Ealing Broadway station
|
Station forecourt with proposed cycle parking racks.
Forecourt without cycle parking
|
Ealing Broadway station public realm improvements consultation
Response by the Central Ealing Neighbourhood Forum
General
We support proposals which help to achieve the transport and the public realm objectives and policies in the Neighbourhood Plan, in particular to improve the approaches to Ealing Broadway station. We agree that Crossrail will add to the pressures on this key area, and that the opportunity needs to be taken to create a civic space which is welcoming, fully accessible and functional for all users of this key gateway to the borough.
The proposals need to be judged by how far they meet detailed policy objectives on issues such as reducing traffic volumes generally, removing areas of potential conflict, controlling deliveries to premises, and improving approaches for active travellers, impaired users, and those with luggage, Unfortunately objectives these have not been provided.
Our comments on specific aspects of the proposals are:
Restricting Ealing Broadway carriageway section to one lane
There is no indication of traffic modelling evidence or pollution/environment impact assessment to support the design. Given the information provided, we strongly oppose this proposal.
It is crucial that changes are properly balanced to cope with the legitimate needs of all users. Haven Green east and Ealing Broadway constitute a key section of a classified road (B455). With the effective closure of Longfield Avenue there is no alternative route for north/south traffic, commercial vehicles as well as buses and private cars. It would:
• funnel all southbound traffic into a single lane and significantly increase the congestion which already occurs on the eastern side of Haven Green, which frequently blocks back to the Madeley Road junction and interfers with bus movements
• increase existing high levels of air pollution in this and the wider area
• create a conflict for taxis leaving the rank southbound, which would have to move sharply across other users to get into the one remaining lane
• create additional pedestrian space at points where it is least necessary, ie outside Broadway Chambers where the existing pavement on the west side is at its widest.
Moving bus stop F
We also strongly oppose this. The new location has several disadvantages. It is:
• further away from the station entrance, where a high proportion of bus passengers wish to go or are coming from
• on a significant slope, making it more difficult for passengers to mount or dismount buses, particularly for those with buggies, with luggage, or the disabled particularly if in wheelchairs
• where the footway is limited in width (at its narrowest only 2.4m), which would mean no space to relocate the present passenger shelter. This is left off the proposal diagrams
• in the wrong position for buses serving this stop. Once the 112 is re-routed via Madeley Road, all four routes, (20 buses an hour) will have to turn sharply across the traffic flow in order to turn west (right) into Ealing Broadway. This is a potentially dangerous manoeuvre, cutting across left turning traffic going east and adding to delays.
Cycle racks on station forecourt
We strongly oppose the suggested placing of new cycle parking on the open space directly in front of the station entrance.
• No evidence is given that moving the existing racks will, as claimed, “enable more sustainable travel”. It seems that no net new capacity is to be provided, after allowing for the removal of 10 “Sheffield” stands already on the Broadway.
• Previous data produced by Steer Davies Gleave shows that 40% of bus passengers arriving at Haven Green have the town centre rather than the station as their destination. No figures have been produced to shown that bike riders are any different. New spaces should be provided nearer to the centre (eg Springbridge Road car park) rather than closer to the station.
• The change would conflict with the stated objective of the scheme to provide a distinctive new civic space and provide a good impression on visitors to the borough. Racks in the middle of the concourse or the pavement in front of Broadway Chambers would create a new barriers to pedestrian flows, and add rather than subtract to existing clutter, detracting from the sense of place.
If a limited number of racks near the station is felt necessary, the only suitable place would be at either side of the concourse, against the two blank walls and away from the retail frontages.
Street furniture
The introduction to the scheme claims that The Broadway is currently cluttered with street furniture, and most importantly “the footways are not wide enough to cope with passenger numbers”. In fact, where the footways are now restricted (as noted above), no proposal has been made to improve the flow. Apart from the 10 Sheffield stands referred to, which are placed at the kerbside and not significantly impeding pedestrian flows, the only other clutter consists of two redundant telephone boxes. We welcome the removal of these, but there is no need for new seating or tree planters outside Central Chambers, where there is no obvious or natural demand; this would be better confined to the eastern side. This would obviate the need to remove the westbound lane on the carriageway.
New Haven Green walkway & pedestrian crossings
We are in favour of measures to improve modal separation and particularly pedestrian safety. However, it is unclear what natural route this new pathway will cater for and what demand exists for the proposed light controlled crossing at the end of the diagonal road. If it is really felt necessary, it would be best for any new provision to be linked to the existing crossing over the Broadway, to allow for smoother road traffic flows. We also suggest that the present east-west crossing, which is now too narrow to cope with the two-way flow at-peak times, should be widened.
Pick up and set down
We are particularly concerned at the absence of any provision for pick up and set down access to the station. Proper provision for the disabled and those with luggage should be a key element of any public realm improvements in line with both Neighbourhood Plan policies and normal DDA requirements.
31/7/19
Response by the Central Ealing Neighbourhood Forum
General
We support proposals which help to achieve the transport and the public realm objectives and policies in the Neighbourhood Plan, in particular to improve the approaches to Ealing Broadway station. We agree that Crossrail will add to the pressures on this key area, and that the opportunity needs to be taken to create a civic space which is welcoming, fully accessible and functional for all users of this key gateway to the borough.
The proposals need to be judged by how far they meet detailed policy objectives on issues such as reducing traffic volumes generally, removing areas of potential conflict, controlling deliveries to premises, and improving approaches for active travellers, impaired users, and those with luggage, Unfortunately objectives these have not been provided.
Our comments on specific aspects of the proposals are:
Restricting Ealing Broadway carriageway section to one lane
There is no indication of traffic modelling evidence or pollution/environment impact assessment to support the design. Given the information provided, we strongly oppose this proposal.
It is crucial that changes are properly balanced to cope with the legitimate needs of all users. Haven Green east and Ealing Broadway constitute a key section of a classified road (B455). With the effective closure of Longfield Avenue there is no alternative route for north/south traffic, commercial vehicles as well as buses and private cars. It would:
• funnel all southbound traffic into a single lane and significantly increase the congestion which already occurs on the eastern side of Haven Green, which frequently blocks back to the Madeley Road junction and interfers with bus movements
• increase existing high levels of air pollution in this and the wider area
• create a conflict for taxis leaving the rank southbound, which would have to move sharply across other users to get into the one remaining lane
• create additional pedestrian space at points where it is least necessary, ie outside Broadway Chambers where the existing pavement on the west side is at its widest.
Moving bus stop F
We also strongly oppose this. The new location has several disadvantages. It is:
• further away from the station entrance, where a high proportion of bus passengers wish to go or are coming from
• on a significant slope, making it more difficult for passengers to mount or dismount buses, particularly for those with buggies, with luggage, or the disabled particularly if in wheelchairs
• where the footway is limited in width (at its narrowest only 2.4m), which would mean no space to relocate the present passenger shelter. This is left off the proposal diagrams
• in the wrong position for buses serving this stop. Once the 112 is re-routed via Madeley Road, all four routes, (20 buses an hour) will have to turn sharply across the traffic flow in order to turn west (right) into Ealing Broadway. This is a potentially dangerous manoeuvre, cutting across left turning traffic going east and adding to delays.
Cycle racks on station forecourt
We strongly oppose the suggested placing of new cycle parking on the open space directly in front of the station entrance.
• No evidence is given that moving the existing racks will, as claimed, “enable more sustainable travel”. It seems that no net new capacity is to be provided, after allowing for the removal of 10 “Sheffield” stands already on the Broadway.
• Previous data produced by Steer Davies Gleave shows that 40% of bus passengers arriving at Haven Green have the town centre rather than the station as their destination. No figures have been produced to shown that bike riders are any different. New spaces should be provided nearer to the centre (eg Springbridge Road car park) rather than closer to the station.
• The change would conflict with the stated objective of the scheme to provide a distinctive new civic space and provide a good impression on visitors to the borough. Racks in the middle of the concourse or the pavement in front of Broadway Chambers would create a new barriers to pedestrian flows, and add rather than subtract to existing clutter, detracting from the sense of place.
If a limited number of racks near the station is felt necessary, the only suitable place would be at either side of the concourse, against the two blank walls and away from the retail frontages.
Street furniture
The introduction to the scheme claims that The Broadway is currently cluttered with street furniture, and most importantly “the footways are not wide enough to cope with passenger numbers”. In fact, where the footways are now restricted (as noted above), no proposal has been made to improve the flow. Apart from the 10 Sheffield stands referred to, which are placed at the kerbside and not significantly impeding pedestrian flows, the only other clutter consists of two redundant telephone boxes. We welcome the removal of these, but there is no need for new seating or tree planters outside Central Chambers, where there is no obvious or natural demand; this would be better confined to the eastern side. This would obviate the need to remove the westbound lane on the carriageway.
New Haven Green walkway & pedestrian crossings
We are in favour of measures to improve modal separation and particularly pedestrian safety. However, it is unclear what natural route this new pathway will cater for and what demand exists for the proposed light controlled crossing at the end of the diagonal road. If it is really felt necessary, it would be best for any new provision to be linked to the existing crossing over the Broadway, to allow for smoother road traffic flows. We also suggest that the present east-west crossing, which is now too narrow to cope with the two-way flow at-peak times, should be widened.
Pick up and set down
We are particularly concerned at the absence of any provision for pick up and set down access to the station. Proper provision for the disabled and those with luggage should be a key element of any public realm improvements in line with both Neighbourhood Plan policies and normal DDA requirements.
31/7/19
