DOCSLIB.ORG

517 / 2004-Maylands Field

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
517 / 2004-Maylands Field GREATER LONDON AUTHORITY London Assembly 31 March 2004 Report No: 5 Subject: Questions to the Mayor Report of: Director Of Secretariat 342 / 2004 - Pedicabs Jenny Jones Can you provide us with a timetable for TfL reporting on the registration of Pedicabs, and moving towards their proper regulation? . 343 / 2004 - London-wide basis of Olympic Games bid Andrew Pelling While there is very good merit in our Olympic bid owing to the prospective concentration of facilities for athletes at our East London base, I am sure that you would agree with me that a successful Olympic bid will also be secured by emphasising the London-wide nature of the Olympic Games bid. What comments would you like to make about the London-wide basis of our bid? . 344 / 2004 - Traffic Signals in Croydon Andrew Pelling As part of the TfL work at the junction of Addington Road and Farleigh Road in Croydon, the decision has been made to remove the traffic lights which used to advise motorists whether or not traffic had been signalled to continue into their path and which were located ahead of motorists turning right at that junction. Please can we have these traffic lights reinstated? 345 / 2004 - Brighton Road, Coulsdon Andrew Pelling Why is it necessary to continue to designate the Brighton Road in the centre of Coulsdon as a Red Route after the construction of the Coulsdon Inner Relief Road? . 1 346 / 2004 - Traffic movements in Upper Norwood Andrew Pelling The unpopular one-way system introduced in Upper Norwood looks like being made permanent by the London Borough of Croydon. The funding for this work came primarily from within the GLA family via the LDA. This decision in favour of permanence is to be made despite the fact that the London Borough of Croydon failed on two occasions in its bid to TfL for money to monitor the effect of the changes in the one-way system in terms of altered traffic movements. My judgement is that the one-way system does not promote good business within the one-way triangle, has introduced at least one unsafe and pedestrian-unfriendly crossing facility and has also redirected much traffic into local residential roads. What was it in Croydon’s bid that was so ineffective when seeking money to measure the effect of the one-way system on traffic movement? 347 / 2004 - Bus route 455 Andrew Pelling What steps are being taken to improve the timing and performance of the 455 bus route, particularly on the route between Purley town centre and Old Lodge Lane in Purley. 348 / 2004 - A232 Croydon Road cycling facilities Andrew Pelling A very significant sum of money was invested in a heavily bollarded and somewhat confusing semi-segregated cycle lane on the heavily trafficked A232. It is most encouraging to see such a significant investment in promoting cycling but could I ask what decision has been made about the extension of this facility and whether a more effective route could be taken by providing a cycling route away from the A232 Croydon Road via Guy Road down to the aesthetically attractive route by the Wandle? . 349 / 2004 - Number of cyclists using cycle route on A232 Croydon Road Andrew Pelling How many cyclists is it estimated use the cycle route on the A232 Croydon Road in between The Plough public house and the Paynes Poppets factory? . 350 / 2004 - Bus Drivers and Cyclists Jenny Jones Given that more buses are sharing more bus lanes with more cyclists, what is being done specifically to train bus drivers about the need to co-exist with cyclists? . 351 / 2004 - Greenwich Reach East Darren Johnson Following the collapse of the proposals to develop the riverside site at the mouth of Deptford Creek what will you do to ensure that the site does not remain a derelict 2 wasteland and that the local community are properly involved in any shaping new proposals? 352 / 2004 - Accidents involving Tramlink from April 2003 to date - follow up query Andrew Pelling Your answer to my question 156/2004 at the Assembly on 25 February 2004 failed to provide the data I requested on the number of accidents that Tramlink had been involved from April 2003 to date, broken down by type of accident and type of collision defined by body with which collision has taken place. Could you please supply this detail in the Mayoral answer? 353 / 2004 - Library Books Darren Johnson Given that significant quantities of old library books are being landfilled each year, rather than being reused or recycled, can the GLA work with Local Authorities to address this? . 354 / 2004 - Taxis Jenny Jones What is the estimated average cost of establishing a taxi rank in London at a major transport interchange and/or main road? And the mean average cost of relocating a taxi rank in London? . 355 / 2004 - KSIs for taxis and private hire vehichles Jenny Jones Can you provide statistics regarding the number of deaths and injuries to a) drivers; b) passengers and c) pedestrians as a result of road collisions involving London taxis for the last 5 years up to the latest date for which figures are available? . 356 / 2004 - KSIs for taxis and private hire vehichles Jenny Jones Can you provide any statistics regarding the number of deaths and injuries to a) drivers; b) passengers and c) pedestrians as a result of road collisions involving converted van/MPV private hire vehicles for the last 5 years up to the latest date for which figures are available? 357 / 2004 - Taxi numbers decline Jenny Jones Is it correct that the net amount of ‘all London’ (‘green badge) taxi drivers has gone down for the last three quarters for which figures are available? Why is this happening when taxis are needed to meet demand as London’s population continues to grow? . 3 358 / 2004 - Upper Norwood Triangle Jenny Jones Will you ask Croydon council to fullfil their promise of a full public review of the traffic scheme they imposed upon the triangle in Upper Norwood? . 359 / 2004 - Upper Norwood Triangle Jenny Jones Will you ask for this review to form the basis of a public consultation with local people and to include the option of reverting it back to two way? . 360 / 2004 - Upper Norwood Triangle Jenny Jones Will you get Croydon council to explain why the London Cycle Network (LCN) route that was removed from the Triangle has not been replaced? Also, can TfL make an independent assessment of whether the problems the scheme was designed to eradicate have in fact disappeared? . 361 / 2004 - Thames Gateway Bridge tolling system Jenny Jones According to the TfL traffic model for the TGB, how many of the daily vehicle trips across the bridge in 2016 will be made by residents in the four boroughs: Bexley, Greenwich, Newham and Barking and Dagenham? . 362 / 2004 - Thames Gateway Bridge tolling system Jenny Jones What proportion of the traffic will be from vehicles with discounts, and what proportion will be traffic which has a complete exemption? . 363 / 2004 - Thames Gateway Bridge tolling system Jenny Jones What are the baseline levels of tolls used in the model and can you provide figures on the projected annual split between different types of vehicle (e.g. heavy goods vehicles, cars paying full price, cars with discount) which gives you a projected toll revenue of £27m a year? 364 / 2004 - Thames Gateway Bridge tolling system Jenny Jones You have spent the last two years promoting toll discounts for local people as a crucial part of the Thames Gateway Bridge package. The revenue from the tolls is also a major element of the financing for the bridge. Can you outline the total income expected from the TGB tolls and show how they relate to the traffic forecasts made for 2016, including the 50% discount for local people? 4 . 365 / 2004 - Thames Gateway Bridge tolling system Jenny Jones Has the additional administrative burden of these discounts and exemptions been fully taken into account when calculating the cost of running the tolling system? . 366 / 2004 - Thames Gateway Bridge Jenny Jones Based upon TfL's experience of congestion charging, can you outline the administrative costs of registering all the potential drivers within the four boroughs, policing the system to prevent fraud and keeping the database up to date? . 367 / 2004 - Thames Gateway Bridge tolling system Jenny Jones Do you agree that it wouldn't be right for TfL to approve the financing of the bridge when the tolling system has not been finalised and the figures are imprecise? . 368 / 2004 - Extension to the Congestion Charge Andrew Pelling Why does your consultation on the proposal to extend the Congestion Charge include so many leading questions? Why are there no questions asking whether residents will be less likely to visit the extended zone if the Charge is introduced? . 369 / 2004 - The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives Darren Johnson Will you sign up to become a Founding Authority of Procura, the new ICLEI Sustainable Procurement Campaign? . 370 / 2004 - Dagenham Ferry Darren Johnson What representations have you made regarding the withdrawal of the ferry service for Ford workers between Erith and Dagenham? . 371 / 2004 - Arsenal Stadium Darren Johnson Do you still believe that Arsenal's stadium plans offer "enormous benefits to the local community and to London as a whole" in the light of the government inspector's report on the London Borough of Islington (Ashburton Grove and Lough Road) compulsory purchase orders? . 5 372 / 2004 - Rail Network Policing Jennette Arnold How much are the suburban train operating companies receiving in public subsidy / and how much of that are they sending on improving safety and security of passengers and staff through policing? .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Greenwich Waterfront Transit
    Greenwich Waterfront Transit Summary Report This report has been produced by TfL Integration Further copies may be obtained from: Tf L Integration, Windsor House, 42–50 Victoria Street, London SW1H 0TL Telephone 020 7941 4094 July 2001 GREENWICH WATERFRONT TRANSIT • SUMMARY REPORT Foreword In 1997, following a series of strategic studies into the potential for intermediate modes in different parts of outer London, London Transport (LT) commenced a detailed assessment under the title “Greenwich Waterfront Transit” of a potential scheme along the south bank of the Thames between Greenwich Town Centre and Thamesmead then on to Abbey Wood. In July 2000, LT’s planning functions were incorporated into Transport for London (TfL). A major factor in deciding to carry out a detailed feasibility study for Waterfront Transit has been the commitment shown by Greenwich and Bexley Councils to assist in the development of the project and their willingness to consider the principle of road space re-allocation in favour of public transport. This support, as well as that of other bodies such as SELTRANS, Greenwich Development Agency,Woolwich Development Agency and the Thames Gateway London Partnership, is acknowledged by TfL. The ongoing support of these bodies will be crucial if the proposals are to proceed. A major objective of this exercise has been to identify the traffic management measures required to achieve segregation and high priority over other traffic to encourage modal shift towards public transport, particularly from the private car. It is TfL’s view,supported by the studies undertaken, that the securing of this segregation and priority would be critical in determining the success of Waterfront Transit.
    [Show full text]
  • Test Page to Show Traffic Order with Styles Created
    Transport for London GLA 2021 Nos.0204,0205,0206&0216 THE GLA ROADS AND GLA SIDE ROADS (SOUTHWARK) RED ROUTE CONSOLIDATION TRAFFIC ORDER 2007 A3 GLA ROADS (KENNINGTON PARK ROAD AND NEWINGTON BUTTS) EXPERIMENTAL VARIATION ORDER 2021 THE GLA ROADS AND GLA SIDE ROADS (LAMBETH) RED ROUTE CONSOLIDATION TRAFFIC ORDER 2007 A3 GLA ROAD (KENNINGTON PARK ROAD) EXPERIMENTAL VARIATION ORDER 2021 THE GLA ROADS (LONDON BOROUGH OF SOUTHWARK) (BUS PRIORITY) CONSOLIDATION ORDER 2009 A3 GLA ROAD (NEWINGTON BUTTS) EXPERIMENTAL VARIATION ORDER 2021 THE GLA ROADS (LONDON BOROUGH OF LAMBETH) (BUS PRIORITY) CONSOLIDATION ORDER 2009 A3 GLA ROAD (KENNINGTON PARK ROAD) EXPERIMENTAL VARIATION ORDER 2021 STATEMENT OF REASONS 1. Transport for London proposes to make the above named Orders. 2. The Orders in the London Borough of Lambeth and Southwark will; GLA/2021/0204,0205,0206&0216 1 (1) Change the operational timing of the Loading and Disabled persons’ vehicle bay adjacent to No.148 Kennington Park Road/Newington Butts to No stopping at any time except 7pm-7am for vehicles to load and unload for a maximum of 20 minutes or disabled persons vehicle to park for a maximum of 3 hours; (2) Change the operational timing of the Loading and Disabled persons’ vehicle bay outside Nos.109-127 Howell Walk, Newington Butts to No stopping at any time except 7pm-7am for vehicles to load and unload for a maximum of 20 minutes or disabled persons vehicle to park for a maximum of 3 hours; (3) Replace the Loading bays outside and opposite Nos.1-30 Falstaff Court, Kennington Park Road to a double red line control.
    [Show full text]
  • Branching out the Future for London's Street Trees
    EMBARGOED until 00.01am on Tuesday, 19 April 2011 Environment Committee Branching Out The future for London's street trees April 2011 EMBARGOED until 00.01am on Tuesday, 19 April 2011 EMBARGOED until 00.01am on Tuesday, 19 April 2011 Environment Committee Branching Out The future for London's street trees April 2011 Cover image source: George Raszka EMBARGOED until 00.01am on Tuesday, 19 April 2011 Copyright Greater London Authority April 2011 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen’s Walk More London London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk enquiries 020 7983 4100 minicom 020 7983 4458 ISBN This publication is printed on recycled paper EMBARGOED until 00.01am on Tuesday, 19 April 2011 Environment Committee Members Darren Johnson Green (Chair) Murad Qureshi Labour (Deputy Chair) Gareth Bacon Conservative James Cleverly Conservative Roger Evans Conservative Nicky Gavron Labour Mike Tuffrey Liberal Democrat The Environment Committee agreed the following terms of reference for its investigation on 1 December 2010 • To examine what progress has been made for street trees in London since the committee’s 2007 report; and • What the future holds for street trees, and where responsibility for planting and maintenance will lie. The Committee would welcome feedback on this report. For further information contact: Jo Sloman, Assistant Scrutiny Manager, on 020 7983 4942 or [email protected]. For media enquiries please contact: Lisa Moore on 020 7983 4228 or [email protected]; or Julie Wheldon on 020 7983 4228 or [email protected]
    [Show full text]
  • A Mayor and Assembly for London. Report
    A Mayor and Assembly for London: 10 years on Report of Conference at LSE 2 nd July 2010 Opening remarks of Chairman, Emeritus Professor George Jones, Chairman of the Greater London Group [GLG] This conference follows one of May 2007 held at City Hall, which had looked at the performance and demise of the Greater London Council [GLC]. Notable speakers at that event were the then Mayor, Ken Livingstone, and Lord (Desmond) Plummer, a former Conservative Leader of the GLC, who had since died. That earlier event was timed to mark the 40-year anniversary of the date when Plummer had become leader. Earlier this year L.J. [Jim] Sharpe died. He had been a research officer with the GLG in the early 1960s and had helped prepare evidence leading to the establishment of the GLC. He went on to write two pioneering GLG papers about the 1961 London County Council (LCC) Elections called A Metropolis Votes (1962) and about Research in Local Government (1965) . He remained a frequent visitor to the Group and writer about London government. I would like to dedicate this conference to Jim’s memory. The Group also lost a few days ago William Plowden who sat with me at GLG Monday afternoon meetings under the chairmanship of William Robson when I first joined the Group in 1966. Today’s conference is timely since the vesting day of the Greater London Authority [GLA], when it came into being, is ten years ago tomorrow. The objective of the conference is to assess the performance of the Mayor and Assembly that make up the GLA, looking at why and how it came into being, its achievements and disappointments.
    [Show full text]
  • Environment Committee – Clearing the Air: Pollution in London
    MDA No. 1 2 5 5 Title: Environment Committee – Clearing the air: pollution in London Executive Summary At the Environment Committee meeting on 17 November 2020 the Committee resolved: That authority be delegated to the Chair, in consultation with party Group Lead Members, to agree any output arising from the discussion. Following consultation with the Deputy Chair and party Group Lead Members, the Chair of the Committee, Caroline Russell AM, agreed a report Clearing the air: pollution in London. A copy of the report is attached at Appendix 1. Decision That the Chair, in consultation with the Deputy Chair and party Group Lead Members, agree a report on pollution in London. Assembly Member I confirm that I do not have any disclosable pecuniary interests in the proposed decision and take the decision in compliance with the Code of Conduct for elected Members of the Authority. The above request has my approval. Signature: Date: 26/02/2021 Printed Name Caroline Russell AM (Chair of the Environment Committee) V1/2020 Decision by an Assembly Member under Delegated Authority Notes: 1. The Lead Officer should prepare this form for signature by relevant Members of the Assembly to record any instance where the Member proposes to take action under a specific delegated authority. The purpose of the form is to record the advice received from officers, and the decision made. 2. The ‘background’ section (below) should be used to include an indication as to whether the information contained in / referred to in this Form should be considered as exempt under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FoIA), or the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR).
    [Show full text]
  • 255 Consultation Report
    Consultation on possible changes to highway measures in support of the proposed extension of route 255 to Balham Summary of responses November 2011 Contents Section Page 1 Introduction 3 2 The consultation 3 3 Responses from members of the public 5 4 Responses from statutory bodies and other 8 stakeholders Appendices A Copy of the consultation letter 9 B Consultation area 14 C List of stakeholders consulted 16 2 1. Introduction In summer 2009 TfL consulted stakeholders and the local community about plans to extend bus route 255 from Streatham Hill to Balham. The route included Weir Road and Old Devonshire Road. The 2009 consultation response was mainly positive, particularly regarding the benefits of a new bus service in the parts of the area furthest from existing routes. There were 689 responses from members of the public of which 472 were generally supportive, 188 generally opposed and 29 neutral. Many of the local people who came to the consultation exhibitions in Weir Road community centre said they would find it easier to use the bus than take a long walk to and from their home, especially where they were older and/or do not have a car. However some concerns were raised about traffic issues, noise, changes to parking and changes to highway infrastructure, particularly on Old Devonshire Road in the London Borough of Wandsworth. TfL would still like to introduce the extended bus service to improve public transport facilities in the area and meet local requests. The concerns raised in the consultation have been discussed with both Lambeth and Wandsworth Councils.
    [Show full text]
  • Roger Evans (Chairman)
    Appendix 2 London Assembly (Plenary) – 5 March 2008 Transcript of Question and Answer Session with Simon Fletcher (Chief of Staff, GLA) and John Ross (Director, Economic and Business Policy, GLA) Sally Hamwee (Chair): We now move to the main item on today’s agenda: the question and answer session regarding the funding of organisations and GLA Group corporate governance, the Corporate Governance Review. Can I start by asking Simon Fletcher, as Chief of the Mayor’s Staff, to what extent you are responsible in your role as Chief of Staff for regulating and supervising the conduct of the Mayoral Advisers? Simon Fletcher (Chief of Staff, GLA): I would say my responsibility is to ensure that the Mayor’s advisers and directors are providing the Mayor with the best possible advice and do so in a timely fashion. That is a role of regulation, if you want to call it that, because it involves making sure that the most important issues facing the city are properly discussed and that the appropriate action is taken to deliver the Mayor’s priorities. The Mayor’s directors are people who directly report to me. Sally Hamwee (Chair): The question was about conduct but Mike Tuffrey has already caught my eye, so he might pursue that. Mike Tuffrey (AM): Simon, last time you were before us, a couple of years ago now, you painted a picture- Simon Fletcher (Chief of Staff, GLA): A bit more recently than that. Mike Tuffrey (AM): No, sorry, I mean in terms of answering questions regarding how the Mayor’s Office functions.
    [Show full text]
  • 2004 Election Results for the Mayor of London and the London Assembly
    2004 election results for the Mayor of London and the London Assembly The 2004 Mayor of London election results If there are only two candidates, the Mayor of London is elected using the First Past the Post system. The candidate with the most votes wins. If there are three or more candidates running for Mayor, the Supplementary Vote system is used to ensure the candidate with the broadest amount of support from London is elected. In this system, voters can cast a first and second choice vote. If a candidate receives more than half of all the first choice votes they are elected. If this does not happen, the top two candidates with the most first choice votes go through to a second round. All other candidates are eliminated, but the second choice votes on their ballot papers are looked at. If they are for either of the top two candidates, these second choices are added to their totals. The candidate with the highest total of first and second choice votes wins. If there is a tie then the Greater London Returning Officer draws lots. 1st % 1st 2nd Final Name Party choice* choice choice* total Ken Livingstone Labour Party 685,548 36.78 142,842 828,390 Steve Norris Conservative Party 542,423 29.10 124,757 667,180 Simon Hughes Liberal Democrats 284,647 15.27 UK Independence Frank Maloney 115,666 6.21 Party Lindsey German Respect 61,731 3.31 Julian Leppert British National Party 58,407 3.13 Darren Johnson Green Party 57,332 3.08 Christian Peoples Ram Gidoomal 41,698 2.24 Alliance Independent Working Lorna Reid 9,542 0.51 Class Association Tammy Independent 6,692 0.36 Nagalingam * These numbers reflect the number of valid votes and do not include those ballot papers which were spoilt.
    [Show full text]
  • WEEK in WESTMINSTER £25 Million Boost for New Apprentices London
    WEEK IN WESTMINSTER Week ending Friday 29 July £25 million boost for new London Assembly Lib Dems apprentices call for London's buses and Prime Minister David Cameron has announced details taxis to go electric of a £25m fund that will support up to 10,000 London Assembly Liberal Democrats have put forward advanced and higher apprenticeships in sectors such a programme to convert high mileage buses, taxis and as advanced manufacturing, engineering and IT. The light goods vehicles to electric power by 2020. “The Higher Apprenticeships Fund will support the Big Switch” was launched at City Hall with support expansion of apprenticeships up to degree equivalent from the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate in companies, particularly SMEs, where there is Change, Rt Hon Chris Huhne MP. Mike Tuffrey the unmet demand for the higher level skills that are Liberal Democrat London Assembly environment necessary to create additional jobs and growth. On a spokesman stated: "Electric cars are welcome, but visit to the Jaguar Land Rover plant in the Midlands, bang for buck the biggest benefits come from Mr Cameron said: “It is crucial that we build up the electrifying the vehicles that clock up the most miles skills in this country that our businesses need and that and generate the most pollution. Look at the facts and will fuel long term growth. We are investing in it is a no brainer that the top priority is to electrify apprenticeships because we know they work – they buses, taxis and vans". (Source: GLA LibDems) are good for people who want to get ahead, good for http://glalibdems.org.uk/en/article/2011/504093/the- business and good for the country”.
    [Show full text]
  • Greater London Authority
    GREATER LONDON AUTHORITY London Assembly 24 July 2002 Report No: 5 Subject: Questions to the Mayor Report of: Executive Director Of Secretariat 296 / 2002 - Vauxhall Cross Elizabeth Howlett Has the phasing of traffic lights at junctions in Central London been altered from 10 seconds to 6 seconds and if so what was the reason for the change of timing? . 297 / 2002 - Vauxhall Cross Elizabeth Howlett Is the Mayor aware that residents of Wandsworth have to suffer from continual traffic congestion on Battersea Park Road and Nine Elms Lane leading to Vauxhall Cross. Even on a Sunday the traffic jams are as though it’s a Friday evening rush hour. Can the Mayor explain why this should be and what steps are being taken to resolve this? . 298 / 2002 - Vauxhall Cross Elizabeth Howlett It is evident to the residents of Wandsworth that the increased delays on Battersea Park Road, Nine Elms Lane and Wandsworth Road is leading to angry and frustrated drivers who ry to gain some advantage. Can the Mayor tell us what proposals he has to resolve this dangerous and unacceptable situation? . 299 / 2002 - Vauxhall Cross Elizabeth Howlett Is it the case that the traffic signal system at Vauxhall Cross has been set to give the impression that the scheme on Vauxhall Cross can cope with traffic when in fact the traffic is being forced to queue on the roads leading to it? . 300 / 2002 - Vauxhall Cross Elizabeth Howlett Can the Mayor guarantee that the traffic signal timings are set to the optimum to assist the flow of traffic, whilst taking into account the safe passage of pedestrians? .
    [Show full text]
  • (Bus Priority) and (Red Route) Traffic Orders Experimental General Variation Order 2020
    Transport for London GLA 2020 No.0456 THE GLA ROADS (BUS PRIORITY) AND (RED ROUTE) TRAFFIC ORDERS EXPERIMENTAL GENERAL VARIATION ORDER 2020 Made 24th August 2020 Coming into force 13th September 2020 Transport for London in exercise of the powers conferred by sections 9 and 10(2) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984a, and of all other enabling powers, hereby makes the following Order— 1. Commencement and citation This Order may be cited as The GLA Roads (Bus Priority) and (Red Route) Traffic Orders Experimental General Variation Order 2020 and shall come into force on 13th September 2020. 2. Variations 1) substituting the individual column (4) Times of Operation, for the Orders listed in Schedule 1 to ‘Mon-Sun, At Any Time’; and 2) suspending all parking bays in Schedule 2 column (4) to restrictions displayed on site. 3. Power to Modify or suspend this order In pursuance of section 10(2) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, a person authorised by Transport for London may, if it appears to that person essential in the interests of the expeditious, convenient and safe movement of traffic, or of the provision of suitable and adequate parking facilities on the highway, or for the preserving or improving the amenities of the area through which any road affected by this Order runs, and after consulting with the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, modify or suspend any provision of this Order, save that no modification shall make an addition. a 1984 c.27 GLA/2020/0456 1 SCHEDULE 1 (Orders with Bus Lanes being Changed to Monday to Sunday 24 Hours) 1 2 3 4 Traffic Order No: Traffic Order Title Items Varied 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Lambeth Parking Surveys – Streatham Report
    Lambeth Parking Study Parking Surveys 11/10/2017 Reference number GB01T15C41 LAMBETH PARKING SURVEYS – STREATHAM REPORT LAMBETH PARKING STUDY LAMBETH PARKING SURVEYS – STREATHAM REPORT IDENTIFICATION TABLE Client/Project owner London Borough of Lambeth Project Lambeth Parking Study Study Lambeth Parking Surveys – Streatham Report Type of document Report Date 11/10/2017 File name 2017-10-11 Streatham FINAL.docx Framework N/A Reference number GB01T15C41 Number of pages 10ϰ APPROVAL Version Name Position Date Modifications Karishma Kumar, Assistant Author Matthew Transport 15/03/2017 Parker, Planner 1 Josh Bell Checked Jon Associate 23/03/2017 by Bunney Director Approved Jon Associate 23/03/2017 by Bunney Director Author Josh Bell Consultant 19/05/2017 Checked David Associate 24/05/2017 2 by Alderson Approved David Associate 24/05/2017 by Alderson James Assistant Author 11/10/2017 West Consultant Checked David 3 Associate 11/10/2017 by Alderson Approved David Associate 11/10/2017 by Alderson TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 8 1.1 BACKGROUND 8 1.2 CONTROLLED PARKING ZONES (CPZ) 8 1.3 PARKING SURVEY OBJECTIVES 8 1.4 SITE LOCATION 8 2. EXISTING PARKING RESTRICTION 10 2.1 KERBSIDE RESTRICTIONS WITHIN THE STREATHAM AREA 10 2.2 WAITING RESTRICTIONS 10 2.3 PARKING BAYS 10 2.4 OTHER CONTROLLED AREAS 10 2.5 ACCESS PROTECTION MARKINGS (H-BARS) 10 2.6 UNRESTRICTED KERBSIDE SPACE IN THE STREATHAM AREA 11 3. SURVEY METHODOLOGY 12 3.1 METHODOLOGY 12 3.2 PRE-SURVEY AUDIT 12 3.3 SURVEY 12 3.4 SURVEY MONITORING 12 3.5 SURVEY OUTPUTS 12 3.6 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA 13 4.
    [Show full text]