Stockwell Consultation Report

S

Stockwell Cross Response to Consultation March 2015

2

Stockwell Cross Response to Consultation Published March 2015

3

Contents 1 Executive summary ............................................................................................ 4

2 Introduction ............................................................................................ 5

2.1 Purpose of the Scheme ............................................................................................ 6

2.2 Descriptions of the proposals ................................................................................... 6

2.3 Stockwell Cross proposals: map .............................................................................. 8

3 Background ............................................................................................ 9

4 The consultation ............................................................................................ 9

4.1 Who we consulted .................................................................................................. 10

4.2 Consultation material, distribution and publicity ..................................................... 10

4.3 Meetings and events .............................................................................................. 11

5 Overview of consultation responses ........................................................................... 13

6 Responses from members of the public ...................................................................... 16

6.1 Analysis of all the questions asked ......................................................................... 16

6.2 Cycling proposals ................................................................................................... 16

6.3 Removal of the Gyratory ......................................................................................... 22

6.4 Urban realm improvement ...................................................................................... 24

6.5 Changes for pedestrians ........................................................................................ 28

6.6 Associated measures for Stockwell Cross ............................................................. 31

6.6.1 Widening of the bus lanes .................................................................................. 31

6.6.2 Simplification of the junction ............................................................................ 32

6.7 Average response for Q 1-11 for Stockwell Cross proposals .................................... 33

6.8 Other comments ..................................................................................................... 34

6.9 Understanding who responded ............................................................................... 35

7 Responses from statutory bodies and other stakeholders .......................................... 40

8 Conclusion .......................................................................................... 42

Appendix A – The consultation material ................................................................................ 43

Appendix B – Leaflet distribution area ................................................................................... 45

Appendix C – List of stakeholders consulted ......................................................................... 45

Appendix D – Response to issues raised .............................................................................. 48

Appendix E – Events at Tate South Lambeth Library ............................................................ 54

Appendix F – Lambeth Visual Impairment Group .................................................................. 56

Appendix H – Metro Article .......................................................................................... 58

Appendix G – Email to Oyster card users, road users and affected bus passengers ............ 59

4

1 Executive summary 1.1 Between 24 November 2014 and 18 January 2015, Transport for London

(TfL) consulted on proposals for the removal of the gyratory at Stockwell Cross. The scheme is part of TfL’s Road Modernisation Plan and includes an upgrade to cycling infrastructure, simplification of the road layout and urban realm enhancements. Stockwell Cross is in south-west London on the well-used Cycle Superhighway Route 7 (CS7). It is the intersection of two roads on the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN); the A3 Clapham Road and the A203 Stockwell Road and South Lambeth Road.

1.2 Information about the proposals was made available online, along with a

consultation questionnaire which included both closed and open questions. 1.3 Members of the public and stakeholders were invited to give their views either

by filling in the questionnaire online or by responding via post or email. The proposals could also be viewed and commented upon at two consultation events and one local community forum. Paper copies of the consultation were available on request, together with the questionnaire. Both were also available on request in alternative formats such as large print, audio or another language.

1.4 The consultation was supported in various ways, including:

Over 6,000 letters were distributed to addresses around Stockwell Cross (see Appendix B for distribution area)

We sent 46,000 emails to Oyster card users, road users and affected bus customers in the Stockwell area (copy of the email in Appendix G)

An article to raise awareness of the consultation was published in the Metro newspaper (see Appendix H)

Links to the TfL online questionnaire were carried by a number of external websites including: The London Borough of Lambeth; The Stockwell Partnership and Lambeth Cyclists;

Letters and emails were sent to local, London wide and national stakeholders

Two public exhibitions at Tate South Lambeth Library, attended by the project team, consultation team and LB Lambeth officers

Presentation and Q&A session at the Stockwell Forum, a local public forum run by the Stockwell Partnership, a local charity

Updates on twitter accounts to alert/remind people about the consultation and the public exhibition events

1.5 The questions were structured to provide TfL with an understanding of the level of support for proposals, to help identify any specific local issues and to understand how respondents used the gyratory. Details of the questions can be found in Section 6. We consulted on a number of key elements including cycling improvements, changes to the road layout, the urban realm around the Stockwell Memorial Gardens and changes to pedestrian facilities.

5

1.6 We received 579 responses to the consultation, with over 74% in favour of the proposals. A full breakdown can be found in Section 6 of this report.

1.7 Some of key issues and themes from the individual and stakeholder

responses include:

Concerns about the proposed banned left turn from South Lambeth Road into Clapham Road

Concerns about the proposed banned right turn from Clapham Road into Stockwell Road

Concerns about the proposed staggered crossing replacing the straight across crossing at Stockwell Road

Concern about conflict between pedestrians and cyclists going through the new Memorial Garden

Lack of protection for cyclists turning left into South Lambeth Road from Clapham Road

Decreased junction capacity and increased congestion 1.8 Full details of all the consultation responses are available in Section 6 of this

report (analysis of consultation responses), Section 7 (responses from stakeholders) and Appendix H (analysis of free text box).

1.9 The majority of respondents agreed that the proposals would deliver

improvements to cyclists (75%) and pedestrians (69%) create a new public space and help transform Stockwell Cross (77%). The public consultation identified areas of local concern. However, whilst we acknowledge that the changes will inconvenience some, we believe that this is outweighed by the wider benefits that the scheme offers to cyclists, pedestrians and the urban space.

1.10 Having considered the outcome of consultation, TfL intends to progress with

the scheme we consulted on. This will be subject to minor alterations as we continue to work with the London Borough of Lambeth to agree a final design. TfL will then seek relevant approvals to progress the scheme to construction.

Once approvals have been granted for the scheme to progress, construction could begin in late 2015 and would be expected to take approximately 6 months to complete. Monitoring work would also be undertaken to assess any impacts of the changes, for example on local roads, and mitigation measures would be identified if required.

We will write to everyone who provided us with their details to inform them of the outcome of consultation.

2 Introduction This document describes the consultation on proposals for Stockwell Cross that includes the removal of the gyratory, additional infrastructure to protect cyclists along CS7, simplification to the road layout and an improved urban

6

realm environment. The consultation asked for feedback on a number of questions describing the different elements of the scheme. The questions were grouped to reflect the impacts on differing users of Stockwell Cross.

2.1 Purpose of the Scheme

What did we propose?

As part of the ‘Road Modernisation Plan’, TfL has been working closely with the London Borough of Lambeth and key stakeholders to develop proposals for Stockwell Cross. The proposals seek to make cycling safer and the area around Stockwell Cross easier to use for both residents and people travelling through the area. Why are we proposing this?

Stockwell Cross is in south-west London on the well-used CS7. It is the intersection of two roads on the TLRN; the A3 Clapham Road and the A203 Stockwell Road and South Lambeth Road. The Stockwell Cross gyratory system was introduced in the 1960s, effectively cutting off Stockwell Memorial Garden from the surrounding neighbourhood. We are proposing to remove the gyratory and reduce the dominance of motor traffic, making the garden more accessible. Cycling in London has more than doubled since 2001 and CS7 has seen a similar increase of cyclists travelling through Stockwell. With the number of cyclists still on the rise, we are considering additional measures that will make cycling safer.

2.2 Descriptions of the proposals

Proposed layout changes To improve conditions and safety for cyclists we would:

Separate cyclists from general traffic on Clapham Road between Stockwell Road and Stockwell Terrace and install a separate signal phase to allow cyclists to continue straight ahead whilst vehicles turning left are held at the lights

Allow cyclists to enter the Clapham Road/Stockwell Road junction ahead of all other traffic by having a separate green signal for cyclists only

Introduce new sections of cycle lanes on Stockwell Road and South Lambeth Road

Make changes to the Advanced Stop Lines (ASL). An ASL allows cyclists to wait in front of other traffic at lights and makes them more visible to other motorists. Other vehicles wait at a second stop line behind the cyclist area. The space for cyclists would be increased to seven metres, to accommodate the increasing number of people cycling in the area

Widen the bus lanes on Clapham Road, south of Stockwell Road and Binfield Road. This would give cyclists room to pass buses without crossing into the lane with other moving traffic. To provide the extra

7

space, we would reduce the width of the footway on both sides of the road. On the side of the station entrance the pavement would be six metres wide, with approximately three metres width on the Post Office side. The remaining footways would be wide enough for pedestrians, even at the busiest times of day.

To improve the area for the local community we would

Remove the gyratory by closing the southern part of South Lambeth Road

Connect Stockwell Memorial Garden, which currently lies in the centre of the gyratory, with the surrounding area

Provide more trees and seating to make the area more pleasant and accessible for residents

How would the proposal affect other road users? Pedestrians

One pedestrian crossing on South Lambeth Road would be removed

The pedestrian crossing on Stockwell Road would be changed from a direct crossing to a staggered crossing (two separate crossings with an island in the middle)

Bus users

Stop A serving bus routes 2 and 88 outside the chicken shop would move 50 metres north along South Lambeth Road

Bus routes 345 towards Brixton would turn directly into Stockwell Road, rather than turning around the gyratory

Bus route 50 would be rerouted via Binfield Road, Lansdowne Way and South Lambeth Road, rather than turning around the gyratory

Traffic

The left turn from South Lambeth Road into Clapham Road would be banned to remove the potential conflict between left turning vehicles and cyclists. Few vehicles make this turn, with an average of 13 vehicles an hour in the morning and 15 an hour in the evening.

A disabled parking bay/loading bay on the closed section of South Lambeth Road would be moved next to the kerbside of Stockwell Memorial Garden

Route 50 would have a new terminus on Binfield Road, opposite Stockwell Bus Garage. The current parking spaces would be relocated locally.

The proposals would impact some journey times through the junction, with some journeys increasing.

8

2.3 Stockwell Cross proposals: map

9

3 Background The Stockwell Cross gyratory system was introduced in the 1960s, marooning Stockwell Memorial Garden from the surrounding neighbourhood. Stockwell Memorial Garden, with the war memorial at its centre, features in Remembrance Sunday Commemorations. It also featured during the 100th anniversary of the start of hostilities in WW1 in 2014. TfL has been working closely with the London Borough of Lambeth, and a number of other organisations to develop proposals for Stockwell Cross. The proposals would make cycling safer and the area around Stockwell Cross easier to use for both residents and people travelling through the area. It would also connect the memorial gardens to the neighbouring area. The London Borough of Lambeth has also recently made improvements to Binfield Road, located at the side of Stockwell Tube station, with new seating, widened pavements and closure to general through traffic. At the request of London Borough of Lambeth TfL have retained the architects (DSDHA) of this scheme, to develop new urban realm proposals for Stockwell Memorial Garden. TfL and London Borough of Lambeth have worked jointly to develop proposals to change the gyratory system to two-way working. This would be achieved by the part closure of the southern section of South Lambeth Road and a land transfer between TfL and Lambeth Council. The Stockwell Cross scheme is included in TfL’s ‘Road Modernisation Plan’, which includes a programme to improve conditions for pedestrians and cyclists at 33 of London’s most intimidating junctions. This is part of a £4 billion investment into the Capital’s road network, which will make our roads safer and journey times more reliable.

4 The consultation Between 24 November 2014 and 18 January 2015, TfL consulted on proposals for the removal of the gyratory at Stockwell Cross. The consultation was designed to enable TfL to understand local opinion about the proposals.

The potential outcomes of the consultation are:

We decide the consultation raises no issues that should prevent us from proceeding with the scheme as originally planned

We modify the scheme in response to issues raised in consultation

We abandon the scheme as a result of issues raised in the consultation

10

The objectives of the consultation were:

To give stakeholders and the public easily-understandable information about the proposals and allow them to respond.

To understand the level of support or opposition for the change to Stockwell Cross.

To understand any issues that might affect the proposal of which we were not previously aware.

To understand concerns and objections.

To allow respondents to make suggestions.

4.1 Who we consulted

The public consultation intended to seek the views of people living close to and travelling through Stockwell Cross. We also consulted stakeholders including the affected Council, traffic police, London TravelWatch, Members of Parliament, Assembly Members and local interest groups. A list of the stakeholders we consulted is shown in Appendix C and a summary of their responses is given in Section 7.

4.2 Consultation material, distribution and publicity We undertook a number of activities to publicise and promote the consultation. These included:

A TfL press release advertising the consultation was sent to the local press

A letter drop to over 6,000 addresses around the Stockwell Cross area (see Appendix B)

o We invited people to respond by using the TfL website www.tfl.gov.uk/stockwell-cross, by emailing [email protected], by post or by calling Customer Services on 0845 300 7000.

An online consultation www.tfl.gov.uk/stockwell-cross, explaining the scheme and featuring maps (see Appendix A)

An article published in the Metro newspaper to raise awareness of the consultation and proposals (see Appendix H)

An email campaign to 46,000 Oyster card users, road users and affected bus customers (see Appendix G)

An email sent to stakeholders and local residents groups and associations

TfL twitter feeds and tweets from the Stockwell Partnership website

Two public information sessions at the Tate South Lambeth Library

Two visits to the Stockwell Forum, a public forum for local people (although the first attendance pre-dated consultation start and no details were disclosed. This provided an opportunity to make local people aware of the forthcoming consultation)

One site visit with members of the Lambeth Visual Impairment Group, to enable a clearer understanding of the physical changes proposed. This involved a member of the group with a white cane, one member with a

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/stockwell-cross

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/stockwell-cross

11

guide dog and one accompanied member who is also a wheelchair user (Appendix F).

Scheme questions can be found in Section 6 of this report.

4.3 Meetings and events

Meetings pre-dating public consultation

On the 17 September 2014 the TfL project and consultation team met with, London Borough of Lambeth officers and Stockwell Ward Councillors: Alex Bigham & Guilherme Rosa and the Portfolio holder for Environment & Sustainability: Cllr Jennifer Brathwaite. Councillors expressed support for the proposals.

Two meetings were held in October 2014 with the Friends of Stockwell Memorial Gardens to develop the urban realm components of the Memorial Garden.

Other meetings FastFit MOT Centre TfL met with FastFit MOT centre to discuss their concerns regarding access under the proposals. Three meetings were held during January and February 2015, the last was also attended by a London Borough of Lambeth officer.

Sustrans, Living Streets, London Cycling Campaign (LCC) The scheme was tabled at meetings attended jointly by Sustrans, Living Streets and LCC in March 2012, February 2013 and April 2014. Details of formal responses can be found in Section 7. Events TfL held two public information sessions, with representatives from the project team, consultation team, London Borough of Lambeth Officers and the Stockwell Partnership on:

Saturday 29 November, 12.00 to 15.00, Tate South Lambeth Library

Wednesday 3 December, 15.00 to 18.00, Tate South Lambeth Library Both sessions were well attended, with 60 people visiting on Saturday and 63 people visiting us on Wednesday evening. Attendees were invited to register their comments at two computer terminals made available at the library. A number of other visitors left their email or postal addresses so they could be informed when the consultation report was available. Comments made informally at the events mirror those raised in the online responses. Further details are available in Appendix E. Tate South Lambeth Library attracts a significant number of visually impaired visitors, as it provides and trials specialist computer programmes. One of the members of the Lambeth Visual Impairment group attended one of the information sessions and requested a site visit to explain the proposal. This subsequently took place in January 2015. Further information is available in Appendix F.

12

The project team also presented the proposals at the Stockwell Forum, a regular meeting organised by the Stockwell Partnership, a local charity run by and for the local community. These took place:

2 October 2014 and pre-dated public consultation, no details of the scheme were disclosed and the meeting slot was used to increase awareness of the forthcoming consultation

11 December 2014 with approx 40 attendees from the local community who were signposted to the different ways to register comments, including commenting via the Stockwell Partnership team

13

5 Overview of consultation responses

We received 579 separate responses to consultation. This includes responses

from member of the public and stakeholders. The online consultation

generated 542 responses.

We also received responses via email, letter and at public exhibitions. A number of people used a variety of methods to let us know their views and we consolidated these into a single response per respondent. This means that 14 instances of duplication were removed from the final numbers. We received 571 responses from members of the public and eight from stakeholders, outlined in Section 7. A total of 95% (542) of the public responses were online, and 5% (29) were received by email, post or at an event.

Type of response Number of responses

%

Online questionnaire 542 95%

Other (via email, post or at an exhibition) 29 5%

Total received 571

In the online questionnaire we asked respondents how they found out about the consultation. Of those that answered the question, the majority stated they found out via an email from TfL. The ‘Not Answered’ numbers include those that used a different method to contact us, rather than the online questionnaire.

How did you hear about this consultation? Number of responses

%

Email from TfL 304 54%

Letter from TfL 60 11%

Social media 41 7%

TfL’s Website 32 6%

Other (please specify) 24 4%

Word of mouth 23 4%

Not Answered 38 4%

From another organisation 15 3%

Read about it in the press 14 3%

Stockwell Forum 9 2%

At an event (Library or Stockwell Partnership Forum) 7 1%

Lambeth’s website 4 1%

Total 571

14

The majority of respondents (93%) provided their home postcode, with most (89%) living in Greater London. Overall, 418 (84%) live within the London Borough of Lambeth where Stockwell Cross is located. The next highest levels of response rates were from surrounding boroughs such as London Boroughs of Wandsworth (23 responses, 5%), and Southwark (9 responses, 2%). Public responses received by Borough

London borough Number of responses

%

Lambeth 419 84%

Wandsworth 23 5%

Southwark 9 2%

Hackney 4 1%

Sutton 4 1%

Lewisham 4 1%

Kingston upon Thames 4 1%

Enfield 3 1%

Islington 3 1%

Waltham Forest 3 1%

Merton 3 1%

Tower Hamlets 3 1%

Bromley 3 1%

Brent 2 <1%

Camden 2 <1%

Barnet 2 <1%

Harrow 2 <1%

Richmond upon Thames 1 <1%

Ealing 1 <1%

Croydon 1 <1%

City of Westminster 1 <1%

Hillingdon 1 <1%

Hounslow 1 <1%

Total 499 100%

Please see a map of postcodes within Greater London area in Figure 5.1 below.

15

Figure 5.1: Postcode Data Evaluation

16

6 Responses from members of the public 6.1 Analysis of all the questions asked

The Stockwell Cross online consultation questionnaire consisted of twelve questions about the proposed scheme. Questions were grouped by the elements of the proposals that support different travel choices.

These were split into sections that seek to make improvements to the cycling, public realm environment and pedestrian and also views about the removal of the gyratory in general. Two questions (Q7 and Q11) are not attributed to any particular choice of travel and are evaluated separately.

This section summarises responses as detailed below:

Question 1 to 6: Changes to the cycling environment

Question 8: Views on the removal of the gyratory

Question 9: Proposals for the urban realm

Question 11: Changes to the pedestrian environment

Question 7 & 10: Associated measures for Stockwell Cross proposal The questions are further analysed by:

Distance: Based on TfL Legible London guideline (Yellow Book A prototype wayfinding system for London), five (400 metre) and fifteen (1,200 metres) minutes walking distance, we analysed answers against the postcode data provided.

Travel preference: We further broke down results to show responses by the different travel choices made.

Section 6.9 evaluates the type of person who responded to consultation by analysing a number of supplementary questions, such as age, gender, how people use the area, how often they travel and their preferred choice of transport.

6.2 Cycling proposals This section summarises the responses to all questions about changes to the cycling environment.

Q 1: Do you agree with cycle lanes separated from general traffic between Stockwell Road and South Lambeth Road?

Q 2: Do you agree with Cyclist Early Start (CES), where cyclists get a green signal before other traffic?

Q 3: Do you agree with the proposed new sections of cycle lanes/areas at Stockwell Road?

Q 4: Do you agree with the proposed new sections of cycle lanes/areas by Stockwell Terrace?

Q 5: Do you agree with the Advanced Stop Lines (ASL), where cyclists have a larger waiting area at lights before other traffic?

Q 6: Do you agree with the widening of the bus lanes?

17

Average of the six cycling questions asked:

Average response for changes to the cycling environment

All area Within 1,200 metres

Number of responses

% Number of responses

%

Yes, agree 428 75% 263 80%

Doesn’t affect me 25 4% 17 5%

No, disagree 59 10% 28 8%

Don’t know 21 4% 13 4%

Not Answered 39 7% 7 2%

Support for the proposed changes affecting cyclists is at 75%. Focusing on the local area (within 1,200 metres), among respondents whose home postcodes could be mapped, 80% supported and 8%did not support the cycling proposals. Half of respondents (49%) agreed that all measures described would enhance the road space for cyclist and only 2 % (11) of respondents did not agree that any of the elements would improve cycling. Within 15 minutes (1,200 metres) walking distance there were 172 respondents (58%) who supported all six cycling proposals, and four respondents who did not support any of the proposed improvements. We evaluated the overall support for cycling proposal (Q1-6 on the basis of the number of times the respondents chose “Yes, agree” and “No, disagree” to questions 1 to 6. Each question was given a score of +1 if the response was positive and a score of -1 if the response was negative. Therefore the maximum positive score available is +6, or -6 for the maximum negative score. Based on this calculation the map in Figure 6.1 summarises the level of support on cycling proposals (question 1 to 6) with three levels: Positive (score 2 to 6), Neutral (score -1 to 1), and Negative (score -6 to -2).

18

Figure 6.1: Cycling proposals

19

Evaluation by distance from Stockwell Cross scheme

Both residents and commuters were mostly supportive of the proposed cycle measures, with 80% of residents and 82% of commuters agreeing with the proposed changes, and 9% of residents and 11% of commuters disagreeing with proposed changes.

Average response on Cycling elements of the proposal

Residents Commuters

Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 288 80% 204 82%



Don’t know 14 4% 7 3%


Evaluation by travel preference

The consultation generated high levels of support of the cycling measures. Overall 89% of cyclists and 79% of non-cyclists agree with the proposals for cyclists. 7% of cyclist and 9% of non-cyclists disagree with the proposals.

20

Analysis for each individual cycle proposal:

Q 1: Do you agree with cycle lanes

separated from general traffic between Stockwell Road and South Lambeth Road?


Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 454 80% 279 85%



Don’t know 12 2% 7 2%


Q 2: Do you agree with Cyclist Early Start

(CES), where cyclists get a green signal before other traffic?


Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 428 75% 258 79%



Don’t know 17 3% 13 4%


Q 3: Do you agree with the proposed new

sections of cycle lanes/areas at Stockwell Road?


Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 427 75% 266 81%



Don’t know 22 4% 12 4%


Q 4: Do you agree with the proposed new

sections of cycle lanes/areas by Stockwell Terrace?


Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 415 73% 259 79%



Don’t know 25 4% 15 5%


21

Q 5: Do you agree with the Advanced

Stop Lines (ASL), where cyclists have a larger waiting area at lights before other traffic?


Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 454 79% 279 85%



Don’t know 9 2% 6 2%


Q 6: Do you agree with the widening of

the bus lanes?


Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 387 68% 234 71%


No, disagree 89 16% 49 15%

Don’t know 41 7% 26 8%


22

6.3 Removal of the Gyratory

Question 8: Do you agree with the removal of the gyratory?

Do you agree with the removal of the gyratory?


Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 422 74% 262 80%


No, disagree 57 10% 37 11%

Don’t know 44 8% 21 6%


Support for the proposed removal of the gyratory is high at 74%, with 10% disagreeing with the proposed removal. Feedback from people in the local area (within 1,200 metres), where postcodes were provided, shows that 80% agree and 11% disagree with the proposal. The map in figure 6.2 indicates how the respondents within 15 min (1,200 metres) walking distance responded to Question 8.

23

Figure 6.2: Removal of the Gyratory

24


Both residents and commuters were mostly supportive of the removal of the gyratory, with 81% of residents and 79% of commuters agreeing with the proposal.11% of residents and 9% of commuters disagree with the proposal.

Do you agree with the removal of the gyratory?

Residents Commuters

Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 293 81% 197 79%



Don’t know 20 6% 22 9%



As the removal of the gyratory includes closure of the southern section of South Lambeth Road, the responses were filtered by motorists and non-motorists. Motorists include those who chose private car driver / Taxi, and non motorist include those who chose pedestrian, cyclist, Tube, and/or Bus passengers as options in question 18. The consultation generated high levels of support, with 73% of motorists and 80% of non-motorists agreeing with the removal of the gyratory. 18% of motorists and 10% of non-motorists disagree with the proposal.

Motorist Non- motorist

Yes, agree 215 1254

No, disagree 53 155

Doesn’t affect me 1 15

Don’t know 22 113

Not Answered 3 29

1% 2%

8%7%

18%

10%

>1%1%

73%

80%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

25

6.4 Urban realm improvement

Question 9: Do you agree with the proposed improvements for the public space around the Stockwell Memorial Garden by closing part of South Lambeth Road?

Do you agree with the proposed improvements for the public space around the Stockwell Memorial Garden by closing part of South Lambeth Road?


Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 439 77% 274 84%


No, disagree 59 10% 36 11%

Don’t know 24 4% 10 3%


Support for the proposed urban realm changes are at 77%, with10% disagreeing with the proposal. Feedback from people in the local area (within 1,200 metres), where postcodes were provided, shows that 84% agree and 11% disagree with the proposal. The map in figure 6.3 indicates how the respondents within 15 mins (1,200 metres) walking distance responded to Question 9.

26

Figure 6.3: Urban realm

27


Both residents and commuters were mostly supportive of the urban realm proposal, with 84% of residents and 80% of commuters agreeing with the proposal.11% of residents and 9% of commuters disagreed with the proposal.

Do you agree with the proposed improvements for the public space around the Stockwell Memorial Garden by closing part of South Lambeth Road?

Residents Commuters

Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 303 84% 200 81%

Doesn’t affect me 1 <1% 6 2%


Don’t know 12 3% 12 5%



As the removal of the public realm proposal includes closure of the southern section of South Lambeth Road, the responses were filtered by motorists and non-motorists. Motorists include those who chose private car driver / Taxi, and non-motorist include those who chose pedestrian, cyclist, Tube, and/or Bus passengers as options in question 18. The consultation generated high levels of support, with 79% of motorists and 83% of non-motorists agreeing with the proposal. 16% of motorists and 10% of non-motorists disagree with the proposal.

Motorist Non- motorist

Yes, agree 232 1308

No, disagree 48 155


Don’t know 9 61

Not Answered 3 22

79% 83%

16% 10%

3% 4%1% 1%

1% 1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

28

6.5 Changes for pedestrians

Question 11: Do you agree with the new pedestrian crossing facilities?

Do you agree with the new pedestrian crossings facilities?


Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 394 69% 245 75%


No, disagree 83 15% 49 15%

Don’t know 43 8% 24 7%


Support for the proposed pedestrian improvement is high with 69%.15% disagreed with the proposed improvement. Feedback from people in the local area (within 1,200 metres), where postcodes were provided, shows that 75% agreed and 15% disagreed with the proposal. The map in figure 6.4 indicates how the respondents within 15 mins (1,200 metres) walking distance responded to Question 11. Evaluation by distance from Stockwell Cross scheme Both residents and commuters were mostly supportive of the changes to the pedestrian facilities, with 75% of residents and 74% of commuters agreeing with proposals.15% of residents and 13% of commuters disagreed with the proposals.

Do you agree with the new pedestrian crossings facilities?

Residents Commuters

Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 270 75% 184 74%


No, disagree 55 15% 32 13%

Don’t know 26 7% 19 8%



There is high level of support for the pedestrian improvements among both

pedestrians and those using other means of travel; 74% of pedestrian and

73% of other travel preferences agreeing with the proposed pedestrian

measures. 17% of pedestrians and 15% of those with other travel choices

disagreed with the proposal.

29

Pedestrian Any other mode

Yes, agree 289 1095

No, disagree 65 230


Don’t know 26 113

Not Answered 4 45

1% 3%7%

7%2%

2%

17%15%

74% 72%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

30

Figure 6.4: Changes for pedestrians

31

6.6 Associated measures for Stockwell Cross

This section includes the questions 7 & 10 that were not attributed to a preferred way

of using and/or travelling through the area.

6.6.1 Widening of the bus lanes

Question 7: Do you agree with the widening of the bus lanes?

Do you agree with the widening of the bus lanes?


Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 392 69% 237 72%


No, disagree 79 14% 43 13%

Don’t know 49 9% 33 10%


Support for the proposed widening of the bus lane is high, with 69% agreeing and 14% disagreeing with the proposal. Feedback from people in the local area (within 1,200 metres), where postcodes were provided, shows that 82% agreed and 13% disagreed with the proposal.

Evaluation by distance from Stockwell Cross scheme Both residents and commuters were mostly supportive of the proposal to widen the bus lanes, with 72% of residents and 77% of commuters agreeing with the proposal. 14% of both residents and commuters disagree with the proposal.

Do you agree with the widening of the bus lanes?

Residents Commuters

Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 261 72% 190 77%


No, disagree 51 14% 34 14%

Don’t know 31 9% 15 6%


32

6.6.2 Simplification of the junction

Question 10: Do you agree with simplification of the junction?

Do you agree with the simplification of the junctions?


Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 436 76% 259 79%


No, disagree 55 10% 36 11%

Don’t know 34 6% 22 7%


Support for the proposal to simplify the junction is high, with 76% agreeing and 10% disagreeing with the proposal. Feedback from people in the local area (within 1,200 metres), where postcodes were provided, showed 79% agreeing and 11% disagreeing with the proposal.


Both residents and commuters were mostly supportive of the proposal to simplify the junction, with 80% of residents and 85% of commuters agreeing with the proposal.11% of residents and 9% of commuters disagree with the proposal.

Do you agree with the simplification of the junctions?

Residents Commuters

Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 288 80% 210 85%



Don’t know 23 6% 10 4%


33

6.7 Average response for Q 1-11 for Stockwell Cross proposals

The following table shows the average percentage of support for all the elements of the scheme.

Average Q1-11

All area Within 1200m

Number of responses


%

Yes, agree 423 74% 259 79%


No, disagree 63 11% 33 10%

Don’t know 29 5% 17 5%


34

6.8 Other comments

Question 12 was a free text box and gave the option to make additional comments. These have been analysed and a number of common themes established. Each response has been evaluated against these themes. 610 issues were raised by 395 members of the public for Question 12. The table below shows the top 10 issues and themes raised. The majority of comments were positive and supported the proposals. Some respondents raised concerns about increased traffic congestion and rat running as a number of turns would no longer be possible under the proposals. Concerns were raised that the proposed staggered crossing on Stockwell Road would mean pedestrians would need to wait longer to cross Stockwell Road. There were also a number of comments suggesting that the segregated cycle lanes are not wide enough to accommodate the growing demand in cycling. Responses to the concerns raised are provided in Appendix D of this report.

Top ten issues and themes Number of comments

Paragraph in Appendix D

Support the proposed scheme 196 N/A

Concern about increased traffic congestion 46 D.1

Concern about banned right turn into Stockwell Road from n/b Clapham Road

37 D.2

Concern about available space in segregated cycle lane

36 D.7

Concern about new staggered crossing on Stockwell Road

35 D.12

Concern about banned left turn South Lambeth Road n/b Clapham Road

34 D.3

Oppose whole proposal 25 N/A

Concern about rat running 23 D.4

No cyclist protection on left turn into South Lambeth Road from Clapham Road (n/b)

20 D.8

Support the proposed public realm 19 N/A

35

6.9 Understanding who responded

To better understand who responded to our proposals, we asked respondents a number of additional questions:

What is your age group?

What is your gender?

Which do you use when travelling in and around Stockwell (option to tick multiple options of travel)

How often do you travel in and around Stockwell Gyratory?

What is the main purpose of your journeys through the area? (option to tick multiple choices)

6.9.1 Age group

The significant number of respondents are aged 26 to 39 (48%) or 41 to 50 (28%). 9% of respondents are above the age of 60. There were only two respondents who are under the age of 15.

36

6.9.2 Gender group

More than half of people responding are male (62%), with 29% female. Among the respondents who live within 1,200 metres, 62% are male, and 34% are female. There were 53 respondents who did not answer or preferred not to say.

37

6.9.3 Type of transport used by respondents

In this question we allowed a choice of as many answers as applicable. Therefore, the total does not match up with the total number of responses overall. 297 respondents provided information on the types of transport they use locally, selecting 1.031 options of travel in total. As people were able to choose a number of options, these were divided by the number of the individual options selected to get an average figure. Most people stated that they travelled by Tube (76%), closely followed by bus users (72%) and those walking (68%). Those who cycle regularly were at 57%and those who regularly drive represented 35%. There were not many respondents indicating that they regularly use taxis (16%). Within 1,200 metres from Stockwell Cross, the majority of the respondents walk and take the tube (both 87%). 83% of the respondents use a bus and 58% cycle in the area.

38

6.9.4 How often do you travel in and around Stockwell Gyratory?

535 respondents provided information on how frequently they travel in and around Stockwell Cross. About half of the respondents (51%) travel in and around Stockwell Gyratory daily. 66% of the respondents whose postcodes were within 1,200 metres also travel in and around the gyratory daily. 27% stated they used the gyratory weekly. Of those within 1,200 metres, 27% stated they travel weekly.

39

6.9.5 The main purpose of your journeys through the area

As people were able to choose a number of options, these were divided by the number of the individual options selected to get an average figure. The analysis shows a large proportion of people who answered this question are residents (63%), and 43% commute through the area. Most live within 1,200 metres (94%).

6.9.6 Conclusion of respondents’ socio demographic character

The analysis shows the most typical respondents are: Male, aged between 26 and 39, lives locally and uses the Stockwell gyratory on a daily basis travelling by tube or bus.

40

7 Responses from statutory bodies and other stakeholders We received eight responses from stakeholders. These responses are below.

Comments from elected representatives

Valerie Shawcross AM - Greater London Authority Believes these changes will significantly improve look of area, vastly improv

public realm and make busy area outside tube station more attractive for local residents and workers

Said the new improvements to the Memorial Garden are very welcome

Also welcomed removal of gyratory system as it will make area not only be safer for vulnerable road users (such as pedestrians and cyclists), but make it feel safer

Scheme will contribute towards enhanced sense of place for Stockwell and help develop it as destination in its own right for visitors, rather than simply an interchange and residential area

Comments from transport representatives

Living Streets Supportive of proposed changes but expressed concerns:

The loss of the straight ahead crossing on Stockwell Rd. Changing this crossing from straight ahead to staggered reduces pedestrian convenience

Reduction in footway width on Clapham Road

The consultation drawings give no indication of footway width, pedestrian comfort levels or adjacent building use (other than tube and rail stations). We ask that this type of information is included in similar consultations in the future."

Sustrans Supportive of proposed changes but expressed concerns:

Cyclists should be permitted to turn right into Stockwell Road

There will be no right turn from Clapham Road into Binfield Road for cyclists

Stockwell Road: The right/left turning lane is not acceptable when combined with a left hand feeder lane. The proposed layout would encourage cyclists to filter on the inside of traffic, and put them at risk of a ‘left hook’ collision

The right turn for cyclists from Stockwell Road to Clapham Road is long movement. Separate signalling or an early start facility should be considered, particularly to avoid the risk of collision from large vehicle’s tracking

Clapham Road / Stockwell Terrace junction: priority on Stockwell Terrace is not clear. For cyclists, the left turn should be permitted to allow them to join the Cycle Superhighway route northbound.

There should be a facility that enables pedestrians to cross the southern side of the junction

It is unclear whether an early start facility will be used to assist northbound cyclists travelling from Stockwell Road to Clapham Road.

41

Lambeth Cyclists (sub group to LCC)

Suggests junction starting at South Lambeth Road/ Stockwell Road with public space connected to Stockwell Terrace instead.

Suggests that this would allow the left turn from South Lambeth Road to Clapham Road to remain and might cut down rat-running on alternative streets.

On the scheme itself:

Suggests this is potentially better than existing layout

Suggests a segregated cycle lane with floating bus stop on a substantial island with zebra crossing on the tube station side and two general traffic lanes (one signed to Vauxhall, one to E&C) after the bus stop.

Suggests a two-stage ‘Copenhagen’ turn using Binfield Road

Suggests cycle lane through closed section of Memorial Garden

Suggests cycle lane by War Memorial needs to be wide enough to allow for a greater number of cyclists than currently and attractive enough in junction crossing time that people are not tempted to cycle in the general traffic lanes.

Suggests segregated cycle lane continues northbound past the Clapham Road/South Lambeth Road junction with a floating bus stop

Suggests southbound cycle lane continues across the junction with South Lambeth Road, with traffic turning left into Stockwell Gardens being forced to do so very slowly, giving way to the cycle lane.

Suggests pavement continued across the entrance of Stockwell Gardens similarly to the recent scheme in ‘The Pavement’ Clapham Old Town.

Suggests a seamless cycle lane from Clapham Road left into Stockwell Road and a cycle lane with floating bus stop rather than cyclists overtaking the buses past Stockwell Road junction.

Suggests northbound turn from Stockwell Road should have offside lane as left turn into South Lambeth Road (from Clapham Road) and nearside lane left turn only when cycle traffic is held at the junction.

Suggests southbound from South Lambeth Road, the No Entry to Stockwell Terrace should remain, but show ‘except cyclists’, with ‘one way’ signage likewise amended at the Clapham Road entrance. Questions the proposed ASL.

Comments from local groups

Stockwell Partnership

Supportive of proposed changes:

Has been engaging the local community about the neighbourhood since 2001, as there have always been strong concern expressed about the poor quality of the area and often perceived as ‘ugly, dirty and dangerous’

The gyratory contributes to this perception, cutting off one of the very few public open spaces in Stockwell, as well as being a known hazard to cyclists (as they have to cycle across South Lambeth Road to carry on northwards up Clapham Road)

The loss of the straight crossing on Stockwell Rd to a staggered crossing will reduce pedestrian convenience

Closure of part of South Lambeth Road has potential to create a safe, dignified plaza setting for the War Memorial, a respite from the traffic, and a place where people can meet and relax in the cafés which are sure to come. It will create a

42

new heart for Stockwell, and reduce the perception of it just as a place people travel through on their way to somewhere else.

Stockwell Park Residents' Association

Strongly opposes to the proposals due to impact on traffic flow and overall safety. Suggests that the changes are solely for the benefit of commuting cyclists.

Stockwell Memorial Friends

Support the proposed changes.

8 Conclusion

TfL believes the case for improving the 1960s gyratory system at Stockwell to better deliver the transport requirements of a 21st century city is clear. The consultation received nearly 600 responses from members of the public, demonstrating that there is considerable local interest in the proposals. The majority of respondents agreed that the proposals would deliver improvements to cyclists and the Stockwell area as a whole. Further comments on the opportunity to create a new public space and help deliver transformational change were overwhelmingly positive.

The public consultation identified areas of local concern. However, whilst we acknowledge that the changes will inconvenience some, we believe that this is outweighed by the wider benefits that the scheme offers to cyclists, pedestrians and the urban space. Having considered the outcome of consultation, TfL intends to progress with the scheme we consulted on. This will be subject to minor alterations as we continue to work with the London Borough of Lambeth to agree a final design. TfL will then seek relevant approvals to progress the scheme to construction.

8.1 Next steps

Once approvals have been granted for the scheme to progress, construction could begin in late 2015 and would be expected to take approximately 6 months to complete. Monitoring work would be undertaken to assess any impacts of the changes, for example on local roads, and mitigation measures would be identified if required. We will write to everyone who provided us with their details to inform them of the outcome of consultation.

43

Appendix A – The consultation material

44

The consultation material sent to residents around the Stockwell Cross

area (as shown in Appendix B overleaf) consisted of a two page A4 letter

(previous page), a CGI (below) and map (right)

45

Appendix B – Leaflet distribution area

The letter distribution area as shown below identified 6739 residences, including high density

housing estates.

Appendix C – List of stakeholders consulted

LB Lambeth Lambeth Safer Transport Team

Lambeth Traffic and Transport Working Group

Officers Cllrs (Stockwell and Larkhall

wards)

Portfolio Holder

GLA - AMs Caroline Pidgeon Andrew Boff

Garath Bacon Fiona Twycross

Nicky Gavron Joanne McCartney

Jenny Jones Murad Qureshi

Victoria Borwick Valerie Shawcross

46

Darren Johnson

Houses of Parliament - MPs Patrick McLoughlin (Secretary of

State)

Chuka Umunna

Stephen Hammond Kate Hoey

Seema Malhotra Tom Copley

Business Representatives London First London Chamber of Commerce

and Industry (LCCI)

Federation of Small Businesses

(FSB)

Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE)

CBI Royal Institution of Chartered

Surveyors (RICS

Transport Industry Freight Transport Association Association of Car Fleet Operators

Road Haulage Association Association of British Drivers

Licenced Taxi Drivers Association Green Flag Group

Business Services and Strategy

PCO, Taxi & Private Hire, ST

LCC (Lambeth Cyclists)

DfT AA Motoring Trust

Motorcycle Industry Association Sustrans

Motorcycle Action Group Living Streets

Disability Groups The British Dyslexia Association SCOPE

Independent Disability Advisory

Group (IDAG)

Joint Committee on Mobility of

Blind and Partially Sighted People

(JCMBPS)

Asian Peoples Disabilities Alliance Muscular Dystrophy Campaign

City of London Access Group Action for Blind People

Joint Mobility Unit RADAR London Access Forum

Sixty Plus MIND

Disabled Persons Transport

Committee

Disabled Persons Transport

Advisory Committee

Leonard Cheshire Disability Sense

Transport for All Age UK

The Association of Guide Dogs for

the Blind

Multiple Sclerosis Society

Disability Alliance Stroke Association

47

Action on Hearing Loss (RNID) People First

Disability Groups continued Royal London Society for the Blind

(RLSB)

British Deaf Association (BDA)

RNID Action on Hearing Loss (RNID

Lambeth Visual Impairment Group

Other organisations and Campaigns

London Travelwatch

Passenger Focus

Campaign for Better Transport Greater London Forum for Older People (GLF)

Campaign for Clean Air in London

Royal Parks

Environment Agency (London

team) National Union of Students

National Council for Voluntary

Youth Services (NCVYS) National Children's Bureau

Partnership for Young London

Action for Children

London Older People's Strategy

Group Greater London Forum for the Elderly

King's College Hospital NHS

Foundation Trust LU

Royal Mail

Local Groups Stockwell Partnership Virtual Norwood Forum

Stockwell Park Residents

Association Friends of Stockwell Memorial Garden

Friends of Slade gardens Clapham Society

Streatham Vale Property

Occupiers Association

Emergency Services London Fire and Emergency Authority London Ambulance Service

London Fire Brigades Traffic management Police

Metropolitan Police - Community Police

Utilities BT Thames Water

EDF Energy National Grid

48

Appendix D – Response to issues raised Responses to concerns raised during Stockwell Cross consultation R

D.1 Concern about increased traffic

The changes at Stockwell have primarily been designed to improve safety for cyclists, who are not well catered for by the current layout. There were 20 collisions involving injury to cyclists in the 36 months from July 2011 – July 2014, 37% of total collisions in this area. As a result of introducing new segregated cycle lanes, cycle-only phases and advanced cycle signals, carriageway space available to general traffic is reduced which will result in longer queues during the peak periods. TfL will continue to work to mitigate the impact on traffic as much as possible. We are developing wider traffic management plans for central London to help reduce the traffic impacts of this scheme and others, including those proposed by London local authorities and developers. This will include continuing to invest in advanced traffic signal technology to allow us to better manage traffic depending on differing conditions at any given time. There will also be customer information to enable road users to make informed journey choices and campaigns to encourage road users to check before they travel. Where there are increases on journey times for bus routes impacted by the scheme, a programme of work is being developed to save time elsewhere along the affected route by addressing delays and giving priority to buses at certain pinch-points.

D.2 Concern about banned right turn from Clapham Road into Stockwell Road

when coming from Clapham North

Under the proposal to remove the gyratory, northbound vehicles will no longer be able to turn from Clapham Road into Stockwell Road. Traffic counts undertaken during the design of the scheme showed that the use of this turn is very low. Removing this turning movement makes the operation of the junction safer and simpler. The turning counts were AM Peak (7:45-9:45) = 11 vehicles and 7 buses PM Peak (18:00 – 19:00) = 14 vehicles and 7 buses The route 345 bus will be able to make this movement under the proposal, with the provision of a bus only right turn at the junction of Clapham Road and Stockwell Road. This will not be a dedicated right turn and buses will need to wait for a gap in southbound traffic before making the turn. Consideration was given to allowing this turn for all vehicles; however it was not carried forward due to being unsafe without a dedicated right turn signal. To provide this signal would contribute to the time in the junction’s operation, which would impact on pedestrian waiting times, travel times and congestion.

49

TfL has worked closely with the London Borough of Lambeth to assess the redistribution of traffic onto local roads as a result of changes proposed in the scheme. We are satisfied that this will not pose a significant issue due to the low numbers of vehicles currently making this turn. We will monitor the situation following the implementation of the scheme and mitigation measures developed if they are required.

D.3 Concern about banned left turn from South Lambeth Road into Clapham Road

when coming from Vauxhall

Under the proposal to reduce the risk of left hook collisions between vehicles and cyclists, the left turn from South Lambeth Road into Clapham Road will be banned. Traffic counts undertaken in the design of the scheme showed that the use of this turn is very low. The turning counts were AM Peak (8:15 - 9:15) = 18 vehicles PM Peak (18:00 - 19:00) = 17 vehicles To introduce this turn would require the left turn to be separately signalled, which would contribute to the time in the junction’s operation, and impact on pedestrian waiting times, travel times and congestion. Removing this turning movement will make the operation of the junction safer and simpler. The pedestrian crossing directly to the north side of the junction will benefit from additional crossing time as a result of the left turn being banned. Most vehicles going between the two roads use Lansdowne Way, which they will still be able to do. Given that there are currently so few vehicles making this turn, TFL does no expect there to be any significant increase of traffic on Albert Square and Aldebert Terrace.

D.4 Concern about rat running

TfL has worked closely with the London Borough of Lambeth to assess the redistribution of traffic onto local roads as a result of changes proposed in the scheme. We are satisfied that this will not pose a significant issue due to the low numbers of vehicles currently making this turn. TFL will make use of driver education, signage and satellite navigation devices to ensure motorists are informed of the changes when planning their journeys. We will use targeted email and publicity campaigns to provide drivers with information about the changes in advance of their implementation. These will include details of the banned turns, and the alternative routes available. We will install appropriate signage in Clapham and Vauxhall to ensure that drivers are made aware of the banned turns before they reach Stockwell. We are liaising with satellite navigation companies so that their devices incorporate the banned turns and provide drivers with alternative routings. Taken together, these measures will mitigate the impact of the banned turns on traffic displacement and congestion in the Stockwell area. Drivers wanting to make these turns will be presented with alternative routings before they approach Stockwell.

50

Buses D.5 Concern about the move of the bus stop on South Lambeth Road

Bus stop A is moving 50 metres north along South Lambeth Road towards Vauxhall, which will result in a longer walk to Stockwell Underground for passengers who wish to make this interchange. This bus stop services Routes 2 and 88, both of which have other stops in the local area (at Stop R (Stockwell Road) and Stop F (Clapham Road) respectively). The distance from the existing stop A to Stockwell Underground is 100 metres, with the proposed stop A being 150 metres away. Stop R is 90 metres from Stockwell Underground. However, it does include a pedestrian crossing over Clapham Road, which may increase the journey time. Stop F is 20 metres from Stockwell Underground, which is 80 metres less than the existing stop A.

D.6 Concern about bus route 50 curtailments via Lansdowne Way

The diversion of route 50 to a new stand on Binfield Road would add an additional 6 buses per hour to this route, which is already used by Route P5. Out of service buses which currently return to the bus depot via Binfield Road would no longer follow this route due to a banned turn for buses under the proposals. This would result in a reduction of buses. A benefit of diverting route 50 is that it would be able to commence service earlier by first stopping at Stop B.

Cyclists D.7 Concern cyclists would remain in carriageway instead of using segregated

cycle lane

The ‘Mayor’s Vision for Cycling in London’ sets out a commitment that ‘nothing I do will affect cyclists’ freedom to use any road they choose’. The majority of cyclists are however expected to use the high quality infrastructure proposed, which provides protection from motorised traffic and enables them to connect seamlessly with other cycle routes. Data recently collected from the fully segregated CS2 between Bow and Stratford showed 95 per cent of cyclists in the pm peak used the segregated facilities.

D.8 No cyclist protection on left turn into South Lambeth Road from Clapham Road

(northbound)

The left turn into South Lambeth Road from Clapham Road can be made in one of two ways, both of which provide a safe passage for cyclists:

51

1. Cyclists can cross the Memorial Gardens 2. Cyclists can turn left when the ahead traffic has a green signal, this would occur

when left turning traffic is held on a red signal D.9 Concern about conflicting movement with buses on Clapham Road

(southbound) by Stockwell Road junction

Cyclists have been given an early start at this signal which will enable them to move ahead of buses at the stop line. Due to the layout of the junction, volume of cyclists and volume of bus passengers, it was felt that providing a 4.5 metre wide bus lane was the best option for cyclists. An option to provide a bus stop bypass facility was assessed but considered unfeasible due to the volumes of cyclists using the facility and the risk that it could cause cyclists to queue back into the junction. We will continue to monitor the operation of the scheme once implemented.

D.10 Concern about conflicting left turn from Stockwell Road into Clapham Road

(southbound)

Cyclists are given a head start here, allowing them to pass through the junction ahead of other traffic. Consideration was given to providing physical segregation, but this was seen as unfeasible as the potential point of conflict is beyond the stop line and could result in encouraging cyclists into an unsafe position when making the turn. Consideration was also given to banning the left turn but this is required by bus route 345, which could not feasibly be diverted.

D.11 Concern about conflicting movement with left turning traffic on Clapham Road

(southbound) by Stockwell Road junction

This junction holds all left turning vehicles to enable cyclists to travel south and left with ahead traffic only. Vehicles are then held at a dedicated cycle light whilst the left turning traffic is released.

Pedestrians D.12 Concerns about crossing time on Stockwell Road due to new staggered crossing

Pedestrians are currently only able to cross Stockwell Road during the ‘All Red’ pedestrian stage at the straight crossing, which also has a narrow pedestrian refuge. The proposed layout of the junction has a staggered pedestrian crossing over Stockwell Road, which will enable pedestrians to cross the western arm of Stockwell Road when traffic lights on A3 Clapham Road are on green. The wider traffic island will also give pedestrians a safe area, and more space than currently, to wait before crossing the eastern arm during the ‘All Red’ pedestrian stage. Removal of the straight crossing over Stockwell Road provides a significant improvement in vehicle capacity, and helps maintain a fair balance for all road users

52

D.13 Concern about conflict with cyclists going through new Memorial Garden

Cyclists will be able to cycle through the Memorial Garden via dropped kerbs on Clapham Road and South Lambeth Road. This movement will only be in one direction from Clapham Road to South Lambeth Road, and flows are expected to be low outside the weekday morning peak. Cyclists will also be able to make this movement by using the segregated track on Clapham Road and turning left into South Lambeth Road at the controlled junction. Consideration has been given to risks of conflict between pedestrians and cyclists using the path through the gardens, and the design will include measures to reduce conflicts by using appropriate signage, materials and lighting.

D.14 Concern about removal of pedestrian crossing on South Lambeth junction

The new road layout at the northern end of South Lambeth Road was defined by the removal of South Lambeth Road from Clapham Road northbound. This resulted in the relocation of the existing bus stop and loading/parking bay in the vicinity of the current pedestrian crossing on South Lambeth Road. Hence the pedestrian crossing could not be provided across South Lambeth Road to link up with proposed public space within the Memorial Gardens. An uncontrolled crossing with a pedestrian refuge just to the south of the bus stop on South Lambeth Road was investigated but was not feasible owing to insufficient road width and for reasons stated above. There are other controlled crossings in the vicinity of the current crossing point where pedestrians would be able to cross the road safely to reach their destination.

Memorial Garden D.15 Let cyclists cycle through Stockwell Memorial Garden

Cyclists will be able to cycle through the Memorial Garden. Consideration has been given to risks of conflict between pedestrians and cyclists using the path through the gardens and this will inform the design, with appropriate signage, materials and lighting being used.

D.16 Concern about proximity to carriageway

The memorial clock tower will be closer to the carriageway. This has been discussed with the Friends of Stockwell Memorial to ensure the most suitable setback possible has been achieved. There will be a footway, hedge, cycle track and segregation separating the clock tower from the traffic lane, which equates to approximately 5 metres.

D.17 Preserve the meaning of the memorial

53

TfL has worked in partnership with London Borough of Lambeth, Stockwell Partnership and Friends of Stockwell Memorial to ensure the total design of the Memorial Garden is focused on the memorial. The proposed design provides a larger area in front of the memorial for Remembrance Day services, whilst providing areas for reflection and contemplation throughout the year.

D.18 Too much hard stand around memorial, more greenery required

The amount of lawn in the memorial garden has been increased significantly and areas shown in the consultation as planted with small plants will now be replaced by lawn. In consultation with the London Borough of Lambeth, a balance was required between providing an active space which can be used for a variety of purposes and a garden, which will need to maintain a high quality and robust appearance, without requiring extensive maintenance.

Safety D.19 Concern about antisocial behaviour

Consideration has been given to improving the public open spaces and reducing the impacts of crime and disorder in the development of the proposals. The scheme aims to improve the entire area and rejuvenate it into an open and friendly space. Removing the gyratory would mean the Memorial Gardens are much more accessible, which will lead to a higher level of natural surveillance. The installation of safe-crossing places, good connectivity throughout the area, and clear way-finding will encourage local user confidence. The designers were tasked with providing a more open, lighter and friendly space, which has been proven in other locations to reduce the potential for anti-social behaviour and other crime. This is achieved through removing deserted, undefined or secluded places, given that vandalism and other criminal acts tend to be concentrated in these areas. A similar urban redevelopment in Windrush Square in Brixton has highlighted the positive impact that regeneration can have on crime and disorder. Seating and tree positions will be considered in terms of creating good visibility and natural surveillance. The lighting design will distribute light so it is spread evenly, avoiding pools and light variations. New CCTV positions will be considered to ensure the changes in the area don’t create blindspots.

54

Appendix E – Events at Tate South Lambeth Library 29 November & 3 December 2014 We held two events at Tate South Lambeth Library to enable local people to view the plans and ask questions of the project teams. Over the two three-hour sessions 123 people visited, with 35 people writing comments on our feedback sheets. Of these, 11also recorded their views online. Visitors to the information sessions had the opportunity to use two computer terminals at the library to record their views.

Comments included:

Can not be worse than at present. Currently dangerous for cyclist drivers and pedestrian & just pray the traffic will flow smoothly afterwards as it does not now

I think it’s a great idea. It will definitely bring a greater emphasis to Stockwell in terms of bringing more cultural and reckoning to Stockwell. Great, fantastic idea

Please stop building for a while. This is not a dramatic improvement. It can wait until the area is less of a building site. Use the money for something useful.

London is being spoilt with all this building work. Take stock of all the people.

Many of us are concerned that the proposed traffic routeing will turn Albert Square & Adelbert Terrace into a busy rat run. One answer is to restore 2way traffic flow on Lansdowne Way to enable traffic from Stockwell Park Road to go to Vauxhall

Ok - except far too much concrete. London has a flooding problem. Either have much more grass or trees or even plants in pots or specify a water absorbent surface - it does exist

55

Narrowing of pedestrian walkways will create pinch points around bus stops create impediment for walkers on cluttered pavements. Keep cyclist on the roads not with pedestrians

Would be keen to be updated on progress. I generally feel positive with the plan Keen to keep Stockwell Terrace and green area in front unchanged - plus possible crossing on top of Lambeth Road where there is one... Should be retained? It might be a good idea to make Lansdown Way able to turn right into Clapham Road

I'm in a wheelchair - sloping kerbs (not just on a few crossings, but on all of them) are really very essential for a reasonable trip out in the big, wicked world

56

Appendix F – Lambeth Visual Impairment Group Site visit with members on 13 January 2015

TfL consultation and Travel Mentoring team (Christina Smith and Ibiyinka Akande) met the group at Tate South Lambeth Library. Members of the group asked for a site visit to explore the changes to the road layout. The group was particularly concerned about the difficulty by people with visual impairments to negotiate junctions and of the other physical barriers that could be introduced as part of the proposals. This included Patrick with guide dog Rufus; Mel, a wheelchair user with companion; Roger, a white cane user, shadowed by Ibi from the travel mentoring team;

Image 1-3: Members of the group set off at different times from Tate South Lambeth Library.

The group meet at the proposed location of the relocated bus stop, just north of the future closed section of South Lambeth Road and continue to the entrance of Stockwell tube together.

Image 4: Roger continues from new bus stop location Image 5: Waiting to cross at Binfield Road junction

Findings:

The straight across crossings (by tube station), although there are pedestrian light control boxes with cones on the middle island, there is no tactile paving to indicate where the island is located (Roger therefore continued crossing although the red ped light was showing)

The tactile paving on eastern side of Stockwell Terrace that would indicate crossing the road to the traffic island (and from there to the garden or the east side of Clapham Road) has no tail, so Patrick could not find his way from the last bus stop on South Lambeth Road going southbound to the eastern side of Clapham Road.

For the proposed closed South Lambeth Road section, part of the new Stockwell Memorial Gardens, Roger suggested a clear taper around trees to follow with his cane (orientation is based on following a line of buildings or physical features). If cycles are

57

allowed to use the closed section, then measures to obviously separate the two spaces are required (similar to last point). Post visit comment: The distinction between the space for cyclists and pedestrians needs to be a physical one that can be easily distinguished by all groups affected. A colour scheme in itself will not be sufficient. It needs to be a tactile, visual and physical barrier.

58

Appendix H – Metro Article

59

Appendix G – Email to Oyster card users, road users

and affected bus passengers

Documents

Stockwell Consultation Report