From mid morning to end of day on Friday 8th November the hearing was given over to transport matters. Evidence was heard from Howard Potter. His proof recites:

“I am a Chartered Civil Engineer and a Fellow of the Institution of Civil Engineers and a Chartered Town Planner and now a retired member of the Royal Town Planning Institute. I served as a Director of the Transport Planning Society for over 10 years. I have practiced as a transport planning specialist having worked extensively in senior positions within the public and private sectors and have
over the last 6 years advised both the MBCG and the Mortlake and East Sheen Society
on transport planning matters.. I have been a local resident since 1969.”

He described his concerns as: (1) the large size of the school; (2) the proposals for widening the Lower
Richmond Road approach to Chalker’s Corner; and (3) the lack of any proposed effective measures to deal with the increased pressures on the Sheen Lane level crossing.

His major concern is about safety at the level crossing. This is illustrated by the incident shown in the video of the van rolling backwards to the school gate. https://www.elmwoodfencing.co.uk/

Safety is of course already an every day concern for many needing to cross the railway line. This can only be exacerbated by the addition of 1085 residential units and a 1200 secondary school and their movement to and from East Sheen and from the A316 and Barnes and in and out of central London.

Margaret Theobald of Stantec Ltd, who has a Post Graduate Diploma in Highway and Traffic Engineering from Middlesex Polytechnic, a member of the Chartered Institution of Highways and
Transportation and a Senior Associate of Stantec UK, a consultancy of engineers and planners, gave evidence after Mr. Potter.

She gave evidence that Network Rail has said that the level crossing is a high risk crossing due to the proximity of the station and speed and frequency of trains passing through. They also said that all available safety features are currently present at the crossing. The changes to signing and lighting of the footbridge will raise awareness that a ticket is not required to make use of the footbridge, which is not explicit at the moment, and will increase the attractiveness of the foot bridge route to pedestrians particularly in the dark. Advanced cycle stop lines will give cyclists the opportunity to cross the railway ahead of motor traffic. This is a feature commonly used at traffic signals to allow cyclists a head start at the beginning of the green time and is likely to have a similar effect here. Additional waiting space is also provided for pedestrians as this was identified as an issue by LBRuT.

She referred to the section 106 agreement and noted that should there be a failure to achieve the Travel Plan targets a contribution of £350,000 payable to the council for sustainable travel purposes which are:
1) Implementation of a bus lane along Lower Richmond Road; and/or
2) a review of cycle infrastructure and implementation of the recommendations of that
review; and/or
3) A review of pedestrian infrastructure and implementation.
4) Or such other measures directed towards the promotion of sustainable transport and
travel within the council’s administrative area as may be agreed between the owner and
the Council in writing.

Are we in Richmond Ice Rink territory here? (See post on 10 November 2024) If they fail to achieve the plan they pay a sum of money. Who knows what that might be used for? And is it even feasible for those measures to be safe or adequate. None of the existing proposals even begin to touch the current let alone the potential future generated problems.