SECOND OBJECTION LETTER -   

Email:   This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it                                    

Date  ..........................   

Dear Sirs Re:  TWA  Application Proposed Heathrow Airtrack, Environmental Statement, Addendum No. 2

Your  Ref:  … 

Further to our original objection  we note that BAA / Airtrack has published an Addendum to its Environmental Statement including amendments relating to the impact of Airtrack on Egham.  

We are concerned that the revised document once again underestimates the adverse impact on Egham.    

There has been  a reassessment of the projected level crossing downtimes in Egham, and Airtrack now estimate that (in the average daytime hour) the Thorpe Road crossing in Egham Hythe will be closed for  36 minutes per hour (an 89% increase on the current downtimes)  Vicarage Road / Pooley Green in Egham will be closed for 33 minutes (a 43% increase)  and Egham Station for 30 minutes (a 100% increase) .      A further level crossing at Prune Hill will be closed for 13 minutes an hour, because being on a road completely unsuitable for heavy traffic, it is very little used and as a result Network Rail retains an automatic barrier.    

Reliability of the model 

The statement does not provide estimates of down times during peak hours, although it is apparent that these have been modeled.    

Moreover, the first three crossings are manually operated, and Airtrack acknowledges that “daily operating circumstances will affect the decisions and opportunities for signalmen to actuate the barrier closures”, which we interpret as meaning that the system will not be optimally efficient.   The model assumes that barriers will be raised by the signalman whenever there is a gap sufficient to allow 20 seconds of open time.   This is not an assumption that can be accepted by anyone who regularly waits at the crossing gates.      

The estimated times also don’t allow for “perturbations in train services”.   The estimates for the Vicarage Road crossing assume a 100% increase in train movements and a 43% increase in downtimes, which can only be effected by timetabling trains to pass each other at the crossing.  This implies that even minor delays and other “perturbations” would have a very significant effect on the downtimes. The report makes no attempt to quantify the likelihood or expected frequency of these, or to estimate the margin of error in the projections. As such Airtrack’s assertion that queuing traffic would only affect adjacent road junctions for short periods at peak times is based on an unrealistic assessment of how efficiently the system would operate.    

Egham Chamber of Commerce, basing its view on the existing observable discrepancy between the ambitions of Network Rail and what is actually achieved, believes that the doubling of train frequencies would result in significantly more traffic congestion in Egham.   

Severity of impacts 

The report states that the effects at two of Egham’s crossings (Pooley Green and Egham Station) have been downgraded from Severe to Moderate, on the basis of 3 criteria, all of which must be present.  

The relevant figures are Pooley Green  / Vicarage Road:  Open time reduced from 37 minutes to 27 minutes -  a 27% decrease in open time,  equating to a 43% increase in barrier closed time.  Downtime  55% of each hour.  

Egham Station:   from 45 minutes to 30 minutes  -  a  33% decrease in  barrier open time, equating to a 100% increase in barrier closed time.   Downtime  50.15% using the detailed figures on page 53. 

The inclusion of the third element adds a degree of subjectivity which makes the entire rating exercise spurious.     

 As Airtrack acknowledges,  in reality it is the existence and availability of alternative routes that will determine how severely affected a community is. As already stated,  Egham lacks any bridges or tunnels which would allow road users to avoid the level crossings.    The nearest diversion would involve a detour of  5 miles though a residential estate with narrow roads which BAA / Airtrack acknowledges to be unsuitable.  Other suggested alternative routes include Prune Hill, described elsewhere in the document as having a “narrow twisting alignment”   (additionally complicated by the “hill”  bit of “Prune Hill”).  All other alternative routes require diversions of exceeding 7 miles.   Of the two foot-bridges, one is on a minor footpath which most residents of the town have never found.  

Possible mitigation  

Airtrack’s estimates are that severe effects might be alleviated by reducing traffic,  by  6% at Thorpe Road,  by  10% at Vicarage Road/ Pooley Green and  by 20% at Egham Station.  These reductions would allow, on their model, for peak-hour queues not to regularly impact on nearby junctions.      Their “destination” analysis suggests that this could be achieved, in the case of Thorpe Road and Pooley Green,  by diverting non-local traffic away from the crossings.   

The estimated non-local traffic at Thorpe Road is  8% of the total  and at Vicarage Road / Pooley Green  12%.     The targets equate to persuading  4  out of 5  “non-local” drivers to re-route their journey.  It is not entirely clear what is defined as   “not local”  but existing traffic congestion suggests that the very limited proportion of drivers who are “not local”  will be resistant to re-routing their journeys.    

Airtrack also suggest that since some of the local traffic is travelling to and from Heathrow, those road users might diver to the new train services, which ignores the fact that the Airtrack trains won’t stop in Egham.    

Community Effects 

The Airtrack report divides community effects into primary, secondary and (it would appear) unimportant.      

Egham Chamber of Commerce accepts that access to health and emergency services is of primary importance and has made the point strongly that level crossing closure will have very damaging impacts on local residents and workers.   To a lesser extent we are concerned about the effects of access to schools and churches.   However, most people who do not have small children are most likely to be crossing the railway line to access those services dismissed as “shops, post offices and recreation grounds”.      

We strongly object to the relegation of the economic life of the town to one inaccurate paragraph in the assessment.  

It is factually accurate to state that there are “shops,   post office and leisure facilities on both sides of the level crossings ”  at Thorpe Road and Pooley Green level crossings,  in the same way that it is factually accurate to suggest that  the M25 and the B967 are both roads, or users of  Heathrow could use Southend  airport instead.  In the case of Egham Station crossing it is not even factually accurate. 

The report is inaccurate in stating that these facilities,  (insofar as they exist),   “provide people with good alternatives”.   For residents of Egham Hythe the local shopping parades provide only the most limited of facilities, and whether they consider Egham or Staines to be their local town, it would be necessary to use a level crossing to reach their nearest supermarkets, banks,  estate agents and travel agents as well  as all those facilities which distinguish a town from a shopping parade. 

Equally, the town centre provides employment to a significant part of the local population whose ability to get to and from work has been totally disregarded.        

The Egham Chamber of Commerce is not qualified to dispute the assessment of the air quality and noise impacts, beyond a concern that unrelated planning decisions should be considered in a joined up fashion.   We would be extremely concerned should decisions regarding Airtrack and decisions regarding large-scale extraction of gravel within the area described by Airtrack as “islanded”  be taken in isolation from each other.     

Economic effects 

If Airtrack is built and Egham does not get a bridge or tunnel across the railway line the town will be completely gridlocked, with knock-on effects to the M25 and beyond.  

Inevitably an increasing number of people, anxious about long or unforeseeable delays, will choose to avoid trips which involve crossing the railway.  The town centre may be irretrievably damaged as local shops and other local businesses lose up to half their customers.  Almost every organisation in the town will be impacted by the difficulty in reaching, or being reached by, customers, suppliers, employees, members or users of their services. This will have devastating consequences for the viability of the existing town centre, and that will have knock on effects on those not directly affected by the level crossing closures, such as elderly residents dependent to good local services within walking distance.   

Permanent gridlock and congestion will cause larger local employers to consider relocating and international firms who have based themselves in Egham because of its proximity to Heathrow will find journeys to the airport taking longer than if they were twice as far away.  

Other economic effects outside the remit of the Chamber include gridlock and pollution from stationary traffic reducing the values of peoples’ homes, and affecting punctuality and (therefore efficiency) at schools, work-places, doctors’ appointments, church services, clubs and activity groups.  The entire area will become blighted by the difficulty of moving around , including the dead as funeral directors will have to plan for corteges to be interrupted by trains.  

Summary 

None of these problems are intrinsic to the Airtrack project, which in principle is supported by many in Egham.   All will flow entirely from Airtrack/Network Rail choosing not to provide permanent alternatives to the level crossings. We therefore take this opportunity to reiterate our strong objection to this scheme unless it includes provision for at least one (and preferably 3) bridges/tunnels in Egham. 

Yours faithfully,

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites