Application Number:                    2009/1507
Name:                                  Richard Houghton
Address:                               46 Elm Quay Court
Nine Elms Lane
London
SW8 5DF
Tel:                                   07879448593
Email:                                 richard.houghton@eu.jll.com
Date and time of comment left:         22-06-2009 09:28
Comment Type:                          Object to Proposal
Comment:                               

Planning application for US Embassy, Nine Elms Lane
Road alterations application
Ref. 2009/1507

OBJECTION

As a resident of Elm Quay Court I am directly affected by the proposed
road alterations to Nine Elms Lane to accommodate the proposed new
American Embassy. I wish to object to the proposals for the following
reasons:
1. The proposals will make it virtually impossible and highly
dangerous to exit from Elm Quay Court by car and turn right to head
west. There is very frequently continuous traffic heading west, which is
only broken by the existing traffic lights. These existing traffic
lights enable this right turn. The pedestrian traffic lights proposed
will rarely be used since there will be nothing accessible by
pedestrians on the south side of Nine Elms Lane. (The embassy entrance
is proposed to be off Wandsworth Road and Post Office Way) The
pedestrian lights therefore will not give the breaks in traffic
suggested. The residents of Elm Quay court tend to chose to live here
because vehicle access out of town to the west is easy. (It takes a
minimum of 20 minutes if you are forced to turn left and go round the
Vauxhall Cross one-way system to get back onto Nine Elms Lane to head
west.)

2. The proposals make it exceedingly dangerous to turn right from
Nine Elms Lane into Elm Quay Court. The 2-car waiting lane will be
helpful, but there will be nothing to break the traffic on the east
bound lane. Residents of Elm Quay Court will have to dodge the fast
flowing traffic. Even if the east bound traffic is stationery and has
actually left the box junction clear, the bus lane (which includes
taxis, bikes and goods vehicles from the market, post office and courier
depots) will not be stationary. Vehicles turning into Elm Quay Court
will have fast moving vehicles in the east bound bus etc lane hidden by
the stationary traffic. This is an accident waiting to happen.

3. The proposals make it exceedingly difficult and dangerous, if
not illegal, to turn left into Elm Quay Court from Nine Elms Lane. The
application proposes to extend the bus lane right up to the entrance to
Elm Quay Court. It currently stops some distance back (approximately
80m) from the entrance to enable vehicles heading east to use the left
lane to filter into Elm Quay Court, ahead of any buses or other vehicles
using this lane. The proposals would require east bound traffic wishing
to enter Elm Quay Court to cut across the bus etc lane without any
turning or slipping distance. They would have to block the traffic and
dodge past the fast moving traffic in the bus etc lane, without any
chance of traffic in the bus etc lane seeing them, when there is a
traffic queue. The bus etc lane should not be altered and should
terminate at its current termination point.

4. The proposals make it virtually impossible, incredibly dangerous
and almost certainly illegal to turn left out of Elm Quay Court onto
Nine Elms Lane to head east. The existing layout gives a short slip lane
from the exit from Elm Quay Court before the bus etc lane recommences.
This enables vehicles from Elm Quay Court to merge with the east bound
traffic, which is frequently queuing. The proposals remove the slip
lane.  This will force exiting vehicles to either wait in the box
junction or dodge across the bus lane into a non-existent gap in the
traffic, or drive in the bus lane to try to merge with the traffic. The
proposed removal of the traffic lights at the junction will mean that
there is nothing to create any gap in the traffic queue. The slip lane
and the traffic lights should be retained.

5. It is clear that the proposed junction between Nine Elms Lane
and Elm Quay Court is completely unacceptable. It is dangerous, almost
impossible to negotiate, and will force people into illegal traffic
manoeuvres in all four turning directions.

6. The existing traffic lights, slip lanes and bus lanes should be
retained as they currently exist, with the Ponton Road phasing removed.
This is the only simple, safe and legal option from a highways
perspective.

7. The only other alternative solution to making the junction
between Elm Quay Court and Nine Elms Lane safe and acceptable would
appear to be to move the junction to the west end of the Elm Quay Court
grounds, so that the exit/entrance to Elm Quay Court forms part of the
new junction to the moved Ponton Road. The Elm Quay Court junction would
have to be one of the phases of the proposed traffic lights. This would
require the existing internal road to be altered so as to give access to
the underground carpark. It would also require extensive works at the
actual junction, particularly due to the variations in ground level at
this point. The applicants would have to be required to pay for the
works to Elm Quay Court including the design of the works, both highways
and landscaping.

Richard Houghton