Consultation Report Summarises the Consultation Exercise and Responses Received

A406 North Circular Road: Golders Green RoadA24 with Epsom Brent Road Street – Cycle and Bridge safety Lane to Goldersimprovements Green Road Proposed improvements to cycle facilities along A24 Proposed pedestrian and cyclist improvement works Epsom Road between Central Road and Lower

ConsultationMorden LaneReport SeptemberMarch 2016 2016

C ontents

1 Executive summary ...... 1 2 Background...... 2 3 The consultation ...... 3 4 Overview of consultation responses ...... 5 5 Responses from statutory bodies and other stakeholders ...... 9 6 Conclusion ...... 10 Appendix A - Copy of consultation letter………………………………………………………… 11 Appendix B – Letter distribution area ...... 15 Appendix C – List of stakeholders consulted ...... 15 Appendix D - A list of views and suggestions made during the consultation………..17 Appendix E – Response to issues raised ...... 19

1 Executive summary

We recently consulted on proposed improvements for pedestrians and cyclists along the A406 North Circular from Bridge Lane to Golders Green Road and at the A406 junction with Golders Green Road and Brent Street. The proposals included a new shared pedestrian/cyclist ‘toucan’ crossing and new and upgraded sections of shared use footway, as well as a new retaining wall.

The consultation aimed to provide an opportunity for people to give us feedback about the proposals and enable us to understand local opinions.

Results of consultation We received 87 responses to the consultation. In the consultation we asked two main questions:

1. Do you support the proposed new toucan crossing on the A406 North Circular westbound carriageway?  61% of respondents supported the scheme, 18% opposed, 10% partially supportive, 2% were not sure, 8% did not answer the question

2. Do you support the shared use proposals from Bridge Lane to Golders Green Road and the proposed new retaining wall south of Bridge Lane?  51% of respondents supported the scheme, 21% opposed, 11% partially supportive, 6% were not sure, 2% had no opinion and 9% did not answer the question

The main issues raised included safety concerns of pedestrian/cyclists crossing the A406, conflict between pedestrians and cyclists on shared use areas, and increased traffic on the A406.

Next steps Following analysis of the consultation, we have decided go ahead with the scheme. We anticipate that implementation will begin in August 2017. This consultation report summarises the consultation exercise and responses received.

2 Background

We proposed improvements for pedestrians and cyclists along the A406 North Circular from Bridge Lane to Golders Green Road and at the A406 junction with Golders Green Road and Brent Street. The proposals included converting some sections of footway to shared use for pedestrian and cyclists, and a new staggered shared pedestrian/cycle ‘toucan’ crossing on the westbound carriageway, adjacent to the Woodlands retaining wall. The proposals for the crossing were in response to safety concerns that pedestrians are crossing the A406 independently and using the central reservation as a waiting area, rather than using the pedestrian footbridge located at the junction. The existing pedestrian footbridge will remain as a secondary crossing point for pedestrians and dismounted cyclists to use. We proposed the following:

• A new ‘toucan’ crossing for pedestrians and cyclists on the A406 North Circular westbound carriageway, adjacent to A406 Woodlands retaining wall. This would involve widening the central reservation by 4 metres to accommodate the crossing, central waiting area and guard railing, which in turn would require minor widening of the carriageway into the footway on the north west corner of the junction

• New shared use footway for pedestrian and cyclists at the A406 junction with Golders Green Road and Brent Street. This would involve resurfacing the footways on three of the four corners of the junction to ensure surface consistency; we would also resurface the footway north of the junction to link to our current footway works at the Woodlands retaining wall. Signage and tactile paving would be used

• Improve the shared use footway facilities from south of Bridge Lane to link to existing shared use facilities north of Courtleigh Gardens. This would involve resurfacing the footway to ensure surface consistency and adding new signage

• Build a retaining wall to enable widening of the footway into the grass verge embankment just south of Bridge Lane

• Widen the existing un-signalised crossing located across Golders Green Road to 3.2 metres to enhance facilities for the north/south movement

• Introduce Advanced Stop Lines for cyclists on the Brent Street and Golders Green Road approaches

2.1 Location

The map below shows the extent of the scheme

Extent of the scheme

Digital Map Data (c) Collins Bartholomew Ltd (2016)

3 The consultation

The consultation ran between 24 May and 1 July 2016 and was designed to enable us to understand local opinions about the proposals.

The consultation enabled us to: • Raise general awareness of the scheme with local residents, stakeholders and the public • Explain the proposed changes • Provide the opportunity for people to contact us with their feedback about the proposals

The potential outcomes of the consultation were: • 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 3

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

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 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

3.1 Who we consulted The public consultation intended to seek the views of local residents and businesses close to the A406 North Circular Road junction with Golders Green Road and Brent Street, and Golders Green Road to Bridge Lane. Please see Appendix B for a map of the local area we consulted.

We also consulted stakeholders including The Metropolitan Police, 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 5.

3.2 Consultation material, distribution and publicity We sent a letter and map explaining the proposed scheme to 1,979 local households and businesses. A copy of this letter and map is shown in Appendix A. The consultation material asked two questions regarding the proposal: 1. Do you support the proposed new toucan crossing on the A406 North Circular westbound carriageway? Yes / Partially / Not sure / No opinion / No

2. Do you support the shared use proposals from Bridge Lane to Golders Green Road and the proposed new retaining wall south of Bridge Lane? Yes / Partially / Not sure / No opinion / No

3. Do you have any further comments?

We invited people to respond to the consultation using the TfL website https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/a406-golders-green-road-brent-street-bridge- lane or by writing to us at FREEPOST TFL CONSULTATIONS or by emailing us at [email protected]

3.3 Pre-consultation We contacted the London Borough of Barnet before the consultation period started to inform them of our proposals. We asked them for their comments regarding our consultation area as well as which local community groups and resident associations they recommend we should consult. 4

4 Overview of consultation responses

A total of 87 consultation responses were received, 75 were submitted online and 12 by post or email (see figure 1 below).

Figure 1

In the consultation we asked two questions to see how much support there was for our proposals. Figures 2 and 3 below show the questions we asked and the number of people who answered yes, partially, those who were not sure, had no opinion, those who answered no and those who did not answer the question.

Figure 2

Figure 3

We asked respondents how they heard about the consultation. The responses are shown in figures 4 and 5 below.

Figure 4

Figure 5

We also asked respondents what they thought of the quality of the consultation, for example, the information we have provided, any printed material you have received, any maps or plans, the website and questionnaire etc. Figure 6 below shows the responses received.

Figure 6

Additional comments Respondents were given the opportunity to provide further comments about our proposal. Of the 87 responses received, 73 provided comments. Figure 7 below shows the top 10 issues that were raised during the consultation. A complete list of views and suggestions made during the consultation can be found in Appendix D and our full response to issues raised in Appendix E.

Figure 7: Top 10 issues that were raised during the consultation

Number of Top ten issues raised times raised General: Shared use pavements cause conflict between 18 cyclists and pedestrians / they're unsafe for pedestrians Pedestrian / cyclist interaction with A406 is dangerous / 13 unsafe General: Install segregated cycle lanes 9 Issue with orientation of corduroy pavement 8 Motorcyclists speed at night on A406 3 Brent St: Toucan crossing lights to be on timer during the 3 Jewish Sabbath Bridge Lane: Install a pedestrian overpass at Bridge Lane 3 junction (over the A406) Proposed changes will increase congestion / cause cars to 2 wait longer at junction Brent St: New arrangement won't prevent pedestrians 2 crossing informally Brent St: Orthodox Jews cannot activate electronic 2 pedestrian lights on the Sabbath

People who were supportive of the scheme said: “Great idea. Extra safety for the local community especially the children” “Very much in favour of anything making transport by bike safer” “I think that this plan will be helpful for cyclists along the North C ircular. It will create a safer environment for pedestrians crossing at Golders Green R oad/ Brent S treet who do not use the bridge.”

“For years I have to climb that bridge with great difficulty, the crossing will be very beneficial to the community”

People who opposed the scheme said: “The proposals will cause a further build up of traffic on the North Circular” “The proposals are dangerous and will encourage people not to use the bridge” “Cyclists should have their own infrastructure, and not be forced to use shared areas with pedestrians.”

“I am concerned for the safety of pedestrians having to share a space with cyclists some of whom may ride without due care for pedestrians in the area”

5 Responses from statutory bodies and other stakeholders

We received two responses from stakeholders. Their responses are summarised below.

The London Borough of Barnet Did not specifically state whether they supported or opposed the proposals. Response to the consultation is based on traffic modelling information provided separately by TfL that indicates that the proposals would not have a detrimental impact on traffic movement and junction operation. Supportive of the proposed pedestrian crossing and request that the existing pedestrian footbridge is also retained. Would like to see the detailed designs for the scheme. Welcomes extension of off-carriageway provision for cyclists on the A406. Would like to know how far south this would extend as concerned that footway width may be inadequate to accommodate cycle and pedestrian use at some locations. Believe that the extent of the shared pedestrian and cycle areas on Brent Street and Golders Green Road need to be reviewed and have stated the following:

• The shared provision on Brent Street (particularly the north side) appears to continue onto the bridge over the Dollis Brook. There are high kerbs and guardrail along the kerb-line over the bridge to protect the structure. Cyclists and pedestrians should not be encouraged to share this constrained space. • The arrangement on the north side of Golders Green Road may encourage conflict between cyclists seeking to re-join the carriageway and pedestrians crossing to the refuge on the approach to the junction. • The representation of corduroy paving on the plan appears to imply an orientation which we do not consider to be appropriate.

The London Cycling Campaign Did not specifically state whether they supported or opposed the proposals. Stated that their response was developed with input from the co-chairs of their Infrastructure Review Group and the coordinator of Barnet Cyclists. Expects schemes to be designed to accommodate growth in cycling and to reduce motor vehicle traffic, particularly for journeys 5km or less. Would like as a condition of funding, all highway development designed to London Cycling Design Standards (LCDS) with all “Critical Fails” eliminated from the scheme’s Cycling Level of Service assessment (CLoS). Strongly suggest that all schemes including cycling provision should be of comparable quality to similar schemes at cities with a high modal share of cycling, i.e. with a CLoS rating of 70 or above. 9

Have stated the following regarding the proposals: 1. The A406/North Circular remains a significant barrier to cycling journeys and uptake of cycling. Much more could and should be done for cycling along its entire length. Most notably: a. High quality segregated tracks that enable cycling along it b. High quality crossings that enable cycling journeys from one side of the road to the other 2. Would much rather have fully segregated tracks used to enable cycling, would expect shared space to be created on both sides of the road and all crossings to be designed with cycling in mind. 3. If those aims are not achieved, no funding for this scheme should come from cycling or walking budgets, but roads funding – as would not be a cycling or walking scheme. 4. Crossings should be direct where possible, not staggered, for both pedestrians and those cycling 5. Turnings on/off the A406 should be as narrow and as close to 90 degrees as possible. This will enable less stressful crossings for vulnerable road users, cyclists and walkers, as well as slow motor vehicle traffic down turning in and out. This should be considered for both sides of Bridge Lane and Courtleigh Gardens.

6 Conclusion

Following an analysis of the responses received and taking in to account issues that were raised during the consultation, we have decided go ahead with the scheme that was consulted on.

6.1 Next steps

We will now begin the detailed design stage; we anticipate that implementation of the scheme will begin in August 2017.

Appendix A – Copy of consultation letter

Appendix B – Letter distribution area

Digital Map Data (c) Collins Bartholomew Ltd (2016)

Appendix C – List of stakeholders consulted

Elected Members Matthew O fford MP Andrew Boff AM Mike F reer MP Tom C opley AM S tephen Hammond MP J oanne McC artney AM Z ac G oldsmith MP Onkar Sahota AM S iobhain McDonagh MP Fiona Twycross AM J ames B erry MP S haun Bailey AM Dr Mathias MP K emi Badenoch AM

T heresa Villiers MP S ian B erry AM Andrew Dismore AM Leonie Cooper AM C aroline P idgeon AM Unmesh Desai AM Gareth Bacon AM Tony Devenish AM J ennette A rnold A M F lorance E shalomi AM L en Duvall AM David Kurten AM Navin S hah AM K eith P rince AM Nicky G avron AM C aroline R ussell AM S teve O'Connell AM P eter W hittle A M Tony Arbour AM

Local Authorities London Borough of Barnet

Police & Health Authorities Metropolitan Police CCG NHS Central London London Ambulance Service Metropolitan Police - Community Police Barnet Safer Transport Team Barnet NHS Care commissioning Group

Local Businesses / Interest Groups Barnet Residents A s s ocia tion Machzike Hadath S ynagogue B arnet S omali C ommunity S t. Mary & Archangel Michael C optic Orthodox C hurch B ell L ane Primary S chool and C hildren's Temple Fortune C lub C entre Golders Green Estate Residents T he B ridge L ane C hristian F ellowship Association Hasmonean Primary S chool The Independent Jewish Day S chool Hendon R eform S ynagogue The London S chool of J ewish S tudies Hendon S chool T he P illar Hotel Hendon United S ynagogue W entworth T utoria l C olleg e

Other Stakeholders AA Motoring Trust London Councils Action on Hearing Loss (formerly RNID) London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority Age Concern London London Older People's Strategy Group Age UK London Omnibus Traction Society Alzheimer's Society London TravelWatch Asian Peoples Disabilities Alliance London Underground Association of British Drivers Metropolitan Police Heathrow Airport Association of Car Fleet Operators MIND Better Transport Motorcycle Action Group British Motorcyclists Federation Motorcycle Industry Association BT National Children's Bureau 16

Campaign for Better Transport National Grid Canal & River Trust London National Grid - Electricity Confederation of British Industry (CBI) Northbank BID Confederation of Passenger transport Port of London Authority CTC, the national cycling charity RMT Union Department for Transport RNIB Disability Alliance Road Haulage Association Disability Rights UK Royal Mail Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Royal Mail Parcel Force Committee East Finchley Bus Watch Royal Parks EDF Energy Sense Freight Transport Association Sixty Plus GLA Strategy Access Panel members Stroke Association Greater London Forum for the Elderly Sustrans Green Flag Group Taxi and Private hire Guide Dogs for the Blind Association Thames Water Hertfordshire County Council The British Dyslexia Association ICE -London The Clubhouse Joint Committee on Mobility of Blind and TPH for Heathrow Airport Partially Sighted People (JCMBPS) Joint Mobility Unit Unions Together Licenced Taxi Drivers Association Unite Union Living Streets Victoria Business Improvement District London Cab drivers Club West London Alliance

Appendix D - A list of views and suggestions made during the consultation

Number of times Support for Proposals/Positive comments issue raised Improved / safer provisions for pedestrians 2 Improved / safer provisions for cyclists 2 Support Toucan Crossing 2 General Support 1 Negative comments General: Shared use pavements cause conflict between 18 cyclists and pedestrians / they're unsafe for pedestrians Pedestrian / cyclist interaction with A406 is dangerous / 13 unsafe Issue with orientation of corduroy pavement 8 Motorcyclists speed at night on A406 3 Brent St: Against crossings where cars have to stop twice 2 Bridge Lane: Underpass beneath A406 at Bridge Lane 2 junction is dangerous / unsafe 17

Cyclists do not have insurance 2 Dead leaves not cleared along North Circular 2 Proposed changes will increase congestion / cause cars to 2 wait longer at junction Brent St: Current pedestrian overpass is inconvenient to use 1 Brent St: Not enough space behind eastbound Toucan crossing for holding traffic during pedestrian green light 1 phase Brent St: There is already a footbridge for pedestrians to 1 cross the A406 there's no need for another crossing Bridge Lane: Southbound A406 bus stop at Bridge Lane junction blocks traffic turning left out of Bridge lane, leading 1 to unsafe manoeuvring Cyclists can just use the existing roads (A406 / Princes Park 1 Avenue) Local residents not taken into consideration sufficiently 1 General: Too much pollution in the area 1 Safety issues / Concerns Brent St: New arrangement won't prevent pedestrians 2 crossing informally Brent St: Orthodox Jews cannot activate electronic 2 pedestrian lights on the Sabbath Brent St: Driver behaviour makes Advanced Stop Lines 2 ineffective Brent St: Toucan crossing will make it difficult for drivers not 2 to violate the yellow no stopping box General: Proposed works will cause disruption 2 Brent St: Changes will incentivise informal crossing of Golders Green Rd (west to east) to reach new Toucan 1 crossing Brent St: Kerb line extensions will narrow carriageway entrance onto A406 from Brent St potentially leading to 1 accidents Brent St: Kerb line removal in northwest part of Brent St 1 junction reduces area for people to wait at crossing Brent St: Phasing of lights must prevent left-turning traffic 1 out of Brent St while pedestrians/cyclists are crossing Bridge Lane: All part of a greater plan to remove access into 1 Bridge Lane from the westbound carriageway of A406 Bridge Lane: Pavement slopes in mouth of Bridge Lane may 1 not be suitable for cyclists Bridge Lane: Risk of cyclists being hit by traffic turning left 1 out of A406 onto Bridge Lane General: May not be sufficient pavement width in some 1 areas to accommodate pedestrians and cyclists Suggestions General: Install segregated cycle lanes 9

Brent St: Toucan crossing lights to be on timer during the 3 Jewish Sabbath Bridge Lane: Install a pedestrian overpass at Bridge Lane 3 junction (over the A406) Brent St: Install pedestrian Subway beneath A406 at Brent 2 St junction Brent St: Introduce separated left-turn out of Golders Green 2 Rd onto A406 (providing easier informal crossing of A406) Brent St: Single green light phase allowing pedestrians to 2 cross A406 in one go Bridge Lane: Close the entrance/exit between A406 and Courtleigh Gardens or install single carriage slip road to 2 improve safety Bridge Lane: Introduce new pedestrian crossing at bottom of 2 Bridge Lane (connecting Golders Green with Hendon) General: Install pedestrian crossings on all arms of Brent St / 2 Bridge Lane junction Other: Improve layout at Golders Green Rd junction with 2 Woodlands to allow easier exit from Woodlands Brent St: Encourage pedestrians to use existing footbridge / 1 overpass Brent St: Install signage warning traffic turning onto A406 of 1 pedestrians crossing Brent St: Install the Toucan crossing on the A406 further southwest - linking Brent Cross station to the shopping 1 centre Brent St: Introduce traffic easing measures on Golders 1 Green Rd Brent St: Make left lane exiting Brent St onto A406 left turn 1 only. Brent St: Make right eastbound A406 carriageway right turn 1 only (from A406 into Golders Green Rd) Brent St: Pedestrians need a traffic island for safe crossing 1 of Brent St (near the junction) Brent St: Remove traffic island from junction in Golders 1 Green Rd / Widen northbound carriageway at that point Brent St: Synchronise Toucan pedestrian green phase with 1 right turn only from eastbound A406 into Golders Green Rd Brent St: Widen Brent St carriageway to 2 lanes for greater distance (to allow more cars to cross junction on a green 1 light phase) Bridge Lane: Install crossing for cyclists to cross A406 at 1 Bridge Lane junction General: Extend cycling provisions along whole of North 1 Circular General: Install CCTV cameras 1 General: Install fully recessed bus stops on A406 1

General: Install provisions for cyclists on quieter streets (not 1 next to main highways) General: Install segregated cycle super-highway (grade 1 separated from all other pavements) General: Make pavements smooth enough for cyclists 1 General: New arrangements will need enforcement 1 General: Install adequate street lighting along shared 1 pavement

Appendix E - Response to issues raised

Our response to issues that were raised as a result of the consultation

Will the new pedestrian crossing increase traffic on the A406 North Circular Road? No. Traffic modelling analysis indicates a neutral affect on the existing traffic flows in the area.

Do you plan to make improvements to the existing footbridge? This is an existing asset maintained under our Asset Management programme and is not part of the scope of this scheme.

How will bus route 240 be affected by the proposals? The bus route 240 will not be affected by the introduction of the toucan crossing on the A406.

Where is space being taken to allow widening plans? To accommodate the proposed toucan crossing some space would be taken from the footway on the north east corner of the junction, this would allow us to widen the central reservation by 4 metres to accommodate the crossing, central waiting area and guard railing, as well as minor widening of the carriageway. The remaining footway would be at least 3 metres wide, which is within design guidelines and is considered sufficient for this location.

Will the toucan crossing be permanent? Yes we proposed a new permanent toucan crossing. This will provide an alternative way to cross the road. The existing footbridge will remain.

Why was there not an opportunity for residents to speak to TfL staff about the scheme in person? We hold public drop in sessions for some of our consultations where resource and budget allows. We considered holding drop in sessions for this consultation but concluded that it would not be good use of resources and that the consultation material gave sufficient information about what is a relatively simple proposal.

Shared use pavements cause conflict between cyclists and pedestrians why can’t segregated cycle lanes be installed?

Presently the number of cyclists that use this road is not high enough to justify the loss of road space. Implementing segregated cycle lanes could potentially result in delays to other road users.

The Jewish community will not be able to press the button for the crossing on Saturday’s. Is there a way it can be automatically activated? This is a consideration that will be added during the detailed design stage. The existing footbridge will also remain, giving another option to cross the A406.

Can you do something to combat the speeding motorists at night? There are enforcement cameras along the A406. Our Enforcement team and the Metropolitan Police are addressing this issue.