into account.
- The single vehicular access to the site from Toddington Road is inadequate for the likely traffic movements pertaining to the new 2 form entry primary school with likely upwards of 420 children attending. It will also cause congestion and a threat to safety in the existing lay-by on Westoning Road which will be used as a drop off and collection point for the proposed new school due to lack of any parking provisions.
- There is no proposal for parking on or near the school, there is nothing shown on the “indicative” masterplan for school drop-off and collection parking. Provision for parking at the school is another policy requirement of the HAS20 local plan allocation.
- Serving a 400 home scheme with a 2FE primary School from a single access point would be a very dangerous proposition, if that access were to become blocked in an emergency. This could well happen due to the likely traffic congestion around the single entrance. As emergency access is part of the “access” aspect, which is not a reserved matter, it must be resolved at the outline planning stage.
- With only 2.1 hectares has been allocated for the new 2FE Primary School, this is going to result in a cramped and tightly packed school environment with little outdoor space.
- The proposal is a threat to biodiversity, especially in relation to Briarwood ponds which provides an important wildlife habit. Local Authorities have a duty to protect and promote biodiversity.
- The proposal would result in the loss of many mature trees, particularly along Toddington Road some of which are notable oak trees between around 100 and 150 years old. The tree survey states: “the Indicative Masterplan demonstrates that the scheme has the potential to provide a net-gain in tree canopy cover for the site which would mitigate the proposed losses” This is nonsense as the Masterplan and Landscape plan are of course Indicative, and only have merely the potential for a net gain, which cannot be ascertained from the detail in the landscape plan. There are no future guarantees of any net gains which the tree survey claims would mitigate the losses. Any gains would take many decades to be realised and the loss of many 100+ year old oaks cannot be mitigated
- In the current times with much attention focused on climate change the council should strive to protect the trees that are left in its area and not allow them to be be cut down to make way for concrete, tarmac and houses.
Closing comments:
The previous points of objection are not an exhaustive list of the issues, just the issues mainly around access to the site which is what I believe is being decided upon in this Outline Planning Application.
The applicant has not accommodated the residents concerns at the Development Brief stage and has actually rolled back on some commitments made in the DB. The scope of the scheme in the outline planning application is unclear and it is difficult to grasp what would be set in stone by any approval. The language used in the submitted documentation, fluctuates between “will” in some cases to “should” , “could" or “recommend” in others. There are inconsistencies between plans and it is unclear whether they are for approval or indicative only, this makes it very difficult to ascertain the scope of the application.
The applicant, Willis Dawson are land promoters and it appears that they, in conjunction with their consultants Pegasus and WSP are attempting to get the lowest cost development passed with the minimum of commitments in order to maximise the value of the land for their client, the land owner. This is at the expense of the residents of Harlington in many ways, particularly road safety. They have so far shown little regard for the lives of current and future residents and future children of the proposed school.
Myself and many other residents, some of who have been able to find the time to submit their objections to this very complex application, trust or hope that the council will carry it out is duty to protect and support its residents and council tax payers.
Yours sincerely,
---REDACTED---