Chapter 5: LIP Proposals

Contents Page Number

Introduction 121

Part One – Addressing the Policies and Proposals in the 123 Mayor’s Transport Strategy

Road Maintenance 123 Principal Roads Maintenance 123 Non-Principal Roads Maintenance 124

Bridge Assessment and Strengthening 124

Local Safety Schemes 125

20 MPH Zones 126

Education, Training and Publicity Schemes 127

Walking 127

Cycling 130 London Cycle Network (LCN) + 132 Non-LCN + Network 132 Cycle Parking and Cyclist Training 132

Traffic Signals 133

Buses 133 Bus Stop Accessibility 133 Bus Priority 134 Enforcement and Management of Bus Routes 135 London Bus Priority Network (LBPN) 135 ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes and Parallel Initiatives 136

Bus Network 137 Operation of Bus Services in the Borough 137 Bus Network Development 138

Area Based Schemes 140

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 117 Town Centres 140 Streets for People 142 Station Access 143

School Travel Plans – Safe Routes to School 146

Workplace Travel Plans 146

Travel Awareness 147

Freight 149

Regeneration Area Schemes 150

Environment 151 Air Quality Improvement 152 Ambient Noise reduction 152

Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs) 152

Accessibility 153

Community Transport, Door-to-Door Transport Services, 154 Taxis, Private Hire Vehicles

Monitoring 155

A13 Route Management Study 156

Airports 156

Biodiversity 156

Car Clubs 157

Consultation 157

East London Transit 157

Freight Interchange and Distribution 157

Land-Use Policies and Planning 158

London Traffic Control Centre 158

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 118 2012 Olympic Games and Other Events 158

Parking and Enforcement 158

Park and Ride 160

Personal Safety 160

Powered Two Wheelers 160

Rail 161

Road Signs and Lines 161

School Buses 161

Shopmobility 162

Traffic Growth Reduction 162

Traffic Management Act 2004 and Network Management Duty 162

Conclusion 162

Part 2 – Proposal Forms 164

Introduction 164

Core Proposals 168

Large Capital Proposals 268

Proposals from Other TGLP Boroughs 317

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 119 List of Tables Page Number

Table 5.1: Cross-Cutting Goals 165

Table 5.2: Core Proposals 165

Table 5.3: Large Capital Proposals 166

Table 5.4: Proposals from Other TGLP Boroughs 167

Table 5.5: LIP Proposal Summary Sheet – Form 2 325

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 120 Introduction

5.1 Section 145 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999 (‘GLA Act’) requires that London local authorities prepare LIPs containing their proposals to implement locally the Mayor’s Transport Strategy. This chapter sets out a five-year programme that the Council will seek to undertake between 2006/07 and 2010/11, in order to implement the Mayor’s Transport Strategy as well as deliver the Council’s own objectives and Barking and Dagenham’s Community Priorities.

5.2 Chapter 5 is made up of two parts. Part One sets out the proposals and policies in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy that the Council is required or encouraged to help deliver; sets out in broad terms how the Council intends to help deliver these; and provides contextual information. Part One of Chapter 5 uses topic headings that reflect the topic headings under which TfL invites boroughs to bid for funds on an annual basis, as well as some of the topic headings used in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy or LIP Guidance. The topic headings used are:

• Road Maintenance; • Bridge Assessment and Strengthening; • Local Safety Schemes; • 20mph Zones; • Education, Training and Publicity; • Walking; • Cycling; • Buses; • Area Based Schemes; • School Travel Plans; • Workplace Travel Plans; • Travel Awareness; • Freight; • Regeneration Area Schemes; • Environment; • Controlled Parking Zones; • Accessibility; • Accessible Transport; • Integration; • Streets; • Car Use; • Monitoring; • Strategies; • International.

5.3 Part Two of Chapter 5 sets out in more detail, via a series of Proposal Forms (‘Form 1s’), how the Council intends to implement the Mayor’s Transport

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 121 Strategy, and provides an estimate of the funding that will be required on an annual basis. Read together, these Proposal Forms make up the Council’s transport programme for the next five years.

5.4 Part Two also contains a LIP Proposal Summary Sheet (‘Form 2’), which cross-references the Proposals Forms against the policies and proposals in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy that the Council is encouraged or required to deliver. Form 2 is in effect a checklist.

5.5 Funding for 2006/07 and 2007/08 has already been secured and proposals have either been implemented or are being designed and implemented. Beyond 2007/08 proposals will be implemented subject to funding being secured. For 2009/10 and 2010/11 there is less certainty as to specific proposals but an indication is given as to whether a programme or proposal is likely to require a similar level of funding, an increase or decrease in funding, or no further funding.

5.6 The Council will submit ‘LIP Funding’ submissions to Transport for London to help deliver the proposals set out in this chapter. The Council will monitor annually the delivery of its programme of proposals and report on this via its LIP Annual Progress Report (‘LIP APR’). Any slippage in implementation, new proposals, or bringing forward of proposals will be picked up by this process and reflected in a revised programme.

5.7 Chapter 3 (Borough Policy Statement) sets out LIP policies as well as ‘strategic transport schemes’ that will largely be pursued and funded by other bodies. Read together with this chapter it is possible to understand the full portfolio of proposals and transport policies that the Council believes necessary to deliver the Mayor’s Transport Strategy locally and deliver the Council’s Community Priorities.

5.8 The environmental effects of LIP policies and proposals have been assessed through a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). The SEA has concluded that the LIP will not have any significant adverse environmental effects. However, the SEA made a number of recommendations to reduce negative effects and promote the opportunities within the LIP to provide added benefits. These recommendations have been incorporated into the LIP.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 122 Part One – Addressing the Policies and Proposals in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy

Road Maintenance

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 4G.25: As the first stage in a new approach to street maintenance, Transport for London and the London boroughs will each produce three-year priority street maintenance plan to cover bridges and principal carriageways reflecting the objectives of the Transport Strategy and available resources.

Proposal 4G.26: Transport for London will work with the London boroughs to develop a long-term approach to the funding and management of all aspects of street maintenance throughout London.

5.9 Highways maintenance is a high priority for the Council and has also been for the Mayor of London. It makes good economic sense to maintain infrastructure in a good state of repair rather than let it deteriorate and incur much higher costs later. Highways in a state of good condition also contribute to achieving other objectives such a personal safety (e.g. no or less tripping on pavements) and road safety (e.g. cyclists not hitting potholes and swerving).

5.10 Standard accepted methods (UKPMS surveys) are used to assess the condition of the network, resources required to bring it up to standard, and the priority locations for repair and reconstruction.

Maintenance of Principal Roads

5.11 Borough principal roads are generally those linking major centres and are the main bus routes. They are the responsibility of the Council.

5.12 Their maintenance has been a high priority of the Mayor as reflected in past financial support to the boroughs. The Council will continue to bid to Transport for London for funds to make up the maintenance backlog with the aim of bringing all ‘A’ roads and busy bus routes up to serviceable standard – that is a UKPMS score of 70 or below – by 2010. Proposal Form 20 sets out detailed proposals and the level of financial support from Transport for London that the Council is seeking.

5.13 As part of a new approach to street maintenance the Council will develop by June 2008 a Highways Asset Management Plan (HAMP) for the highways under its responsibility. The asset management plan will support MTS proposals 4G.25 and 4G.26 as well as objectives in TfL’s Street Maintenance Plan.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 123 5.14 It is proposed that the HAMP be prepared according to the following programme:

• Produce HAMP Scoping Report – June to September 2007; • Report HAMP Scoping Report to Directorate Management Team – October 2007; • Prepare HAMP – November 2007 to May 2008; • Publish HAMP – June 2008.

Maintenance of Non-Principal Roads

5.15 Generally, non-principal roads are the remainder of the highway network in the borough for which the Council is responsible. Their maintenance has not been financially supported in recent past years by Transport for London. With restricted resources and the scale of the maintenance backlog, support from Transport for London has had to be prioritised to the more strategic roads – the Principal Road Network.

5.16 Accordingly, works on non-principal roads have been financed out of the Council’s own capital resources and this is assumed to continue to have to be the case for the foreseeable future. The Council will continue to finance the maintenance of non-principal roads in order to reduce the backlog of work that has resulted from years of underfunding. The amount of funds that the Council will be able to spend on the maintenance of non-principal roads will depend on the priority given to this area in the context of other (competing) demands on the Council’s capital resources. Proposal Form 21 sets out the level of Council funding for the maintenance of non-principal roads.

Bridge Assessment and Strengthening

5.17 All bridge structures are now required to be capable of carrying heavy vehicles to 40 tonnes. Accordingly, all bridge structures have had to be assessed as to their ability to meet this criterion, with programmes determined for interim or permanent works to bring them up to standard where necessary.

5.18 Coordination of the assessment and strengthening programmes between neighbouring authorities is carried out through sector meetings of the London Bridge Engineers Group (LoBEG). This has resulted in agreed coordinated programmes of measures following assessment and prioritisation.

5.19 The Council will continue to monitor the condition of the borough’s bridges and pursue its programme of bridge strengthening to enable bridges to carry 40 ton vehicles and to maintain the integrity and safety of the road network. Proposal Form 5 sets out the Council’s proposals and funding requirements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 124 Local Safety Schemes

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 4G.7: Transport for London (TfL) will develop with the London boroughs, the police and other relevant organisations, the first London-wide Road Safety Plan. The London boroughs will be expected to adopt the approach set out in the plan and to publish their own Road Safety Plans as an integral part of their Local Implementation Plans, outlining how the target reductions are to be achieved locally.

5.20 The Council has produced a Road Safety Plan that it will review annually. The Road Safety Plan has been included in the LIP as Chapter 6. Both Chapter 6 and Chapter 9 of the LIP set out the road safety targets that have been set by the Government and by the Mayor of London. These targets are challenging but underpin the Council’s strategy on road safety.

5.21 Road safety is one of the Council’s highest priorities and the Council will seek continued financial support from Transport for London over the lifetime of the LIP to help reduce the number of accidents and meet its road safety targets. The Council will also work with the London Road Safety Unit to help improve road safety.

5.22 The Council will use a variety of measures to reduce the number of accidents, the severity of accidents and/or the potential for accidents on the borough’s highways including:

• Traffic calming; • Junction Improvements (turning arrangements etc.); • Speed limits; • Traffic speed management (use of message display boards etc.); • Improvements to signage, visibility lighting.

5.23 Proposal Form 16 sets out specific proposals and funding requirements.

5.24 The Council draws up proposals based on the analysis of accident data for the preceding three years. Schemes are developed on a priority basis to address the sites with the most accidents on a cost/benefit basis. Funding is sought from both the Council and Transport for London who also operates allocations on a cost/benefit priority basis.

5.25 Local safety schemes are developed and prioritised on consideration of a range of factors including:

• Accident statistics; • Type of accident/who is involved (pedestrian/cyclist/car/age of persons etc); • Prevailing conditions (wet/dark etc);

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 125 • Other site specific factors; • Accident saving potential; • Severity; • Estimated first year rate of return.

5.26 The priority is reviewed biennially. The proposed programme of schemes reflects current priorities, but will be subject to review in order to reflect circumstances and needs prevailing at the time.

5.27 It is noteworthy that accidents on the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) represent approximately 20 per cent of the total occurring at ‘links’ (the length of road between junctions) and approximately 33 per cent at ‘nodes’ (junctions) on the borough’s highways. This is despite the TLRN representing a comparatively small proportion of the total highways network. Fatalities also appear to be disproportionately found on the TLRN.

20 mph Zones

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 4G.9: The London boroughs and Transport for London should make greater use of their increased powers to introduce 20mph zones and speed limits, where appropriate. Priority will normally be given to residential areas with large numbers of children, such as outside schools.

5.28 The Council is committed to both reducing accidents on the borough’s roads and improving the environment for residents, pedestrians and cyclists. The Council has successfully introduced a number of zones where the speed limit has been reduced to 20 mph.

5.29 The Council will seek to introduce more 20mph zones in particular around schools, in order to reduce the number and severity of accidents involving children. It is necessary for such zones to be self-enforcing in terms of vehicle speed control and as with safety schemes it is necessary to intervene with a range of highway measures. Proposal Form 36 sets out the Council’s proposals and funding requirements.

5.30 The primary aim of a 20mph zone is to reduce vehicle speed (and possibly volume of vehicles) and the benefits are most likely to be a safer environment with a reduced potential for accidents. 20mph zones can also help to reduce air and noise pollution, provided motorists drive sensibly. They can also create more friendly environments for pedestrians and cyclists. Efforts are made to link 20mph zones with other initiatives for mutual benefits – such as School Travel Plan/Safe Routes to School initiatives. 20mph zones can support School Travel Plans in encouraging parents and children to walk or cycle to school rather than travel by car.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 126 5.31 Many zones also build upon previous traffic calming measures, thereby consolidating previous improvements and benefits. Schemes can also address problems imposed by extraneous traffic ‘rat running’ through an area. Schemes are subject to consultation and the views of the local community are a factor in taking them forward; as are any comments or concerns expressed by the emergency services and bus operators.

Education, Training and Publicity Schemes

5.32 A major part of the strategy to improving road safety is through introducing physical works that influence road user behaviour and create a naturally safer highways environment.

5.33 Behavioural change can also be achieved through ‘soft’ measures such as training and publicity schemes. These can also be tailored to meet the needs of specific road users, including the more vulnerable such as children. Examples include schemes addressing drinking and driving, speed, increased awareness of cyclists.

5.34 The Council will seek continued financial support from Transport for London to implement initiatives that relate to road safety education, training and publicity, such as Road Safety Shows for primary school children. The Council will also support pan-London initiatives on education, training and publicity where these exist, such as the new pan-London PTW working group to be chaired by LB Harrow.

Walking

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 4I.1: Transport for London will work with the London boroughs and other relevant organisations to develop effective means of monitoring the extent of walking in central, inner and outer London.

Proposal 4I.2: Transport for London will work with the London boroughs and other relevant organisations to ensure the effective promotion and delivery of better conditions for pedestrians.

Proposal 4I.6: Transport for London, working with the London boroughs and other relevant organisations, will support the completion and promotion of the six strategic walking routes. These are the London Outer Orbital Path, the Capital Ring, the Thames Path National Trail, the Jubilee Walkway, the South-East Green Chain and the Lee Valley Walk.

Proposal 4I.7: Transport for London and the London boroughs will be required to review all traffic signal junctions and implement pedestrian phases wherever practicable, taking account of the impact on priority traffic, such as buses.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 127 Proposal 4I.8: Programmes of improvements will be developed by Transport for London and the London boroughs to make the street environment more accessible, removing barriers and obstructions that make it difficult or unsafe for pedestrians to use the street.

5.35 Walking is a component of practically every journey made. Even for people with a disability the pedestrian environment is an important factor in their overall mobility and opportunities for independent travel e.g. the presence or otherwise of dropped kerbs, pavements that are smooth and easy to negotiate.

5.36 An improved walking environment can also contribute to other objectives such as improved health; reduced reliance on the car and more sustainable journey patterns; and independent travel for those without access to a car such as the young (social inclusion). Incidentally, car ownership in the borough is comparatively low.

5.37 The environmental assessment of the LIP ‘Consultation Draft’ recommended that a greater range of measures to improve cycling and walking be included within the LIP in order to reduce air quality and noise emissions from traffic and improve human health.

5.38 The Council proposes to prepare a Walking Strategy that will set out what the Council intends to do to encourage people to walk more and to make walking safer and more convenient wherever possible. The strategy will also set local targets and how progress in achieving these will be monitored. The strategy will provide a structured approach to walking and will support the Walking Plan for London (TfL, 2004).

5.39 The Walking Strategy will set out a programme of actions including:

• Carrying out street audits (see Proposal Form 34) • Carrying out walking audits of major Council traffic schemes (see Proposal Form 34) • Providing wayfinding signs and panels at key locations in the borough (funding and details are set out in Proposal Form 22) • Producing a printed walking map aimed at residents, visitors and businesses (see Proposal Form 34) • Updating information packs for the public on the borough’s 8 ‘Just Walk’ Routes (see Proposal Form 34) • Carrying out campaigns to promote walking to work and school (funding and other details are set out in Proposal Form 30) • Carrying out engineering works (footway works, removal of street clutter, traffic calming, works to pedestrian crossings and footbridges etc.) – see Proposal Form 34 • Introducing pedestrian phasing at signalised junctions and reviewing pedestrian crossings (see Proposal Form 34)

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 128 • Creating new walking routes linking to key facilities and green spaces (funding and other details are set out in Proposal Forms 45, 40, 37, 38, 39, 70, 71 and 43) • Monitoring the targets set out in the Walking Strategy (funding and other details are set out in Proposal Form 17)

5.40 The Council will seek to increase public participation in the shaping of Council proposals on walking. It will also encourage joined-up working between different council departments. One way in which this could be achieved is by setting up a cross-departmental ‘walking group’.

5.41 The Council’s highway maintenance programme, which covers both carriageways and footways, will also help to improve conditions for pedestrians. Details on the Council’s highway maintenance programme are contained in Proposal Forms 20 and 21).

5.42 The Barking Town Centre Movement Strategy (Proposal Form 44) and Dagenham Heathway Public Realm Strategy (Proposal Form 47) will contribute to creating high quality pedestrian environments in the borough’s two town centres. The Council will also prepare two supplementary planning documents: an Urban Design Framework Plan and a Public Realm Strategy (see Proposal Form 18). These documents will set out principles and guidelines that will help to create pedestrian friendly streets and public spaces.

5.43 The Council will prepare a Rights of Way Improvement Plan (RoWIP) as required by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (see Proposal Form 35). In drawing up the plan the Council will look into a number of issues including the present and future needs of the public and opportunities for exercise and open-air recreation.

5.44 The Council’s Sport Development Unit has created eight health walks in partnership with the local Primary Care Trust. These health walks, called ‘Just Walk’ routes, use footpaths in the borough’s parks and provide opportunities for the community to improve their health and fitness. Most of the walks are accessible to buggies and wheelchairs. The health walks support the national ‘Walking the way to Health Initiative’ (WHI), which is an initiative of the British Heart Foundation and the Countryside Agency. The Council received a ‘3 Heart Award’ from the WHI in 2004 for its ‘Just Walk Programme’.

5.45 Regular organised walks using the ‘Just Walk’ routes take place every week. These walks are led by ‘walk leaders’. The Council produced free ‘Self Walk Packs’ to enable people to use the ‘Just Walk’ routes by themselves. The Council will print and distribute more ‘Self Walk Packs’ in 2006/07 and will seek funding to implement signage on the ‘Just Walk’ routes.

5.46 The Council supports the completion and promotion of six ‘strategic walking routes’ identified by the Mayor of London. These routes are: the London Outer Orbital Path; the Capital Ring; the Thames Path; the Jubilee Walkway; the Green Chain Walk; and the Lee Valley Walk. None of these routes come into the borough however the Council is promoting walking routes within the

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 129 borough that will provide links to some of the six ‘strategic walking’ routes (see Proposal Forms 37 - 42). TfL is considering what options there are to create additional strategic walking routes, which could include the Roding Valley Way and the Thames North Path.

5.47 Most funding for walking schemes is assumed to come from Transport for London, but new developments also give opportunity to provide for schemes as an intrinsic part of the development and/or through Section 106 agreements. A prime example is Barking Riverside, which will open up access to the River as well as provide a pedestrian network internal to the development itself.

Cycling

Mayor’s Policies:

Proposal 4J.1: Transport for London and the London boroughs, in consultation with cyclist user groups, will undertake and support measures to make the cycling environment safer and more convenient for all users.

Transport for London will establish a Cycling Centre of Excellence that will prepare a plan to guide the development of cycling initiatives in consultation with the London boroughs and cyclist user groups.

Proposal 4J.3: The Cycling Centre of Excellence will co-ordinate the London Cycle Network in partnership with a lead London borough. A project management model similar to the London Bus Initiative will be followed, with increased support to the London boroughs to ensure delivery.

Proposal 4J.4: Transport for London will work with the London boroughs and cyclist groups to develop extended high quality cycle routes, which will largely be based on the London Cycle Network. By early 2002, a pilot high quality route will be identified. The Londonwide network will be identified by the end of 2002, with the aim of completing the extended high quality routes programme within ten years.

Proposal 4J.5: Transport for London and the London boroughs will look at the problems that cyclists encounter, particularly key accident locations, to see if these can be solved by specific junction treatment or other traffic management solutions.

Proposal 4J.6: All new major highway and transport infrastructure and traffic management schemes should be cycle audited. Transport for London and all London boroughs should have cycle audit procedures and include cycling in safety audit procedures.

Proposal 4J.7: Transport for London and the London boroughs, working in partnership with rail operators, businesses and educational establishments, will provide additional secure cycle parking facilities, including at shopping centres and transport interchanges. The Mayor will also encourage the provision of these and other facilities required by cyclists at workplaces and places of education, and will

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 130 expect the London boroughs to require developers, wherever practicable, to: - Provide good cycle access to the development; - Install secure cycle parking; - Provide showers, lockers and changing facilities.

Proposal 4J.8: Transport for London (TfL) will work with the London boroughs and the police to support effective training for children and adults for safer cycling. TfL will work with the London boroughs, and the voluntary and community sectors to increase awareness of the problems caused by cycling on the footway and other offences, and will develop effective measures for addressing them.

5.48 The Council will continue to seek to improve conditions for cyclists and seek to increase the amount of cycling in the borough. The Council will seek to increase the amount of cycling facilities in the borough including off highway cycle routes through parks and green spaces, referred to in the LIP as ‘Green Corridors’. Cycling gives many of the same opportunities and benefits as walking whilst offering a quicker mode of travel. Provision of well designed and safe cycle routes both off and on street will encourage more cycling to the benefit of both the individuals involved and the community at large.

5.49 The Council has produced a Cycling Action Plan that sets out what the Council intends to do to encourage more people to cycle and to make cycling safer and more convenient wherever possible. The plan will also implement locally the objectives of the London Cycling Action Plan (TfL, 2004) and support mayoral Proposal 4J.1.

5.50 The Council will seek to raise the profile of cycling through various measures including promotional events.

5.51 The Council’s Cycling Action Plan sets out information and proposals in relation to cycling including the review of key cyclist accident locations, cycle audit procedures, cycle parking standards and consultation with cyclist user groups.

5.52 The Council allows cyclists to use all bus lanes in the borough, and considers the needs of cyclists and consults with various cycling organisations when designing bus priority schemes.

5.53 During 2005/2006 the Council brought the highway services into one group with the aim of improving coordination of highway activities. All works being undertaken on the highway require consideration of all traffic management including pedestrians, cyclists and freight. The aim is to maximise benefits to all transport groups, including cyclists, from all highway works including highways maintenance, traffic management and bus priority measures.

5.54 The Council will in consultation with cyclist groups identify difficulties caused by one-way streets and possible remedial measures. A balanced approach and consideration of all transport users’ needs will inform any proposals for one-way streets.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 131 London Cycle Network (LCN) +

5.55 The LCN+ is a London wide network of strategic cycle routes. The programme of schemes to implement the LCN+ is coordinated by the lead borough for cycling in London – LB Camden. Funding mainly comes from Transport for London. The Council will continue to support the implementation of the LCN+. Proposal Form 7 sets out the Council’s detailed proposals in relation to the LCN+. The LCN common statement is included in Appendix 2.

Non-LCN + Network

5.56 Complementing the LCN+ is a finer grained network of cycle routes serving a more local rather than strategic function. The Council in consultation with local cyclist organisations determines where to implement local cycle routes. The objectives of these routes are broadly similar to the LCN+ routes – to promote cycling through the provision of a well designed, safe and convenient cycle route network that actually reflects where people wish to go.

5.57 The Council will continue to implement Non LCN+ cycle routes and will seek funding from Transport for London for this purpose. That said other opportunities would also be exploited as they arise e.g. partnership funding, developer provision/funding.

Cycle Parking and Cyclist Training

5.58 The Council has installed cycle parking at key locations across the borough including outside train/London Underground stations and in council car parks. The Council will seek funding from TfL to increase the amount of on-street cycle parking and cycle parking at stations. For cycle parking at stations the Council will continue to work with rail operators to identify opportunities to install cycle parking within stations. The Council will also seek funding from TfL to install CCTV cameras at key locations such as transport interchanges, which will help to make cycle parking more secure.

5.59 The Council will encourage through the means of travel plans employers and schools to provide secure and convenient cycle parking. The Council will continue to encourage and help schools to take part in the Mayor’s School Cycle Parking Programme. The Council will require developers, wherever practicable, to provide good cycle access to their development as well as facilities such as cycle parking, showers and changing facilities. The Council’s LDF will set out the Council’s requirements in this respect (see Proposal Form 18).

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 132 Traffic Signals

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 4G.19: Transport for London will take forward the setting up of a London Traffic Control Centre, bringing together traffic management and control functions.

5.60 Traffic signals can have a variety of uses including:

• Controlling traffic flows; • Providing priority to buses; • Helping pedestrians and cyclists cross busy roads.

5.61 Traffic Technology Services (TTS), which are part of Transport for London, are responsible for installing and maintaining traffic signals on the instruction of the boroughs. Generally, if the Council proposes traffic signals these will be part of other proposals such as cycle routes.

5.62 The majority of the borough’s signalised junctions have dedicated pedestrian phases. The aim is to ensure that all signalised junctions where pedestrian access is necessary have a pedestrian phase by the end of financial year 2007/2008. This will also apply to new development. The Council will actively pursue TTS to include sites identified within the annual programmes for implementation. 100 per cent of controlled crossings in Barking and Dagenham have facilities for disabled people.

Buses

Bus Stop Accessibility

Mayor’s Policies:

4O.1: The transport system should be made more accessible by removing the physical, attitudinal and communication barriers that affect independent mobility. Everyone should have safe, comfortable and convenient access to a range of services, facilities and jobs. Work to achieve this should be through partnership with transport providers and other organisations, including those of older and disabled Londoners.

Mayor’s Proposals:

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 133 Proposal 4F.11: Transport for London (TfL) and the London boroughs will develop and implement a long term programme so that all bus stops have appropriate passenger facilities and can be served effectively by low floor buses.

Proposal 4I.8: Programmes of improvements will be developed by Transport for London and the London boroughs to make the street environment more accessible, removing barriers and obstructions that make it difficult or unsafe for pedestrians to use the street.

5.63 The Council will continue its programme of bus stop accessibility works and will seek funding from Transport for London for this purpose. These works can include footway improvements; changes to kerb heights, filling-in of bus bays, etc. As well as proposals for individual stops, the Council will also look at proposals for whole routes. Proposal Form 6 sets out the Council’s proposals.

Bus Priority

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 4F.2: Transport for London will devote greater resources to reviewing and improving the performance and reliability of individual routes through more effective operational management, in partnership with the operators, the London boroughs and enforcement agencies.

Proposal 4F.6: Bus priority and protection against congestion will be substantially increased on all bus routes Londonwide, both in the amount of street space allocated and the time of operation. The current phase of the London Bus Priority Network will be completed by April 2004.

Proposal 4F.7: All bus routes will be effectively enforced, to protect against illegal stopping and other traffic offences, using cameras wherever possible. Emergency vehicles operated by the police, the London Ambulance Service or the London Fire Service will be able to use bus lanes at all times. All bus stops on routes with 24 hour bus services or routes in the London Bus Initiative or London Bus Priority Network will have 24 hour bus stop clearways. At other stops there will be a general presumption in favour of 24 hour clearways, but as a minimum, there must be clearways that cover the operating hours of the bus route.

Proposal 4F.8: Transport for London and the London boroughs will promote and implement a package of whole route enhanced, intensified and enforced bus priority measures on major bus corridors. Together with other complementary measures, this will provide a high quality, fully accessible bus network on the London Bus Initiative BusPlus routes.

Proposal 4G.18: The approach adopted on red routes set out in paragraphs 4G.102 - 4G.104 (including environmental improvements) should be applied to the whole of the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) and roads designated as Greater London Authority side roads before the end of 2004. Parallel initiatives should be

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 134 applied by the London boroughs to all other ‘A’ roads and busy bus routes starting in 2003.

Enforcement and Management of Bus Routes

5.64 The borough is committed to assisting with the provision of public transport. Approximately 90 per cent of bus stops in the borough have bus stop clearway enforcement and the aim is to implement and enforce clearways at all bus stops by the end of financial year 2007/08.

5.65 The Council will maintain its excellent gritting service and will work with neighbouring boroughs to ensure continuity and provide support. The focus will be on public transport routes in terms of preventative gritting.

5.66 The borough undertakes enforcement of parking and loading restrictions using CCTV. Predominantly CCTV enforcement of parking restrictions takes place within local shopping areas and the town centres. A new Service Level Agreement will be signed as soon as possible. The Council will adopt moving contravention enforcement as covered by the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 (‘LLA and TfL Act’).

5.67 Bus lanes in the borough are well respected and CCTV enforcement is not considered necessary at most locations. It is however considered necessary to utilise CCTV enforcement in support of public transport at locations where indiscriminate parking causes congestion. The Council will be seeking CCTV enforcement at potential congestion points along the full length of the route of the East London Transit.

5.68 The Council works closely with London Buses/TfL to undertake improvements for bus priority and access. Residents of Barking and Dagenham have a high dependency on public transport and therefore the scheme heavily promotes priority for buses by supporting bus lanes and beacon priority at signalised junctions. Parking enforcement is highest at locations where indiscriminate parking would adversely affect bus passage.

London Bus Priority Network (LBPN)

5.69 The LBPN partnership is well established and recognised by Transport for London and boroughs alike. It is now in its twelfth year and has been preparing a consistently accepted annual bid on behalf of boroughs for bus priority. Up to the end of March 2004 the LBPN as a project has resulted in the boroughs implementing over 3,500 bus priority schemes. The LBPN common statement is included in Appendix 2 of the LIP.

5.70 The Council will continue to support the development and implementation of the LBPN. Bus priority is key to improving bus journey times and reliability that, in turn, are essential features of the bus as an attractive alternative to the car. Proposal Form 3 sets out the Council’s proposals in relation to bus priority.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 135 5.71 The development and programming of the LBPN is undertaken on a pan- London basis between the boroughs and Transport for London, with LB Bromley as the lead borough. The proposals set out in Proposal Form 3 reflect that arrangement.

5.72 The cost for the implementation of bus priority schemes on the LBPN should continue to be financed at no cost to the local authorities. Over the 12 years the project has been allocated a total of £165.65 million and the recent announcement of a further £20.3m for expenditure in 2006/07 is testimony to the success of the LBPN as a partnership delivering effective bus priority schemes across the Capital.

5.73 Regarding whole route bus priority measures, the Council will actively consider proposals that come out of the scoping work currently being progressed between TfL’s Bus Priority Team and the LBPN.

‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes and Parallel Initiatives

5.74 The Mayor’s Transport Strategy and LIP Guidance (TfL, July 2004) require boroughs to apply ‘parallel initiatives’ to ‘A’ roads and ‘busy bus routes’. Parallel initiatives is a term used to describe an integrated traffic management approach that TfL would like London boroughs to adopt on their main roads. This approach takes its inspiration from the approach adopted by TfL on ‘red routes’. Under this new approach, London boroughs are being asked to identify sections of their network that can be considered holistically, and to look at the principal functions and problems encountered on their highway network, and to develop holistic solutions.

5.75 The Council is responsible for the following ‘A’ roads in the borough: A123, A124, A1153, A1240, A1112, A1083, A118. The Council considers the following roads as ‘busy bus routes’: A124, A1240, A1306 (between A1240 and B178), A1083, A118, Oxlow Lane (between A1112 and A1240), and Dagenham Road (between A124 Rush Green Road and A1112 Rainham Road North).

5.76 The Council’s programme (2007/08 – 2010/11) for parallel initiatives is:

• Identify sections of road to review; • Determine the principal functions of the section of network in terms of the different road users based on the Mayor’s Transport Strategy; • Assess the problems experienced on the section of network by road users taking account of the priorities for main roads identified above; • Design schemes to address the problems identified above.

5.77 The Council will seek funding from Transport for London to identify sections of road to review and to design and implement parallel initiatives. The Council’s planned Road Safety, Bus Priority and Town Centre schemes may offer opportunities as well as funding to implement parallel initiatives. The Council is currently designing a scheme for the A1240 Heathway that aims to

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 136 increase pedestrian priority; ease congestion; reduce delays for buses; and assist loading and unloading.

5.78 Transport for London has set up a ‘Parallel Initiatives’ funding pot however at present the amount of money available is very small (£235k allocated for all London boroughs in 2006/07). The Council would welcome more money being made available for parallel initiatives.

5.79 Neighbouring boroughs are also being asked to implement parallel initiatives. The Council may seek funding through the Thames Gateway London Partnership (TGLP) for cross-boundary schemes.

5.80 Proposal Form 27 sets out the Council’s proposals in relation to implementing parallel initiatives on ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes in the borough.

Bus Network

Operation of Bus Services in the Borough

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 4F.11: Transport for London (TfL) and the London boroughs will develop and implement a long-term programme so that all bus stops have appropriate passenger facilities and can be served effectively by low floor buses.

Proposal 4F.16: Transport for London, with the police, bus operators and other appropriate agencies will introduce measures to improve safety and security on buses, with initiatives such as Operation Seneca.

Proposal 4F.18: Transport for London will develop and introduce better bus information, including different formats and languages, to meet the wide range of passenger needs.

(Progress to be made so improved information starts to be produced by the end of 2001.)

5.81 The Council works closely with Transport for London, bus operators and neighbouring boroughs to identify and remediate bus operational issues that are not otherwise addressed through the LBPN or other programmes. A quarterly Public Transport Liaison Group meeting chaired by the Lead Councillor for Regeneration is one forum for this.

5.82 The Council will continue to lobby for improvements to the running of existing services to tackle issues such as overcrowding, safety, vandalism, anti-social behaviour, inadequate bus shelters, inadequate bus information, difficulties

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 137 encountered by disabled persons, older persons and adults with young children.

5.83 Feedback received by the Council on its ‘Consultation Draft’ LIP indicated that local people would welcome the presence of bus conductors or other staff on bus services, to help deal with anti-social behaviour. Local people would also welcome school buses to transport school children to and from schools.

Bus Network Development

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 4F.9: The bus network will be expanded with new and extended services, and improved service frequencies, where practicable and cost-effective. Consideration will be given to new types of service to attract existing car users. (It is expected that between 2001 and 2011 there will be a 40 per cent increase in both passenger numbers and service provision.)

Proposal 4F.3: Transport for London, with the operators, the London boroughs, and other interested parties, will ensure sufficient bus garage and standing facilities can be provided to meet the needs of the London bus network, including the requirements of the revised contracting regime, and to facilitate the expansion of the network.

5.84 The Council and its partners are embarking on a major programme of regeneration and new development in the borough. At Barking Riverside, for example, 10,800 new homes are proposed. Major new housing and commercial development is also expected in Barking Town Centre and South Dagenham, and Dagenham Dock will see the creation of 4,000 new jobs. The bus network must change and develop to accommodate this growth so that sustainable travel patterns can be established early on. However the Council considers that a light rail system or bus rapid transit is also needed in order to achieve a significant modal shift away from the car and contribute to making Barking and Dagenham a more attractive place to live.

5.85 The coverage of the bus network needs to be increased in order to: improve accessibility to areas such as Marks Gate/Chadwell Heath (perceived as comparatively isolated) and Dagenham Dock (expanding employment area with no bus service); improve accessibility to community facilities such as hospitals (e.g. Queens Hospital), schools and parks; and make it easier to travel between the north and south of the borough.

5.86 There is also a need to capitalise on new trip patterns and opportunities provided by major new infrastructure such as the proposed Thames Gateway Bridge or by new public transport services such as ELT or riverboat services.

5.87 In 2004, the Council commissioned consultants to produce a ‘Bus Strategy’ study. This included an assessment of existing bus provision in the borough,

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 138 capacity, planned developments etc. A number of changes to services were recommended for consideration.

5.88 Proposal Form 4 sets out proposals to develop a Bus Strategy. On consideration of the ‘Bus Strategy’ study and issues raised through various fora, the following service developments (in outline) are suggested as the basis for a full Bus Strategy to be developed:

• Bus routes approaching or likely to be over capacity as identified in the ‘Bus Strategy’ (e.g. Barking Town Centre/Station to Barking Riverside; South Dagenham; Dagenham Heathway; Goodmayes Park); • Services to and within major development areas – specifically Barking Riverside; links across the A13; • To serve Marks Gate; • To serve major community facilities e.g. Queens Hospital and Jo Richardson School; • Areas with a low Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) rating; • Orbital/north south links; • New sub-regional networks, inter alia to capitalise on the Thames Gateway Bridge; • Service developments to tackle health inequalities and social deprivation.

5.89 The Council will support within reason planning applications for new bus facilities. Policy CR 5 in the Council’s Core Strategy Preferred Options Report refers to “Encouraging non-car transport including facilities and routes for public transport […].” London Buses is invited to make known to the Council sites it considers suitable for bus standing and garage facilities, so that the Council can consider these when preparing its Site Specific Allocations Development Plan Document.

5.90 The Council will investigate alternative sites for a bus stand in proximity to Barking Rail Station should the need arise to re-locate the existing bus stand as part of plans for the redevelopment of Barking Town Centre.

5.91 The Council has provided input into the preparation of a Transport Strategy for the Barking Riverside development. The Transport Strategy includes a Public Transport Framework, which contains proposals for bus standing and driver facilities and turnaround facilities. Appendix TS02 of the Barking Riverside Transport Strategy describes these proposals.

5.92 The Council will sit alongside TfL and other stakeholders on the Barking Riverside Transport Strategy Steering Group (the TSSG), which will oversee the delivery of the Barking Riverside Strategy.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 139 Area Based Schemes

5.93 These are schemes where the transport needs of an area are assessed as a whole rather than being proposals on a topic by topic basis e.g. cycling or walking etc. As such these tend to be large comprehensive programmes that are spread over a number of years. A main intention is to make a demonstrable step change to the transport ‘offer’ of any particular area.

Town Centres

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 4G.11: Transport for London will work with the London boroughs to develop a plan setting out a programme of environmental street improvement schemes to improve the attractiveness of London’s town centres.

Proposal 4I.4: Transport for London (TfL) will progress the World Squares For All Project, with the partial pedestrianisation of Trafalgar Square as the first stage. TfL will work in partnership with the London boroughs and the police to ensure that these and other pedestrianised areas are effectively managed.

5.94 There are two main centres in the borough where comprehensive packages of transport proposals and associated improvements are to be introduced – Barking Town Centre and Dagenham Heathway. Both centres were the subject of detailed studies from which the packages of proposals in the LIP derive.

5.95 For Barking Town Centre the key issues that were considered included:

• The links between development and existing movement infrastructure (there will be a net increase of 4,000 dwellings, and commercial development in the town centre); • The maximisation of public transport opportunities and their interconnections; • The control of vehicle movements and speed; • A reduction in pedestrian, cycle and vehicle conflicts • The provision of the correct balance of parking, loading and servicing requirements; • Accommodating the introduction of the East London Transit (Phase 1).

5.96 A key aim is to provide a robust and deliverable Movement Strategy that will provide a quality pedestrian environment whilst accommodating the car and other forms of transport in a sustainable manner. The strategy and associated proposals will complement other initiatives to regenerate the town centre; develop key sites; improve the centre’s environment; and reinforce its role as a major shopping, commercial and services centre.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 140 5.97 The main elements of the Movement Strategy for Barking Town Centre are:

• Implementation of town centre ‘Walk Wheel’ proposals – improved inner and outer centre pedestrian orbital routes with connecting radial links (‘Spokes’); • ‘Sociable Streets’ – e.g. removal of clutter; improved pedestrian environment; better townscape; traffic calming; • ‘Green Backbone’ – a central walking and cycling spinal route between the River Roding north to Abbey Gardens and Barking Park; • Improving ‘Block Structure’ – the creation of better street patterns, particularly in association with redevelopment opportunities; • The ‘Through Traffic Corridor’ – promotion of the northern relief route as the main through corridor; design improvements; better provision for pedestrians; bus priority; downgrading of other corridors (St Paul’s Road; Broadway); • Improvements for public transport – at Barking Station/interchange; introducing East London Transit; improvements to bus layover/operation/shelters and information; • Parking, loading and signage improvements.

5.98 In partnership with the Council, the London Thames Gateway Development Corporation and GLA ‘Family’ (GLA, LDA and Transport for London) will be key organisations involved in implementing the Movement Strategy.

5.99 The Council will seek funding from Transport for London to implement components of the Movement Strategy. Proposal Form 44 sets out the Council’s proposals in detail as well as the funding requirements.

5.100 Dagenham Heathway is the borough’s other major centre. It is located along the Heathway (A1240), which is an important north-south route and features in the ‘Mayor’s 100 Spaces Programme’. The Heathway currently suffers from a poor image and has a number of problems including a poor pedestrian environment characterised by uneven surfaces, extensive guard railing and street clutter; pedestrian/cycle/vehicular conflict; and illegal parking and loading that causes congestion to buses and other vehicles. The packages of proposals put forward aim to address these issues, and to promote Dagenham Heathway as a vibrant and attractive place.

5.101 The Council will seek funding from Transport for London to implement the Dagenham Heathway Public Realm Strategy. Proposal Form 47 sets out the Council’s proposals in detail as well as the funding requirements.

5.102 To ensure that the benefits of the town centre schemes are long lasting, the Council will work with its partners including the police to ensure that pedestrian areas in the town centre are effectively managed. The Council has launched a Street Warden Service in the borough to stamp out environmental crime and work with the community to promote pride and respect for the borough’s streets and public spaces. The street wardens work closely with the police and other enforcement agencies including the Parks Police and the Metropolitan Police Safer Neighbourhood Teams.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 141 Streets for People

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 4G.10: The London boroughs will be encouraged to design and manage appropriate local streets as Streets-for-People areas emphasising their function as social spaces. Priority will initially be given to areas of high deprivation, regeneration areas and in particular areas of high density neighbourhood renewal. Transport for London will co-operate with these initiatives where they are likely to affect the operation of the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN).

5.103 The main initiative under this topic is the introduction of ‘Home Zones’. These are areas where comprehensive traffic calming is introduced often associated with environmental and streetscape improvements, such that traffic becomes secondary to the needs and presence of the pedestrian.

5.104 ‘Home Zones’ are geared to achieving safe, quality environments where people can walk and congregate at leisure within an environment where vehicles do not dominate. They can form an integral part of new development as well as being introduced to established residential areas. Achieving a step change in this way can be expensive as quality materials are often used as part of the environmental uplift involved. This can also have ongoing implications for highways maintenance budgets.

5.105 The Council has made a number of bids to Transport for London for funds to support Home Zones and Streets for People with little success. The Council has invested in and fully funded a number of local schemes and these are being monitored.

5.106 The ethos of Streets-for-People is inherent in all of the substantial number of Regeneration projects that are planned or underway in Barking and Dagenham. The Council is developing two major projects to improve the streetscape and reduce vehicle domination in Barking Town Centre and Dagenham Heathway. Both projects fulfil Streets-for-People objectives and the Council will seek financial support from Transport for London to implement them. Proposal Forms 44 and 47 set out the Council’s proposals and funding requirements.

5.107 The borough also contains a number of areas/housing estates, some of which are deprived, that experience problems such as vehicle domination, ‘rat- running’, poor use of public space, safety issues, a lack of parking, barriers to walking, and an unattractive streetscape. The Council will consider Streets- for-People schemes for these areas as opportunities arise, such as the redevelopment of Barking Town Centre or traffic management schemes. The Council will also consider schemes to help meet the aspirations of local resident groups.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 142 Station Access

Mayor’s Policies:

Policy 4O.1: The transport system should be made more accessible by removing the physical, attitudinal and communication barriers that affect independent mobility. Everyone should have safe, comfortable and convenient access to a range of services, facilities and jobs. Work to achieve this should be through partnership with transport providers and other organisations, including those of older and disabled Londoners.

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 4E.9: Transport for London will work with the Strategic Rail Authority, the Train Operating Companies and the London boroughs to significantly improve the sense of security felt by rail passengers when using rail stations, and to raise more stations in London to the ‘Secure Stations’ standard.

Proposal 4E.13: Transport for London will work with the Strategic Rail Authority, Railtrack, the Train Operating Companies and the London boroughs to identify and implement a Londonwide programme of improved accessibility of National Rail stations, including the establishment of a core network of accessible stations.

5.108 The Council is keen to work in partnership with the rail industry to improve both the internal and external travel environment of stations in the borough. This includes both Transport for London/LUL for the tube network, and the relevant overland rail network interests (c2c; Network Rail; Department for Transport; TfL).

5.109 It is down to the rail industry to invest in and improve stations internally, but the Council can give considerable added value to the operation and attractiveness of stations through works to the surrounding street environment, particularly when geared to improving interchange. Such works can include:

• Improved bus stops and bus arrangements relative to access to the station; • Parking rationalisation and enforcement around the station; • Provision for dropping off people – so called ‘kiss and ride’; • Provision for taxis; • Provision for disabled persons – set down points and parking bays; • Dropped kerbs and other improvements for people with a disability; • Cycle routes serving stations and secure cycle parking; • Improved conditions for pedestrians to the station – surface crossings, new and improved footways, removal of subways; • Improved signage and information; • Environmental and streetscape improvements;

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 143 • CCTV, graffiti removal and other improvements to promote personal security.

5.110 Barking and Dagenham participates in the TGLP ‘Station Access Study’ programme, through which station access improvements are identified and prioritised (see Proposal Form 52). The Council has submitted, as part of this programme, proposals to improve access to Dagenham East Station. The Council will implement these proposals in 2006/07 subject to approval by Transport for London of the detailed design and release of funding. Proposal Form 28 details the proposals.

5.111 Dagenham East Station is the only station in the borough that does not have step free access to the platforms. Transport for London is due to consult on its plans to making more London Underground stations accessible by 2020. The Council will lobby Transport for London to make Dagenham East Station accessible.

5.112 The Council will submit to Transport for London in 2006/07, as part of the TGLP programme, proposals to improve access to Chadwell Heath Station. The Council will define the proposed improvements in collaboration with the neighbouring borough of Redbridge. Proposals Form 28 provides an indication of what the improvements could be and how much funding would be required.

5.113 Barking Station is a key interchange with District Line, c2c and Barking/Gospel Oak rail services available. It is served by many bus routes and taxis. The proposed East London Transit will also access it. The station is at the heart of the town centre and is also well used by pedestrians. There is some cycle parking however this may have to be moved when East London Transit is implemented. The station is a key component in the future health and regeneration of Barking itself. It is also a listed building.

5.114 That said the station is in need of improvement – both internally, and to interchange arrangements externally. Internal improvements could include:

• A general upgrade to the fabric and decor of the building; • Improved information and help points; • Improved signage; • Improved accessibility to the platforms and facilities for people with a disability; • Improvements to the station concourse; • Improved internal circulation – possibly involving a ninety degree rotation of the ticket office, its location on the south side of the ticket hall and the creation of more gates to the platforms; • New entrances – perhaps off Wakering Road and/or Cambridge Road.

5.115 External and interchange improvements have been considered by the Barking Town Centre Movement Strategy study. The Movement Strategy proposes an

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 144 elongated interchange which spreads the interchange functions along Station Parade. Features include:

• Additional bus stops and provision for East London Transit; • Taxis relocated to Wakering Road, with the build out on the corner of the street removed to make them as close to Station Parade as possible and highly visible; • Wide, signalised pedestrian crossings; • Cycle parking provision; • A ‘kiss and ride’ bay; • A milling area for passengers outside the main station entrance; • Improved signage.

5.116 The Council will seek funding from Transport for London, the LTGDC and S106 agreements to finance external improvements.

5.117 Dagenham Heathway is another key interchange in the borough. Internal improvements to the station have been undertaken by Transport for London as part of an ongoing programme of District Line service and station improvements. The Council welcomes these.

5.118 External and interchange improvements will be integrated with the package of improvements for the town centre as described in the ‘Town Centres’ section above and Proposal Form 28.

5.119 A third key interchange will be at Dagenham Dock on the London/Tilbury/Southend line. This will serve major redevelopment and regeneration areas at South Dagenham, Dagenham Dock and Barking Riverside, as well as existing local businesses and communities. It will also be the terminus for East London Transit (Phase 1), new bus services, and the proposed extension of Docklands Light Railway (DLR) from Beckton via the Barking Riverside development area.

5.120 The Department for Communities and Local Government has allocated £3 million to create a new interchange at Dagenham Dock. TfL has allocated £250k in 2006/07 to implement lifts at Dagenham Dock Station. Additional funds are likely to be needed to improve access to the future interchange and to integrate it with local pedestrian and cycle routes such as the proposed ‘Dagenham Spine’ cycle and walking route (see Proposal Forms 41 and 28). The nature and timing of the improvements will be governed by the proposals for the interchange.

5.121 In anticipation of the impact of new development in the area and the integration of other transport schemes with Dagenham Dock (i.e. ELT, buses and DLR), the Council commissioned a study into how the station could be progressively built out and developed to meet its expanded role as a new interchange. The study recommended a staged build out of the interchange over time reflecting the rate and pattern of development in the area, and the progressive introduction of new transport infrastructure and services that

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 145 would terminate at Dagenham Dock (DD). One possible scenario is as follows:

• Phase 1 (2009): ELT terminates at DD southside; • Phase 2 (2010): Bus/cycle/car access from north; • Phase 3 (2012): DLR terminates at DD southside; full cycle access; • Phase 4 (2012+): New pedestrian/cycle bridge crossing over rail lines; • Phase 5 (2012+): ELT terminus at DD northside; • Phase 6: New station building and commercial square/development on northside.

(Elements of the build out and timings are the best estimate at time of writing.)

5.122 For all other stations in the borough a year on year programme of external station access improvements will be determined following a full study to be commissioned by the Thames Gateway London Partnership (TGLP). Rail industry interests are invited to participate in this and complement any such external works with internal improvements as necessary, along the lines as outlined above at the start of this section of the LIP.

School Travel Plans – Safe Routes to School

5.123 This subject is covered in detail in Chapter 8. The schemes included in this part of the LIP represent a year on year programme to implement the Council’s adopted School Travel Plan Strategy.

5.124 The Council aims to have a school travel plan in place in every school in the borough by 2009. The Council’s School Travel Plan Strategy, contained in Chapter 8 of the LIP, sets out how the Council aims to achieve this. In order to deliver its strategy the Council will require continued financial support from Transport for London. Proposal Form 29 sets out the Council’s proposals in relation to school travel plans and the funding requirements.

Workplace Travel Plans

Mayor’s Policies:

Policy 3.7: In exercising his functions in relation to planning applications, draft Unitary Development Plans and other land use matters the Mayor will give due weight to the matters listed below. The London boroughs should also give due weight to these matters in exercising their functions in relation to planning applications and development plans, where appropriate: (appropriate section extracted)

The provision of transport assessments for major new trip generating development proposals – these should include information about how travel behaviour will be influenced by the proposed development, and how public

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 146 transport, walking and cycling will be encouraged. Workplace travel plans should be produced where appropriate.

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 4P.4: The London boroughs, in conjunction with Transport for London (TfL) and key partners including business, health authorities and educational establishments will develop programmes to encourage individuals and organisations to adopt more sustainable modes of transport.

Workplace travel plans: the London boroughs will develop a programme to provide travel advice in partnership with TfL. Employers will be encouraged to establish travel plans, to inform employees of the options available, and address issues such as parking provision, location decisions, and lack of facilities for cyclists. Such plans should be an integral part of development applications (see Policy 3.7).

5.125 The Council will require that workplace travel plans be prepared for new employment developments above a certain size. The Council will seek to encourage the voluntary uptake of workplace travel plans by existing local businesses, by providing advice and by promoting workplace travel plans through publicity and events. The Council will prepare and implement its own workplace travel plan.

5.126 The Council will also seek to support businesses that are developing or implementing a workplace travel plan by using a variety of measures. Proposal Form 33 sets out the Council’s proposals and funding requirements in relation to the promotion of workplace travel plans within the borough.

5.127 TGLP employs two sub-regional travel plan coordinators who are based at the London Borough of Havering. TGLP has secured funding from Transport for London for both posts until at least 2010. LB Havering will act as lead borough for the promotion of workplace travel plans and travel awareness in the London Thames Gateway sub-region.

5.128 Proposal Form 31 sets out funding guaranteed by Transport for London for the two travel plan coordinator posts. Proposal Form 32 sets out proposals for the promotion of workplace travel plans in the London Thames Gateway sub- region.

Travel Awareness

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 4H.3: The London boroughs and businesses will be encouraged to support the development and introduction of car sharing schemes and city car clubs.

Proposal 4I.2: Transport for London will work with the London boroughs and other

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 147 relevant organisations to ensure the effective promotion and delivery of better conditions for pedestrians.

These will include: Travel awareness campaigns: the London boroughs will develop programmes to make people aware of the benefits of sustainable travel. This could include information packs and presentations at schools, and participation in high profile events (such as Car Free Days).

5.129 Travel Awareness comprises a mixed menu of initiatives aimed at promoting the greater use of alternatives to the car. Key objectives include environmental and air quality improvements; reduced congestion; safety improvements, promoting less reliance on the car. The achievement of such objectives will also complement other strategies such as improved health and social inclusion. Initiatives adopted include:

• Publicity and promotional campaigns, inter alia promoting raised awareness as to the consequences of travel choices made by people; • Travel plans for major businesses and other organisations.

5.130 A year on year rolling programme is shown to support Travel Awareness initiatives. The Council recognises the need to raise awareness amongst the public and businesses of:

• The impacts that their travel choices have on the environment (noise and air pollution, CO2 emissions; congestion, etc.); • How they can reduce the need to travel; and • How they can travel in a more sustainable manner (by using public transport, car-sharing, walking and cycling).

5.131 The Council aims to promote travel awareness and to promote the image of car-sharing, public transport, walking and cycling through marketing, events and the production of local travel information. Some events will target specific groups of people such as school children and their parents. Proposal Form 30 sets out the Council’s proposals and funding requirements in relation to the promotion of travel awareness within Barking and Dagenham.

5.132 The London Borough of Havering is the lead TGLP borough for Travel Awareness. As part of their job, the TGLP travel plan co-ordinators promote travel awareness and the ‘Good Going’ brand across the London Thames Gateway sub-region. Barking and Dagenham will continue to be one of the lead TGLP boroughs for Travel Awareness. Proposal Form 32 covers the

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 148 proposals and funding requirements in relation to travel awareness of both lead boroughs.

Freight

5.133 The Council recognises the important economic role of freight and aims to encourage policies for the efficient movement of freight whilst minimising impacts on local communities and the environment. Key priorities include:

• Greater use of the rail and river systems for freight movement; • Selective highway and access improvements for freight; • Traffic management, especially to protect sensitive areas; • Parking and loading controls; • Night time delivery trials; • The inclusion of goods vehicle management as part of company Travel Plans initiatives, making the most effective use of freight trips; • Freight Quality Partnerships to address local servicing and distribution issues.

5.134 The Council will engage with the London Lorry Control Scheme (LLCS) consultation process.

5.135 The Council supports the establishment of a Thames Gateway Sub-regional Freight Quality Partnership. Proposal Form 51 sets out the proposed role of the partnership and funding requirements. The Sub-Regional Freight Quality Partnership will support the aims and objectives of the London Sustainable Distribution Partnership (LSDP) and will work with the TfL Freight Unit, London Sustainable Distribution Partnership and the Greater London Authority.

5.136 The Council supports in principle the establishment of a London-wide Low Emission Zone. The Council is committed to using cleaner fuelled vehicles in its vehicle fleet and will encourage contractors to use cleaner fuelled vehicles. The Council will seek to increase the proportion of cleaner fuelled vehicles in its vehicle fleet. Council fleet vehicles currently comply with Euro III standards. All replacement vehicles will continue to be assessed on environmental criteria.

5.137 The Council will work with the GLA, TfL, TGLP and other organisations such as the London Hydrogen Partnership to promote the establishment of a refuelling infrastructure for vehicles running on cleaner fuels.

5.138 The Council will promote the greater use of railways and waterways for the movement of goods and waste, as set out in Policy 25 in Chapter 3 of the LIP. The Council will explore opportunities to use railways or waterways to move waste, through a Joint Waste Development Plan Document to be prepared with the neighbouring London boroughs of Havering, Newham and Redbridge and the East London Waste Authority (ELWA).

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 149 Regeneration Area Schemes

Mayor’s Policies:

Mayor’s Proposals:

5.139 The main aim of this programme is to support proposals that will assist the regeneration of the borough, open up opportunities for job creation, achieve sustainable development, and meet other objectives such as equality and social inclusion. The London Plan has identified two ‘Opportunity Areas’ in the borough: London Riverside (also covers parts of neighbouring Newham and Havering) and Barking Riverside. ‘Opportunity Areas’ are areas that are capable of sustaining substantial jobs and homes.

5.140 Much of the future regeneration and job creation in the Council will come from new development and initiatives such as town centre regeneration. However the borough has existing employment areas where investment in transport and other local improvements would also promote the retention and expansion of job and other opportunities. Parts of Barking and Dagenham’s industrial estates offer a poor quality environment for business and suffer from problems of traffic congestion, inadequate parking, poor road, pedestrian and cycle links. One such area is the River Road/Creekmouth industrial estate.

5.141 The Council and the London Riverside Action Group in consultation with local businesses have already implemented measures that are helping to improve industrial estates in the borough. These measures include a Signage and Identity Strategy and an Industrial Estates Improvement Programme. The Council will seek funding from Transport for London to help provide further improvements.

5.142 Proposal Form 19 sets out the Council’s proposals to improve the environment and infrastructure of the River Road/Creekmouth industrial estate. This estate is situated within London Riverside. Over the lifetime of the

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 150 LIP the Council will bring forward similar proposals to support job retention and creation as well as social inclusion.

Environment

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 3.Pr2: TfL and the GLA will take the lead in ensuring that transport initiatives and plans will contribute to improving air quality (For full policy refer to MTS).

Proposal 3.Pr4: TfL will contribute to reducing traffic and transport noise. (For full policy refer to MTS).

Proposal 4K.Pr4: The Mayor’s Transport, Air Quality and Noise Strategies should form the basis of partnerships with business and major fleet operators and the London boroughs and sub-regional partnerships to: encourage the accelerated take- up of cleaner and quieter vehicle technologies, the achievement of quieter freight and distribution and waste operations and practices, to the promotion of better vehicle maintenance and considerate and economical driving.

5.143 The environment is a key issue and concern that informs and runs through the whole LIP. It is also fully embodied in the development and implementation of individual schemes. As such initiatives under this heading are geared at more innovative and bespoke schemes addressing key environmental concerns of:

• Air quality; • Noise; • Biodiversity; • Energy efficiency; • Waste minimisation and management.

5.144 The Council has a number of initiatives and strategies in hand geared towards environmental considerations. These include Biodiversity and Energy Strategies. The Air Quality Action Plan is also being progressed and the Council will become part of the London wide Low Emission Zone (LEZ).

5.145 The schemes currently put forward under this heading are geared to improving the Council’s capability to measure and monitor changes in air and noise quality. This data will assist/inform the achievement or otherwise of key air quality targets, air quality assessment/modelling techniques, and policy development.

5.146 The Council will seek to minimise any environmental effects related to transport. The Council has for example started to use ‘quieter’ materials to

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 151 resurface roads. The Council will consider in the future alternative eco-friendly maintenance methods, and will encourage contractors to use economic ‘green’ alternatives that minimise landfill and energy use and make maximum use of recycled materials.

Air Quality Improvement

5.147 The Council will seek to improve air quality in Barking and Dagenham through a variety of measures including better management of traffic and transport systems. The Council will review its Air Quality Action Plan, prepared following the declaration of an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) along the A13 trunk road. The Air Quality Action Plan is likely to identify additional measures to those set out in the LIP. Proposal Form 13 sets out the Council’s proposals and funding requirements in relation to air quality.

5.148 The Council supports proposals in the Mayors Air Quality Strategy (MAQS), such as encouraging cleaner vehicles & fuels, air quality monitoring, promoting alternative modes of transport to the car and travel awareness campaigns. The Council also supports the London Low Emission Zone (LEZ), and will work closely with other boroughs and the GLA to reduce air pollution.

Ambient Noise Reduction

5.149 The Council will seek to reduce ambient noise pollution created by transport in Barking and Dagenham through a variety of measures, including, amongst others: encouraging and promoting quieter vehicle technologies; resurfacing the roads with quieter materials; promoting alternative modes of transport. Proposal Form 14 sets out the Council’s proposals and funding requirements in relation to reducing ambient noise pollution.

5.150 The Council’s proposals will support the Mayors Ambient Noise Strategy (MANS), which aims to reduce the impacts of ambient noise in London. Many of the proposals relating to noise reduction will also support the Council’s Air Quality Improvement Programme (see Proposal Form 13).

5.151 The Council will also work closely with other London boroughs, in particular TGLP boroughs, the Government and local organisations to reduce ambient noise pollution.

Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs)

5.152 Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs) are introduced as necessary and in accordance with the Council’s Parking and Enforcement plan. The Council has implemented CPZs on roads around all of the stations in the borough and on roads within the borough that are close to Chadwell Heath Station. The Council will seek to improve and review existing CPZs and will seek funding from Transport for London to do so. Proposal Form 12 sets out the Council’s proposals and funding requirements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 152 Accessibility

Mayor’s Policies:

Policy 4P.2: Transport for London will work with its partners to improve interchange between public transport modes, walking and cycling; make it easier for people to access the public transport system via walking, cycling, taxis and private hire vehicles; make interchanges accessible; and enable people to access the public transport system by car where this is essential or meets broader strategic objectives.

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 4I.2: Transport for London will work with the London boroughs and other relevant organisations to ensure the effective promotion and delivery of better conditions for pedestrians.

5.153 There is a host of minor improvements that can be made to the transport environment. These improvements will make a material difference to people with a disability. Examples include dropped kerbs and tactile paving, which can assist those with a mobility and sight impediment respectively.

5.154 Such improvements are best incorporated into schemes from the outset, but others may have to be introduced retrospectively. They are considered in the design of and consultation on specific schemes. The Council employs two Access Officers and has regular contact with the Disablement Association of Barking and Dagenham (DABD) and the Barking and Dagenham Access Group. Access issues are also considered at the Council’s Public Transport Liaison Group (attended by an Access Officer) and other relevant fora.

5.155 The Highways Services have close working relationships with the borough’s Access Group and Access Officer. The programmes of accessibility improvements are developed with the Access Group. Highway officers regularly attend the meetings of the Access Group in order to report on highway projects and programmes.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 153 5.156 The Council works closely with the borough’s Access Group to prioritise areas where there is a need to make improvements for pedestrians, wheel chair users or the partially sighted. The Council will continue to bid for funding on an annual basis to maintain this work, as set out in Proposal Form 1.

5.157 The Council will seek funding from Transport for London to carry out a year on year programme of accessibility works, as set out in Proposal Form 1. As part of its Walking Strategy the Council will look at the removal of street clutter.

5.158 The Council will consider the needs of mobility impaired people in relation to direction signing, especially in the borough’s town centres and at train and London Underground stations.

5.159 The Council’s proposals relating to accessibility to bus stops and stations and the review of traffic signal junctions are covered respectively in the sections on Bus Stop Accessibility, Station Access and Traffic Signals.

Community Transport, Door-to-Door Transport Services, Taxis, Private Hire Vehicles

Mayor’s Policies:

Policy 4O.2: Availability of door-to-door services for vulnerable groups and people with mobility problems should be improved with better co-ordination between existing providers and with fair eligibility and entitlement criteria, taking account of the outcome of the Commission for Accessible Transport’s Pilot Projects.

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 4N.5: Transport for London (TfL) will work with the community transport sector and the London boroughs to seek closer integration of mainstream and community transport services, and take into account the outcome of the Commission for Accessible Transport’s Pilot Projects.

Proposal 4O.9: Accessibility/Mobility Forums will be developed at the local and Londonwide level, enabling users to be involved in the process of developing London’s transport services and ensuring that people’s needs are properly taken into account.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 154 5.160 The Council has set up a partnership to oversee over the next three years the development of more integrated door-to-door transport services. The partnership will look at the harmonisation of eligibility criteria and how to ensure that eligibility policies are transparent. The Council will work with the ALG to improve the Taxicard scheme. The partnership will also consider the role of Private Hire Vehicles (PHVs), also known as minicabs, in delivering door-to-door transport services. The Partnership would need to satisfy itself that minicabs are safe and that they comply with accessibility standards.

5.161 The partnership will oversee the creation of ‘Barking and Dagenham Transport Provision’, which will be a ‘one-stop shop’ for statutory (Council passenger transport services) and non-statutory door-to-door transport (Dial- a-Ride, Taxicard, voluntary sector) in the borough. Proposal Form 2 provides more information on this proposed new service.

5.162 The Council also aims to create a certain level of integration between statutory and non-statutory door-to-door transport services through the sharing of vehicles and drivers between the Council, Dial-a-Ride and charity organisations. The partnership created by the Council will be responsible for making proposals in relation to the integration of door-to-door transport services.

5.163 The Council will, subject to the availability of funding, carry out a survey on the parking needs of disabled persons in the borough. The results of this survey will inform proposals for additional parking for disabled persons as well as pick-up/set-down points at key locations such as Underground/train stations.

Monitoring

Mayor’s Proposals:

Proposal 4G.12: The Transport Strategy adopts targets for 2011 of an absolute reduction in weekday traffic of 15 per cent in central London, zero growth across the rest of inner London, and reducing growth in outer London by a third, with the aim of achieving zero growth in outer London town centres. This will provide a context for the London boroughs’ road traffic reduction responsibilities. The London boroughs will be expected to play a key role in achieving or exceeding these targets through road traffic reduction initiatives introduced at local level. These targets will be kept under review in the light of monitoring evidence.

5.164 The Council is required to meet 14 targets to help deliver the Mayor’s Transport Strategy (MTS), which are set out in Chapter 9. The Council will also set its own local targets where considered useful. To monitor progress

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 155 towards achieving these targets, the Council proposes to use a series of Performance Indicators (PIs) including those set out in the LIP Guidance (Table 4.1 and Table 5.1). These PIs will also help to monitor progress in delivering MTS proposals.

5.165 Data for some of the PIs is already available and should not require any significant further work or expenditure on the part of the Council. Other PIs will require that the Council collect and analyse data that hitherto has not been collected. Proposal Form 17 details the PIs that require funding assistance, the data collection methods and costs.

A13 Route Management Study

5.166 The Council supports proposals for a Route Management study of the A13 route corridor through the borough instigated and funded by Transport for London.

5.167 The study would assess the ability of a variety of measures to reduce congestion experienced along the route, from the centre of London to the junction of the A13 with the M25. Improvements to the A13 are timetabled to be operational in advance of the 2012 Olympics. The A13 will serve as a key access route to the Olympic venues from Essex and Kent.

5.168 The Council seeks to work with TfL and their partners in ensuring that quality alternatives to the private car are offered alongside robust traffic management measures.

Airports

5.169 The Council welcomes the opening of the DLR extension to London City Airport. The Council will encourage people to travel to airports by public transport instead of by car and would welcome improved public transport links to both London City Airport and Stansted Airport.

Biodiversity

5.170 The Council has produced a Local Biodiversity Action Plan for the borough and will update this as necessary. The Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the LIP has considered the impacts of the LIP on biodiversity. One of the proposals put forward through the LIP is the creation of ‘tree-lined’ streets where walking and cycling will be encouraged. Proposal Form 43 sets out the proposals and funding requirements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 156 Car Clubs

5.171 The Council will seek to establish a car club in Barking and Dagenham, in order to increase opportunities for car sharing within the borough. The Council will seek financial support from Transport for London to develop a car club. The Council will seek to build on the experience of London boroughs that have already helped to establish car clubs. The Council will also seek to work in partnership with other boroughs and the London City Car Club consortium. The Council could support in various ways the establishment of a car club, including by providing parking bays in convenient locations and through promotion.

Consultation

5.172 The Council consulted widely on the ‘Consultation Draft’ LIP and will continue to involve the community in the shaping of transport in the borough. The Council has run a Public Transport Liaison Group since the 1990s and will consider setting up/taking part in other fora (such as a ‘road user’ forum) at a borough or sub-regional level.

East London Transit

5.173 The Council’s vision of East London Transit is that of a fast and reliable light transit system, that could take the form of a high quality bus running on busways or a tram. The Council will support the implementation of East London Transit in the borough through its role and powers as a statutory planning authority and highways authority, including through the safeguarding of land. The Council also proposes to implement ‘complementary measures’ to improve physical access to the proposed route of East London Transit. Proposal Form 24 sets out the Council’s proposals.

Freight Interchange and Distribution

5.174 Transport for London has identified sites in Barking and Dagenham for major freight interchange facilities. The Council considers that opportunities for freight interchange and distribution centres to serve London and the South East of England need to be looked at for the whole of the South East of England and not just the borough.

5.175 The borough has considerable industrial areas, which generates freight traffic. The Council will look at ways of further reducing the impact of freight traffic on residential areas and will explore where applicable new concepts such as ‘consolidation centres’.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 157 Land-Use Policies and Planning

5.176 The Council is currently preparing a Local Development Framework for the borough, which will replace Barking and Dagenham’s Unitary Development Plan. The Council will review the borough’s parking standards as well as transport policies including policies on the location of high trip generating. The Council will review the borough’s parking standards in line with guidance set out in Annex 4 of the London Plan.

London Traffic Control Centre

5.177 The Council will provide information requested by the London Traffic Control Centre (LTCC) and liaise with the LTCC as needed. The Council will continue to provide information as it currently does including notifications of temporary traffic signals and special events. The Council has provided the LTCC with contact details for Barking and Dagenham Officers and Council Officers have visited the LTCC in 2006.

2012 Olympic Games and Other Events

5.178 Direct impacts of the 2012 Olympic Games on Barking and Dagenham are likely to be small, but the Council will make every effort to ensure that the hosting of the 2012 Olympics brings benefit to the people of the borough. The Council will set up a team that will ensure that the opportunities offered by hosting the games in neighbouring boroughs are used to its advantage, and that resources are not diverted away from Barking and Dagenham.

5.179 The Council will look at transport between the borough and the Olympic sites, and consider measures such as travel plans, providing television screens in borough parks, and providing travel information, to help create good travel conditions and reduce potential congestion on both the roads and public transport network. The Council will seek funding from bodies such as Transport for London to help implement such measures. The Council will consider similar measures for other large events, and will use its experience of hosting events such as the annual Dagenham Town Show.

5.180 The Council is promoting the Roding Valley Way and North East Thames Cycle Route, which are long distance cycling and walking routes. The bodies and organisations promoting the Olympics have identified both these routes as being of significance to the 2012 Olympics. In relation to public transport, the Council aspires to a direct train service between Barking and Stratford.

Parking and Enforcement

5.181 The Council has produced a draft Parking and Enforcement Plan, which is included in the LIP as Chapter 7.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 158 5.182 The Council will work with all agencies to improve enforcement and fine pursuit. The Council is member of the North London Parking Managers Group and shares information and experiences with neighbouring boroughs. The Council will participate in contributing to the Persistent Evaders Database.

5.183 The Council is looking to implement a tow away facility and will focus on persistent evaders. There are close links between the Council’s Parking Enforcement Service and the Abandoned/Untaxed Vehicles Service in order that information can be shared and action coordinated.

5.184 The Council has initiated discussions with the Police and the ALG with regard to increasing enforcement to cover a number of moving traffic offences such as incursion into yellow hatched areas and illegal traffic manoeuvres. The Council aims to undertake these enforcement activities, however it is essential that the Enforcement Service and supporting Administration Service are sufficiently resourced and robust to enforce these new powers. The Parking Service is to be reviewed during 2006/07 to ensure that there is capacity and resource to increase the enforcement activities as outlined in the LLA and TfL Act 2003. The aim is to undertake the review and implement the recommendations by commencement of the 2007/08 financial year.

5.185 The Council undertakes enforcement of parking and loading restrictions using CCTV. Predominantly CCTV enforcement of parking restrictions takes place within local shopping areas and the town centres.

5.186 Bus lanes in the borough are well respected and CCTV enforcement is not considered necessary at most locations. It is however considered necessary to utilise CCTV enforcement in support of public transport at locations where indiscriminate parking causes congestion.

5.187 The Council will be seeking CCTV enforcement at potential congestion points along the full length of the East London Transit route.

5.188 Parking congestion still dominates areas adjacent to school access points. During 2006/07 it is intended that mobile CCTV cameras be utilised to enforce five school locations. Subject to this measure producing satisfactory results, it is intended that during subsequent years the programme can be expanded to address illegal parking at all schools on a rotational basis.

5.189 The Council will carry out a survey on the parking needs of disabled persons in the borough. The results of this survey will inform proposals for additional parking for disabled persons as well as pick-up/set-down points at key locations such as Underground/train stations. The Council will continue to provide, on request, reserved parking spaces outside the homes of disabled persons. The Council manages the Blue Badge scheme in line with guidelines as set out by DfT and the Council’s Social Services and as set out in the Parking and Enforcement Plan.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 159 5.190 The Council is proposing as part of the Barking Town Centre Movement Strategy to install variable message signing for car park spaces at key gateways to the town centre.

Park and Ride

5.191 The Council encourages travel to stations on foot, by cycle or by bus, and does not positively support the provision of additional parking at stations, with the exception of Dagenham Dock station. The Council considers that Park and Ride should be looked at for a larger area than just Barking and Dagenham. It is suggested that an area-wide Park and Ride study be carried out for the London Thames Gateway sub-region or the A13 trunk road corridor.

Personal Safety

5.192 The Council will seek, in partnership with the local Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership (CDRP), to increase:

• Safety around rail stations and bus stops; • Safety for people travelling to and from rail stations and bus stops; and • Safety for people travelling at night, particularly women.

5.193 Proposal Form 25 sets out the Council’s proposals and funding requirements in relation to personal safety.

Powered Two Wheelers

5.194 The Council will consider a trial to allow Powered Two Wheelers (PTWs) to use bus lanes and Advanced Stop Lines (ASLs). Any decision will be taken in consultation with Transport for London and representatives of road user groups.

5.195 The Council will consult with local groups representing PTWs to assess whether there is a need to provide more parking for PTWs at key locations in the borough.

5.196 The Council will work in partnership with Transport for London, other London boroughs and PTW user groups to try to identify further measures to reduce PTW road accident casualties, which could include the preparation of Motorcycling plans. The Council will look at advice contained in the Government’s Motorcycling Strategy.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 160 Rail

5.197 Chapter 3 of the LIP sets out the Council’s aspirations for new or improved rail services. The Council supports the London Metro Concept and OrbiRail. Barking and Dagenham is a member of the North Orbital Rail Partnership (NORP) and will continue to lobby for improvements to the Barking – Gospel Oak line including its extension eastwards.

Road Signs and Lines

5.198 The Council has an annual budget that addresses road signage. It is considered that all of the roads in the Borough are clearly signed and if any deficiencies arise they are corrected/updated.

5.199 Local direction signing will be updated as part of the review of lining and signing as outlined elsewhere on a Community Forum area per year basis. Funding requirements will relate to determined needs from the review.

5.200 Signing and carriageway markings need to be reviewed and updated on a cyclic basis. The borough is divided into 17 ward areas and six Community Forum areas. It is intended that a Community Forum area is reviewed each year commencing in 2007/08.

5.201 The Council is working with Living Streets to reduce clutter and improve signage. This work commenced in 2005/2006 and will continue through 2006/2007 with the view to implementing a policy on the removal of street clutter. This work will support the review of signs and carriageway markings. By year 2009/10 all signs and lines within the borough will be brought up to DfT standards.

5.202 The Council will look into all local signs and street names as programmed. For Barking Town Centre the Council proposes to review street nameplates at all locations and to relocate them to more visible positions if needed. The Council also proposes to install new plates where needed.

5.203 The Council is undertaking works to prepare a detailed Highway Asset Management Plan. Road signage will feature in the Plan in terms of cyclic maintenance and repair.

School Buses

5.204 Consultation with the community has shown that overcrowding of buses with school children is an issue in the borough. The Council will work with London Buses to find solutions to this problem.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 161 Shopmobility

5.205 Shopmobility provides manual and powered wheelchairs and scooters to help people with limited mobility to shop and use the facilities in Barking Town Centre. The Council will consider measures to support Shopmobility such as signage.

Traffic Growth Reduction

5.206 The Council will seek to reduce the growth in motor vehicle traffic on roads in Barking and Dagenham in order to avoid further congestion, air and noise pollution, and to meet the Mayor of London’s target in relation to traffic growth (see Table 9.1 in Chapter 9).

Traffic Management Act 2004 and Network Management Duty

5.207 The Council has reorganised its services to integrate all highways services while maintaining a distinct service responsible for coordination and enforcement of highway activities. Regular meetings take place with the utility services and a coordinated programme of work is developed from utility services, Council generated works and external development.

5.208 The Council has appointed a Traffic Manager to whom the Street works Coordination Group reports to direct. A Network Management Plan is being prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Traffic Management Act.

Conclusion

5.209 In Table 4.1 of Transport for London’s LIP Guidance a number of ‘Priority Areas for Implementation’ are set out that must be reflected in LIPs. These are (in summary):

• Improving road safety; • Improving bus journey times and reliability; • Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability including through the use of travel demand measures; • Improving the working of parking and loading arrangements • Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport network; • Encouraging walking; • Encouraging cycling; • Bringing transport infrastructure to a state of good repair.

5.210 The proposals in Chapter 5 address each and every one of these priorities, as relevant both individually and collectively. The proposals also address

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 162 Mayoral policies and priorities not covered by the ‘Priority Areas for Implementation’, as well as other Mayoral strategies.

5.211 Part Two of Chapter 5 provides more detail on the Council’s proposals including funding requirements. It also relates these proposals to the Mayor of London’s ‘cross-cutting’ goals and policies and proposals contained in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 163 Part 2: Proposal Forms

Introduction

5.212 Transport for London recommended in the LIP Guidance (TfL, 2004) that boroughs use ‘LIP Proposal Forms’ (also referred to by Transport for London as ‘Form 1s’) to set out their proposals. The Council has completed ‘LIP Proposal Forms’ and these are included in Part Two of Chapter 5. In the LIP these forms are referred to as ‘proposal forms’. Each form has been given a reference number (e.g. 7) and has been indexed in another form supplied by Transport for London, called a ‘LIP Proposal Summary Sheet’ (or ‘Form 2’).

5.213 The purpose of the ‘LIP Proposal Summary Sheet’ is to index the Council’s policies and proposals with the Mayor’s Transport Strategy policies and proposals that boroughs are required to support. The ‘LIP Proposal Summary Sheet’ has been included at the end of Chapter 5 after the proposal forms (see Figure 5.3 below).

5.214 Tables 5.2 and 5.3 below list all the proposal forms for which the Council is the lead borough and which will take place within Barking and Dagenham. Tables 12.2 and 12.3 in Chapter 12 show the funding required to implement these proposals. Table 5.4 below lists proposal forms containing proposals developed by other TGLP boroughs. These forms have been included because they will contribute to implementing the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the London Thames Gateway including the borough.

5.215 Table 5.2 lists the Council’s ‘core proposals’. These relate to essential ongoing activities such as maintaining the borough’s roads in a good state of repair and improving road safety, and are a priority for funding. Table 5.3 lists the Council’s ‘large capital proposals’. These are defined here as individual projects that require over £1m of capital funds over the duration of a project.

5.216 Transport for London has also requested that boroughs show how their policies and proposals will support the Mayor of London’s ‘cross-cutting goals’. These goals are derived from the Mayor of London’s overarching objectives set out on page 95 of the Mayor’s Transport Strategy. The ‘cross- cutting goals’ are:

• Promoting safety, and perceptions of safety, for all travel modes; • Encouraging greater use of sustainable means for travel; • A balanced approach to road-user space allocation; • Requirements for sustainable development; • Promoting equality and inclusion.

5.217 Each proposal form indicates the likely impact the proposals will have on the ‘cross-cutting goals’. Table 5.1 below lists the proposals (represented by a proposal form reference) that are expected to have a positive impact on the ‘cross-cutting goals’.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 164 Table 5.1: Cross-Cutting Goals

Cross Cutting Goals Proposal Forms with Positive Impacts

Promoting safety & 1, 2, 3, 50, 5, 7, 70, 71, 72, 8, 9, 10, 45, 40, 37, 38, 39, 12, 15, 51, 16, 17, perception of safety for all 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 43, 23, 46, 25, 26, 27, 28, 52, 29, 30, 31, 32, 44, 47, 34, travel modes 35, 36

Encouraging sustainable 1, 3, 50, 4, 6, 7, 70, 71, 72, 8, 9, 10, 45, 40, 37, 38, 39, 12, 13, 14, 51, 17, means for travel 18, 19, 48, 20, 22, 43, 23, 46, 25, 26, 27, 28, 52, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 44, 47, 34, 35, 36

Balanced road space 3, 50, 4, 6, 7, 70, 71, 72, 8, 10, 45, 40, 37, 38, 39, 12, 13, 14, 51, 17, 18, allocation 19, 48, 20, 22, 43, 23, 46, 26, 27, 28, 52, 29, 44, 47, 34, 35, 36

Requirements for sustainable 3, 50, 4, 6, 7, 70, 71, 72, 8, 10, 45, 40, 37, 38, 39, 12, 13, 14, 51, 17, 18, developments 19, 48, 20, 22, 43, 23, 46, 26, 27, 28, 52, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 44, 47, 34, 35, 36

Equality & Inclusion Target 1, 2, 3, 50, 4, 6, 7, 70, 71, 72, 8, 9, 10, 45, 40, 37, 38, 39, 12, 13, 14, 15, Group 51, 16, 17, 18, 19, 48, 20, 21, 22, 43, 23, 46, 25, 26, 27, 28, 52, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 44, 47, 34, 35, 36

Table 5.2: Core Proposals

Proposal Form Proposal Name Page Number

1 Accessibility 169 2 Accessible Transport 171 3 Bus Priority 174 4 Bus Strategy 177 5 Bridge Strengthening Programme 179 6 Bus Stop Accessibility 181 7 LCN+ Programme 184 8 Non LCN+ Programme 187 9 Cyclist Training Programme 190 10 Cycle Parking Programme 193 11 TGLP Cycle Linkages – NCN in East London 195 12 Controlled Parking Zones 197 13 Air Quality Management/Improvement Programme 199 14 Traffic and Transport Noise Reduction Programme 204 15 Education Training and Publicity 208 16 Local Safety Schemes 210 17 Monitoring 213 18 Local Development Framework 216

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 165 19 Regeneration Area Schemes 221 20 Structural Maintenance of Principal Roads 224 21 Maintenance and Repair of Non-Principal Roads 226 22 Wayfinding Signage 229 23 Congestion Bottlenecks 232 24 ELT Complementary Measures 235 25 Safe Transport 237 26 Traffic Growth Reduction 240 Parallel Initiatives on ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus 243 27 Routes 28 Station Access Programme 245 School Travel Plans/Safe Routes to School 249 29 Programme 30 Travel Awareness Programme 251 31 Sub-Regional Travel Plan Co-ordinators 254 Promotional Budget for Sub-Regional Travel Plan 256 32 Co-ordinators 33 Workplace Travel Plans 258 34 Walking 261 35 Rights of Way Improvement Plan 264 36 20mph Zones 266

Table 5.3: Large Capital Proposals

Proposal Form Proposal Name Page Number

37 City to Sea Pedestrian and Cycle Routes 269 38 Beam Valley (Collier Row to the River Thames) 272 Pedestrian and Cycle Routes 39 Castle Green to River Thames Pedestrian and Cycle 275 Routes 40 Roding Valley Way Pedestrian and Cycle Routes 278 41 Dagenham Spine Pedestrian and Cycle Route 281 42 NE Thames Cycle Route 284 43 Tree-lined Streets 287 44 Barking Town Centre Movement Strategy 290 45 Cycleways and Pedestrian Routes in Parks (Green 297 Corridors) 46 Access Route Provision for Lymington Fields 300 Development 47 Dagenham Heathway Public Realm Improvements 303 48 Dagenham Dock Infrastructure Works 311 49 Dagenham Dock Interchange 314

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 166 Table 5.4: Proposals from Other TGLP Boroughs

Proposals Proposal Name Page Form Number

50 TGLP Bus Initiative 318 51 TGLP Sub-Regional Freight Quality Partnership 320 52 TGLP Station Access Study 323

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 167 Core Proposals

(See forms 1-36, overleaf)

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 168 Form Number 1 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Accessibility. To provide improved access for mobility-disadvantaged pedestrians by the provision of Summary of Proposal: lowered kerbs at all road-crossing points, particularly at junctions, on the Principle Road and Local Road Network. Location: Various within the borough. Dates: Annual Programme. Description of Main Elements: Introduce lowered kerbs, tactile paving and guardrail wherever necessary to help provide a barrier-free environment for mobility disadvantaged pedestrians and increased accessibility for the whole community. The proposed programme for 2007/8 is: • Area scheme bounded by Wood Lane, Parsloes Avenue and Heathway. This scheme will complement public realm works planned for the Heathway (see Proposal Form 47).

2008/09 and Beyond: The accessibility programme is an ongoing programme. External funding will be required to ensure that the borough’s entire road network is accessible to all users. Funding requirements for 2009/10 and 2010/11 are expected to be in the order of at least £100k per year.

Additional information: Chapter 2 of the LIP provides background information on accessibility issues within the borough, Section 3 of the 2006 – 2010 Borough Spending Plan provides additional information on the proposals. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 70k 50k 200k 50k 370k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 0 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 70k 50k 200k 50k 370k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP Nil Nil N/A BOROUGH RESOURCES Nil Nil N/A PARTNERS (please specify) Nil Nil N/A OTHER (please specify) Nil Nil N/A Key Delivery Partners: The schemes will be designed and supervised by the in house team. A major works contractor who has been successful in tendering for the Highways term contract will undertake implementation. Dependencies and Risks: Implications and notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Suitable schemes are not developed. Sufficient funding not provided.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 169 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport network. V 10 3.Pr1 4F.Pr11 4I.Pr8 4O.Pr8 4O.Pr10 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, wheelchair users Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: N/A Requirements for sustainable developments: N/A Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive Disabled people.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 170 Form Number 2 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Accessible Transport. Summary of Proposal: To improve the provision of accessible transport services in the borough. Location: Borough-wide.

Dates: On-going. Description of Main Elements: Door-to-Door Transport Services: The Council has conducted a business review of the Council’s passenger transport services, which represents the first phase of a comprehensive review of the service. The Council’s aim is to set up a ‘one-stop shop’ for statutory (Council passenger transport services) and non-statutory door-to-door transport (Dial-a-Ride, Taxicard, voluntary sector) in the borough. This new service, to be called ‘Barking and Dagenham Transport Provision’, will provide users with a single call centre for various door-to-door transport services. The Council also aims to create a certain level of integration between statutory and non-statutory door-to-door transport services through the sharing of vehicles and drivers. ‘Barking and Dagenham Transport Provision’ will be financed by existing funding streams for passenger transport services, and is expected to provide a reduction in overall costs through greater efficiency. The Council has set up a partnership to oversee over the next three years the development of more integrated door-to-door transport services. The partnership will look at the harmonisation of eligibility criteria and how to ensure that eligibility policies are transparent. The partnership will also consider the role of Private Hire Vehicles (PHVs), e.g. minicabs, in delivering door-to-door transport services. The Partnership would need to satisfy itself that minicabs are safe and that they comply with accessibility standards. The Council will, subject to the availability of funding, carry out a survey on the parking needs of disabled persons in the borough (estimated cost £5k). The results of this survey will inform proposals for additional parking for disabled persons as well as pick-up/set-down points at key locations such as Underground/train stations. The Council already provides on request disabled parking outside the homes of disabled persons.

Signage and Information on Accessible Facilities: The Council has identified a need to improve signage of accessible facilities at key locations such as Underground/train stations. Audits of stations and other locations will need to be carried out. Signage would be used to inform and direct users to facilities such as ramps, lifts, parking spaces for disabled persons and pick- up/set down points. The Council will work with London Underground, Network Rail and train operators to improve signage and information at stations.

Contribution of Other Programmes: The Council’s programmes for Bus Priority, Bus Stop Accessibility, Local Area Accessibility, Station Access and Road Maintenance will support the provision of accessible transport services in Barking and Dagenham.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 171 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A N/A 5k TBD 5k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A N/A TBD TBD TBD (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A N/A 5k TBD 5k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: Contractors, TfL, Living Streets, Thames Gateway London Partnership, local interest groups, LTGDC. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Local support for schemes. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 172 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority areas MTS Proposal/ Priority Target and MTS proposals and policies: Policy number Area Number (Appendix C) Improving the working of parking and loading arrangements. IV 9 4G.Pr15 4H.Pr2 Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport network. V 10, 11 3.Po9 3.Pr1 4E.Pr13 4F.Pr11 4N.Pr5 4O.Po1 4O.Po2 4O.Pr1 4O.Pr2 4O.Pr3 4O.Pr4 4O.Pr5 4O.Pr6 4O.Pr7 4O.Pr8 4O.Pr10 4O.Pr13 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Door-to-door transport (minibus, taxi), car Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: N/A Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: N/A Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive Disabled people, Older people

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 173 Form Number 3 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Bus Priority. Summary of Proposal: To improve bus journey times and reliability on Busy Bus Routes as defined by TfL and other priority routes.

Location: Borough-wide, schemes to be approved in conjunction with Bus Priority Team of TfL.

Dates: 2006 to 2008.

Description of Main Elements: The London Bus Priority Network (LBPN) was originally an 865 km network of borough roads across London that complemented the Priority (Red) Routes. It was developed in 1994 by the 33 boroughs and London Transport who jointly developed in liaison with the Government Office for London (GOL) and the then Traffic Director for London, a cross boundary bus network for the whole of London. To aid boroughs with funding and to assist buses off the original Network from 2003, the LBPN covers all borough roads that carry buses. The LBPN partnership is well established and recognised by TfL and boroughs alike. The LBPN is now in its eleventh year and has been preparing a consistently accepted annual bid on behalf of boroughs for bus priority.

Project Development: The cost for the implementation of bus priority schemes on the London Bus Priority Network should continue to be financed at no cost to the local authorities. Over the eleven years the project has been allocated a total of £146.65 million and the recent announcement of a further £19 million for expenditure in 2005/06 is testimony to the success of the LBPN as a partnership delivering effective bus priority schemes across the Capital. Up to the end of March 2004 the LBPN as a project has resulted in the boroughs implementing over 3,500 bus priority schemes.

Continuing support for the LBPN Partnership: Barking and Dagenham is committed to the continued support for the LBPN as a partnership that will: • Allow a co-ordinated approach to bus priority and provide a London-wide strategy that all boroughs could follow; • Ensure that the management structure remains in place to allow the boroughs to retain their independence but at the same time provide a co-ordinated approach and effective working on the project; and • Co-ordinate future year’s package bids for funding through the appropriate bidding processes.

Busy Bus Routes Operating in Barking and Dagenham: Route 5 (operating the width of the borough along the A124); and Route 174 (providing links to Romford and South Dagenham via Dagenham Road, Oxlow Lane, Heathway and the A1306. As part of a TGLP cross-boundary scheme, east and west bound bus lanes have been provided on the A1306 (old A13) in Barking and Dagenham and neighbouring Havering).

Proposals for Barking and Dagenham: The Ripple Road corridor (east and west bound bus lanes); Lodge Avenue (south bound bus lane); River Road and Renwick Road (north and south bound bus lanes); Rainham Road South (west bound bus lane); Dagenham Road (north bound bus lane); Heathway (north and south bound bus lanes); new bus link road between Renwick Road and Goresbrook Village (routes 498 and 499); Whalebone Lane North approaching the A12 junction. In addition the Council supports the general provision of bus priority measures throughout Barking Riverside as well as the provision of segregated alignments for the East London Transit in Barking Riverside. Funding for these will be additional to the amounts of funding set out in the table below.

Funding Requirements for the Years 2009/10 and 2010/11: The amount of funding is expected to be similar to previous years.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 174 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 1,050k 730k 550k 1,200k 3,530k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 0 0 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 1,050k 730k 550k 1,200k 3,530k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: TfL Bus Priority Team (BPT). Barking and Dagenham Councillors and officers, interest groups, general public. Dependencies and Risks: Dependent on scheme cost benefit analysis and subsequent approval by BPT to commence work in coordination with other bus priority schemes and overall bus priority strategy, including assessment of any adverse impact on service delivery. Support from interest groups and the general public. Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 175 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority areas Priority Target MTS Proposal/ and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving bus journey times and reliability II 3, 4 4F.Po1 4F.Pr2 4F.Pr6 4F.Pr7 4F.Pr8 4G.Pr4 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability by III 5, 6, 7 4G.Pr12 encouraging modal shift 4G.Pr18 Improving the working of parking and loading arrangements IV 9 4G.Pr15 Improving the natural environment 3.Pr2 3.Pr4 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Bus, Community transport, taxi, walking, cycling Positive Train, PTW (impact for PTW could be positive if PTWs were allowed in Neutral the future to use bus lanes) Car, Freight (possibility of reduction in road space) Neutral/Negative Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 176 Form Number 4 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Summary of Proposal: Bus Strategy.

Location: The strategy will be a borough-wide strategy.

Dates: 2007 – 2010.

Description of Main Elements:

There are currently a number of areas in the borough including areas to the south of the A13 that are poorly served by the bus network. The Council aspires to improve the coverage of the bus network, and in particular to improve links between the north and south of the borough. Improvements to north-south bus links are needed in order to link the new communities in London Riverside to the existing ones north of the A13 and to ensure that new jobs are accessible to local people. The Council proposes to produce a Bus Strategy, the aim of which will be to identify improvements and to set out an action plan. Estimated cost of producing the strategy: £15k. The strategy will build on the findings of an earlier Bus Strategy Report. To implement the proposals put forward by the strategy, the Council will seek further funding from external bodies and developers where applicable. Proposals could include new bus routes or extensions to existing bus routes. New or extended bus routes will require new facilities such as bus stops as well as highway works, and may require bus priority measures. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A N/A 15k TBD 15k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A N/A 0 TBD TBD (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A N/A 15k TBD 15k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: TfL London Buses, local interest groups, local businesses. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 177 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability (by III 5, 6, 7 4G.Pr12 encouraging modal shift) 4P.Pr4 Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport network. V 10 3.Pr1 3.Po9 4F.Pr9 4O.Pr10 Impact Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Bus, walking, cycling and rail (through greater opportunity for multi- Positive modal trips) Car, freight, PTW Neutral Impact Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/A) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: N/A Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 178 Form Number 5 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Bridge Strengthening Programme. Summary of Proposal: To maintain bridge structures in a condition suitable for the passage of 40 tonne vehicles, and the integrity and safety of the road network.

Location: Borough-wide.

Dates: Continuous programme.

Description of Main Elements: European Union and UK legislation require all bridge structures to be capable of carrying 40 tonne vehicles. In order to comply with this legislation, the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham has put in place a programme of bridge assessment and strengthening. The assessment/strengthening programme has progressed well, with all structures having been subject to an initial assessment. The borough’s programme contributes to maintaining and preserving the asset value of the highway network, and of maintaining the integrity and safety of the road network. It also contributes to keeping the borough’s commercial/industrial areas competitive. For 2006/07, the assessment/strengthening programme will be as follows: • Thames Road Culvert – Provision of ongoing monitoring of structure as interim measure together with strengthening scheme; • Loxford Road Culvert – Detailed design for structural strengthening scheme; and • London Road Bridge – Maintenance painting and deck waterproofing of cast iron arch ribbed bridge.

Beyond 2008/09: Once the strengthening programme is complete, a continuous programme of inspection, assessment and potential works will be required. It is anticipated that external funding will be required annually in order to maintain bridge structures in a suitable condition. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) 125k FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 34k 125k 675k 959k (allocated) FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 0 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 34k 125k 125k 675k 959k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: TfL. Network Rail/London Underground Limited (LUL). London Bridges Engineering Group (LoBEG).

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 179 Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Delays due to track possessions. Other projects or planned improvements, e.g. major bus priority works.

Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Proposal/ Policy number (Appendix C) Bringing transport infrastructure to a state of good repair. VIII 14 4G.Pr25 4G.Pr26 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Freight Positive Car, bus, PTW, pedestrians, cyclists, rail Neutral Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: N/A Balanced road space allocation: N/A Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): N/A

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 180 Form Number 6 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Bus Stop Accessibility. Improvement to existing bus stop infrastructures in accordance with current legislation Summary of Proposal: on provision of access for disabled, also safety improvements i.e. better lighting cleaner environment and shelter from the weather for all passengers.

Location: Borough wide, implementation to be on a route corridor basis. Annual programme expected to continue beyond the LIP planning cycle of 2006 – 2010 Dates: in line with availability of funds.

Description of Main Elements: As part of the commitment to provide fully accessible bus services and improve bus journey times in the Borough, it is proposed to consider the bus route corridors on Rainham Road North and South, Green Lane, Valance Avenue, Woodward Road, Hedgemans Road, Longbridge Road, Bennett Castle Lane, Wood Lane, Porters Avenue, Gale Street and Thames Road. This proposal relates primarily relates to improving conditions at the bus stops and access to the bus stops, thereby ensuring that all members of the community can gain convenient and unobstructed access to the bus stop and onto the bus services. Where necessary bus stops within lay-bys will be removed or alternate locations considered for bus stops installed. Additional parking controls will be necessary to ensure that the benefits provided at the improved bus stops are fully realised. Consideration will need to be given regarding additional enforcement measures including funding for additional CCTV cameras. Bus Corridors where Works are Proposed: Currently in progress Rainham Road North and Rainham Road (including relocation of bus stops and kerb South modifications) Currently in progress (including relocation of Green Lane bus stops and kerb modifications) Valance Av, Station Road, modification of Proposed stops Wood Lane Proposed Woodward Road Proposed Hedgemans Road Proposed Longbridge Road Proposed Gale Street and Porters Avenue Proposed Bennett Castle Lane Proposed Thames Road Proposed

Beyond 2009/10: It is anticipated that funding requirements will remain at similar levels beyond 2009/10.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 181 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) 158k 110k 200k 200k 668k FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP (allocated) FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 0 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 110k 158 k 200k 200k 668k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: TfL Bus Priority Team (BPT). LBBD Councillors and officers, interest groups, general public. Dependencies and Risks: Dependent on scheme cost benefit analysis and subsequent approval by Bus Priority Team to commence work in coordination with other bus priority schemes and overall bus priority strategy, including assessment of any adverse impact on service delivery.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 182 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving bus journey times and reliability. II 3, 4 4F.Pr7 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability. III 7 4G.Pr12 Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport network. V 10 3.Pr1 4F.Pr11 4O.Pr10 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Bus, cycling, walking (increased accessibility provides the opportunity Positive for more walk/bus trips), mobility impaired persons Impact: Cross Cutting Goals (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive Disabled people, women, black and minority ethnic people, children and young people, older people. One of the core criteria in undertaking bus stop work is provision for disabled access and passenger safety at stops.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 183 Form Number 7 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM LCN+ Programme. Summary of Proposal: To implement and improve LCN+ cycle routes within the borough. Various locations borough-wide, as recommended in the CRISP report and approved Location: by TfL and Camden the lead borough on LCN+ projects.

Dates: 2006/07 – 2009/10.

Description of Main Elements:

The LCN+ is designed to encourage more people to cycle while providing for the needs of current cyclists. By increasing the number of cycle lanes and increasing continuity through improved access the network will prove essential for increased journey time and greater safety. The Council will continue to implement the London Cycle Network+ (LCN+) in Barking and Dagenham through: • Introduction of drop kerbs and “tramline patterns” where appropriate. • Provision of signage to diagram 967 and 957 where appropriate. • Prepare footpath cycle track surface for green antiskid texture flex/cycle track and edgings where appropriate. • Provision of road markings to diagrams 1058, 1059, 1049, 1003, 1057 and Advance Stop Lines (ASLs). • Provision of cycle logos on cycle lanes and tracks. • Provision of Toucan Crossing where appropriate. • Provision of share cycle lane/pedestrian facility with white line segregation. • Borough-wide signage.

The above to be carried out on the following roads: Reference Code – BS\07\LCN\BKG.aa - Link 2 - Barking Station to Redbridge Boundary via Tanner Street/Wakering Road to Junction with Longbridge Road and Station Parade – To review of existing facilities. Design and implementation of suitable schemes to bring the Link up to LCN+ standard. To introduce cycle lane contra-flow on Wakering Road and Toucan crossing at the junction of Station Parade-Longbridge Road/Wakering Road Reference Code – BS\07\LCN\BKG.ab – (CRISP REF AR10, AR11,AR12, AR3 and AR5) – Link 3 – Goresbrook Road/A13/ Heathway/A1306, Goresbrook Road/ Maplestead Road, Maplestead approach to the Lodge Avenue, Goresbrook interchange to A1240/A1306 Design and Implementation of suitable cycling schemes, Provision of cycle track on grass verge on Goresbrook Road due to width restriction of the road. Upgrading of the existing pelican crossing to Toucan crossing at the junction with Heathway/A1306 / A1240 Traffic calming junction treatment, installation of Ensign Bollards and dropping of kerbs. Reference Code – BS\06\LCN\BKG.01 – (CRISP AR28) - Link 3 - Salisbury Avenue to Upney Lane Contra-flow and Toucan crossing installation at the junction with Upney Lane Reference Code – BS\06\LCN\BKG.02 – (CRISP AR33) - Link 3 – Heathway Junction with Parsloes Avenue/A1240 (Link 3) Upgrade of four arm ATS junction and installation of ASL’s

Beyond 2008/09: The Council will need an estimated £50k in 2009/10 and at least £50k per annum up to 2010/11.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 184 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 128k 93k 247k 110k 578k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 0 0 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 128k 93k 247k 110k 578k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: TfL. LCN+ Lead Borough Camden. Barking and Dagenham Councillors and officers, user groups and the general public. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 185 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving road safety. I 1 4J.Po1 4J.Pr5 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability by III 7 4G.Pr12 encouraging modal shift. Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport network. V 10 3.Pr1 4O.Pr10 Encourage walking by improving the street environment and conditions VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 4I.Pr2 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Pr4 4J.Pr5 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral)

Cycling, walking, train (opportunity for more cycle/train trips) Positive Bus, PTW, car, freight Neutral Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive Women; Black and minority ethnic people; Children and young people.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 186 Form Number 8 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Non LCN+ Programme. Summary of Proposal: To implement and improve local (Non LCN+) cycle routes within the borough. Various locations borough-wide, as recommended in the CRISP report and approved Location: by TfL and Camden the lead borough (proposed routes were originally to be part of LCN+).

Dates: 2006/07 – 2009/10.

Description of Main Elements: Main programme elements include: • Introduction of drop kerbs and “tramline patterns” where appropriate • Provision of signage to diagram 967 and 957 where appropriate • Prepare footpath cycle track surface for green antiskid texture flex/cycle track and edgings where appropriate • Provision of road markings to diagrams 1058, 1059, 1049, 1003, 1057 and Advance Stop Lines (ASLs) • Provision of cycle logos on cycle lanes and tracks • Provision of Toucan Crossing where appropriate • Provision of share cycle lane/pedestrian facility with white line segregation • Borough wide signage

The above to be carried out on the following roads: • Longbridge Road/ Barking Park Cycle Track and Wilmington Gardens Longbridge Road Toucan Crossing (£200k) • Heathway Junction with Parsloes Avenue/A1240 • A1240 Heathway (By Dagenham Heathway Station and Shopping parade) • Heathway to Crown Street, Rainham Road/Church Elm Avenue • Parsloes Park/Parsloes Avenue to junction with Heathway A1240 • Ivyhouse Road/ Parsloes Park(CRISP AR31); • Rugby Road (CRISP AR30); Spurling Road/Par sloes Avenue (CRISP 32); • Keir Hardie Way/Lodge Avenue (CRISP AR16); • Gurney Close (Northwest End), • A13 Ripple Road (Renwick Road to Gale Street ) (CRISP AR1) • A13 Ripple Road/Gale Street Junction (CRISP AR2) • A1306 New Road East of A1240 Heathway (CRISP AR4) • A1306 New Road/A1240 Heathway Junction to A1306 New Road/East Entrance (CRISP AR5) • A1306 New Road / Ballards Road (Crisp AR6). FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 187 TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 0 310k 400k 200k 910k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 0 0 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 0 310k 400k 200k 910k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify)

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 188 Key Delivery Partners: TfL. Barking and Dagenham Councillors and officers, user groups and the general public. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements. Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving road safety. I 1 4J.Po1 4J.Pr5 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability III 7 4G.Pr12 by encouraging modal shift. Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Pr1 network. 4O.Pr10 Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 4I.Pr2 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Pr4 4J.Pr5 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral)

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 189 Form Number 9 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Cycle Training Programme. Summary of Proposal: To implement and improve cycle proficiency and cycle training within the borough. Provision of cycle training to adults and school children from tender age of 6 years old.

Location: Borough-wide.

Dates: 2007/08 – 2008/10.

Description of Main Elements:

Main programme elements include: • Implementation of cycle training with appropriate organisations. • Provision of 6, 8, 10, 12 years old and adult cycle training Borough-wide.

The above to be carried out in such manner that: • It will also complement the work of the School Travel Plan Co-ordinator in promoting non-car modes travel for students attending schools and colleges in the borough and contribute to the overall objectives of the Barking and Dagenham/London Cycling Action Plan.

The bid for 2006/07 was £30,000 to ensure that our provision expanded and that about 300 children were trained by an external provider and this allocation is currently being used. We are proposing to train 400 children in 2007/08 through an external provider. (400 children = £40,000) For Year 1 & 2 Bronze Bike Style Award National Cycle training Standard Level 1A – This training will allow pupils to work in a safe environment under supervision in a playground environment. Basic control, coordination and road craft is addressed. For Year 3 & 4 Silver Bike Style Award National Cycle Training Standard Level 1B – Designed to give pupils a greater awareness of control and cycling safety including safety checks. This training gives learners the opportunity to progress to the next stage of cycling safety competence and will involve selected manoeuvres, awareness of various dangers to cyclist and how to deal and cope with it. For Year 5 & 6 Gold Bike Style Award National Cycle Training Standard Level 2/3 – Designed to give pupils access to a national recognised cycle safety standard qualification. The training is tailored to both the school and pupils specific needs. Training is conducted on/off road. The Road Safety Team commissioned a professional cycle training company to fulfil the needs of the students, schools and parents. It consists of approximately 8 hours duration of training times arranged between the schools and training provider We propose commencing a scheme for adult cyclists with a target of 500. To maintain the profile of cycling and cycle training in the borough the following elements are also proposed: • Cycle Events promoting training at approximately £5,000 per event; • Accredited Instructor Training at approximately £2,000; • Cycle Training Resources and Publicity at approximately £7,000.

Beyond 2008/09: Funding requirements from BSP will be in the order of £80k per year.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 190 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 15k 35k 75k 80k 205k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 0 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 15k 35k 75k 80k 205k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: TfL. External cycle training providers, schools. Barking and Dagenham Councillors and officers, user groups and the general public. Dependencies and Risks: Insufficient funding. Staffing shortages.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 191 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving road safety. I 1 4J.Po1 4J.Pr5 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time III 7, 8 4G.Pr12 reliability by encouraging modal shift. 4P.Pr4 Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Pr1 network. 4O.Pr10 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Pr1 4J.Pr8 Improving the natural environment. 3.Pr2 3.Pr4 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral)

Cycling, walking, bus, PTW, car, freight Positive Rail Neutral Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: N/A Requirements for sustainable developments: N/A Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive Children and young people.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 192 Form Number 10 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Cycle Parking Programme. Summary of Proposal: To increase cycle parking facilities within the borough. Various locations borough-wide will be provided with cycle parking, such as colleges, Location: schools, universities, Underground stations and train stations, town centres, shopping parades and libraries.

Dates: On-going.

Description of Main Elements: Main programme elements include: • Implementation of cycle parking where appropriate. • Provision of signage to diagrams 968 and 968.1 where appropriate. • Borough-wide signage.

The above to be carried out on the following roads: • Heathway Junction with Hedgemans Road and Church Elm Lane; • A1240 Heathway (By Dagenham Heathway Station and Shopping parade); and • A118 High Road opposite post office and shopping centre and parking bays.

Cycle parking schemes will complement other LCN+ investment such as Barking Station, London Road. Borough-wide car parks, High Road (Chadwell Heath) shopping Area, East London University, Barking College, Underground and train stations, Wood Lane Bus stops, Longbridge Road/Upney Lane shopping area and other on-street cycle parking only. It will also complement the work of the School Travel Plan Co-ordinator in promoting non-car modes travel for students attending Barking Abbey Comprehensive School, Eastbury Comprehensive School, East London University and contribute to the overall objectives of the Council’s Cycling Action Plan and the London Cycling Action Plan. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 15k 15k 25k 45k 100k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 0 0 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 15k 15k 25k 45k 100k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: TfL Cycling Centre for Excellence. Barking and Dagenham Councillors and Officers. User groups and the general public.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 193 Dependencies and Risks: TfL funding commitment. Lack of support for proposals or aspects of proposals. Staffing shortages. Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time III 5, 6, 7 4G.Pr12 reliability by encouraging modal shift. Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Pr1 network. 4O.Pr10 Encouraging cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Pr7 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Cycling, walking, train (opportunity for more cycle/train trips) Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 194 Form Number 11 TGLP / London Borough of Tower Hamlets

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Summary of Proposal: TGLP Cycle Linkages – National Cycle Network in East London.

Location: Thames Gateway.

Dates: 2007 – 2010.

Description of Main Elements:

It is proposed that Thames Gateway London Partnership (TGLP) will work in partnership with Sustrans, the national sustainable transport charity, to bring together key stakeholders and co-ordinate delivery of National Cycle Routes (NCRs) 1 and 13 in the Thames Gateway sub-region. It would be a continuation of a partnership established in 2005/06 that has been approved by the TfL Cycle Centre of Excellence. In 2004, Faber Maunsell carried out detailed route studies of NCRs 1 and 13. A Thames Gateway Cycle Strategy and Action Plan has also been developed in 2005. Continuing from 2005/06 TGLP and Sustrans will bring this work together in a report detailing which sections of the routes already have funding identified (e.g. through Section 106 agreements) and which sections still need funding via Borough Spending Plan (BSP) and other sources. The partnership will develop a costed schedule of works for the short, medium and long-term and an overall business case in order to ensure that the route is completed by 2010. Funds will be used for the part-time deployment of a route co-ordinator from Sustrans to work with TGLP and the relevant boroughs and stakeholders to achieve delivery of the NCRs 1 and 13 within the required timescale. Progress on other elements of the Thames Gateway Cycling Strategy and Action Plan will be undertaken as funding allows and in agreement with TfL. The funding requirements set out in this form relate to NCR 13 only. Other TGLP boroughs will submit Proposal Forms (Form 1s) for NCR 1. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 40k 40k 80k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 0 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 0 40K 40K 80K STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: The project will be managed by a steering group comprising TGLP, Sustrans, Tower Hamlets, Newham, Barking and Dagenham, Havering, Greenwich and Bexley. NCRs 1 and 13 are parts of a wider network of Green Cycle Corridors in London and NCRs beyond London’s boundaries. Connections with LCN+ and other cycle routes will be included in any proposals for improvements to NCRs 1 and 13 routes, thereby helping to create a comprehensive network of cycle routes in the sub-region. TGLP is in the final stages of completing the Roding Valley Way. With this scheme completed, it is anticipated that NCRs 1 and 13 will become the main cycling initiative for the Partnership until 2010.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 195 Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements. Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time III 7 4G.Pr12 reliability by encouraging modal shift. Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Pr1 network. 4O.Pr10 Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 4I.Po1 4I.Pr2 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Po1 4J.Pr1 4J.Pr3 4J.Pr4 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walk, cycle, rail Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 196 Form Number 12 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Controlled Parking Zones. Summary of Proposal: To improve and review existing controlled parking zones.

Location: Borough-wide – All CPZ around the stations.

Dates: On-going.

Description of Main Elements: The Council has introduced in consultation with the local community Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs) around all rail stations in the borough to ensure that local residents and essential users have access to local parking. The introduction of the London Congestion Charging scheme has increased commuter parking pressure around stations. The extent and nature of zones are subject to review depending on the degree to which parking is merely displaced elsewhere and the views of the local community. In the administration of car parks and CPZs, the Council is striving to bring its overall parking account to self financing, and any move into profit will be invested in transport, highways and parking initiatives. The Council’s draft Parking and Enforcement Plan (included as Chapter 7 of the LIP) provides more details on the operation of the CPZs in the borough as well as maps showing the extent of the six CPZs listed below. The Council proposes the following programme for future years: • Barking Town Centre Area CPZ - Improve and review existing CPZ • Upney Station Area CPZ - Improve and review existing CPZ • Heathway Station Area CPZ - Improve and review existing CPZ • Becontree Station Area CPZ - Improve and review existing CPZ • Dagenham East Station Area CPZ - Improve and review existing CPZ • Chadwell Heath Station Area CPZ - Improve and review existing CPZ

Beyond 2008/09: The Council will require an estimated £60k per annum up to 2010/11. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 10k 0 75k 60k 145k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 0 0 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 10k 0 75k 60k 145k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: LBBD Councillors and officers, residents and TfL.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 197 Dependencies and Risks: Consultation and results. Insufficient funding. Staffing shortages. Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability III 5, 6, 7 4G.Pr12 by encouraging modal shift Improving the working of parking and loading arrangements IV 9 4G.Po5 4G.Pr15 4G.Pr16 4H.Pr2 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Car Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Neutral Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Neutral Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 198 Form Number 13 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Summary of Proposal: Air Quality Management/Improvement Programme.

Location: Borough-wide.

Dates: On-going.

Description of Main Elements: This programme seeks to improve air quality in the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham (LBBD) by better managing its traffic and transport systems. The Council has declared an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) along the A13 due to poor air quality levels for both nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and fine particulates (1870). It has produced a Draft Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP) that sets out the problems relating to air quality along the A13 and the measures it intends to take to help improve air quality along the A13. The Council strongly supports the policies and proposals set out in the Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy (MAQS). This programme identifies a range of proposals designed at reducing emissions from road transport (and hence improve air quality) with the aim of achieving the objectives in the UK Air Quality Strategy (AQS). The proposals are detailed in the following pages and can be categorised as: • Encourage and Promote Cleaner Vehicle and Fuel Technologies – Approx. £30k • Air Quality Monitoring – Approx. £60k for the first year and £15k per year for the following years • Review of Air Quality Action Plan – Approx. £10k per review (This should be carried out once every 2 years) • Air Quality Action Plan option testing – Approx. £10k • Traffic Management and Tackling Through Traffic • Promote Alternative Modes of Transport • Travel Plans and Travel Awareness Campaigns • Planting of trees to intercept particulate matter in the air.

The Council supports in principle the proposed London Low Emission Zone (LEZ). The Council will work with the Greater London Authority (GLA), the Association of London Government (ALG) and other boroughs to consider the results of the LEZ feasibility study and support a phased implementation. The Council would require financial assistance to help offset the costs of adopting its own fleet. Many of the proposals in this programme are consistent with the Council’s Traffic and Transport Noise Reduction Programme (Refer to Proposal Form EVN2). The Council will therefore implement these proposals on both air quality and noise grounds. The Council will also continue to work closely with neighbouring boroughs as part of Thames Gateway London Partnership (TGLP) to tackle shared air quality problems. This work will build on current projects that include the TGLP Car Sharing Scheme, Sub-Regional Freight Quality Partnership, the TGLP Cycling Strategy and Action Plan. The following table outlines funding requirements for this programme of work through to 2008/09.

Beyond 2008/09: It is anticipated that this level of funding will be increased through to 2010/11 as more initiatives are adopted.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 199 The detailed proposals for this programme are as follows: • Encourage and Promote Cleaner Vehicle and Fuel Technologies (Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy Policy Reference: 6, 7, 8, 9, 26 and 30) • Work in partnership with the GLA to encourage and promote the take-up of cleaner vehicle and fuel technologies in the borough. This includes: - Choose where practicable contractors that use alternatively fuelled vehicles; - Encourage local businesses and freight operators in Barking and Dagenham to sign up to the Clean Vehicle Programme; - Develop and implement action plans for reducing emissions and switching to cleaner fuels. - Ensure all developments in Barking and Dagenham are subject to an air quality assessment before implementation; - Facilitate the uptake and use of alternative fuels, including water-diesel emulsion. This includes working with the GLA to increase the number of retail outlets for clean alternative fuels; - Continue to support the London Clean Fuel Vehicle Working Group, which is developing a strategy for electric charging infrastructure. This includes increasing the number of charging points for electric vehicles; - Promote better vehicle maintenance and considerate and economical driving through the London Sustainable Distribution Partnership; - Investigate the potential for parking discounts for residents with low emission vehicles; - Develop and implement an Action Plan to make improvements to the Council vehicle fleet with regard to reducing emissions and to ensure the vehicles are as clean as possible. This involves establishing a fleet register that includes emissions information; - Lead the way in testing new technology where appropriate e.g. greater use of electric vehicles in Council fleet, and act as a point of information for businesses and major fleet operators and other stakeholders in Barking and Dagenham for cleaner vehicle technologies, national schemes and grant systems for the use of alternative fuels; - Adopt Good Practice Guide GPG318 Transport and Environmental Management System as a guide for management of the vehicle fleet; - Seek to use vehicles less and to extend their life through careful maintenance. When a vehicle has clearly reached the end of its economic life and a replacement is needed, replace the Council’s fleet and community vehicles with renewable energy/green fuels and requiring contractors to do the same; - Provide Council fleet drivers and staff who are essential car users with appropriate driver training and monitor fuel consumption before and after training to evaluate the impact.

Air Quality Monitoring: Enhance the Council’s ability to measure air quality by installing extra monitoring stations and portable monitors to expand current air quality monitoring programme. Proposed sites are required to monitor air quality concentrations at representative sensitive receptor locations, e.g. along the A13, in addition to the existing permanent continuous monitoring stations which are located in suburban backgrounds.

Review of Air Quality Action Plan: To be carried out in 2006/07. This involves revising the existing Draft Air Quality Action Plan and assessment of air quality in the borough.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 200 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) 25k N/A 53k 50k 128k FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP (allocated) FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 0 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 25k 53k 50k 128k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP 0 0 0 BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) 0 0 OTHER (please specify) 0 0 Key Delivery Partners: Barking and Dagenham Officers; GLA; TfL; TGLP; Neighbouring boroughs; Freight and transport operators; Emergency services; Interest groups; Local businesses and Local resident communities; Consultants; Contractors.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 201 Dependencies and Risks: Initiatives or aspects of initiatives are not supported. Lack of funding or missed funding opportunity. Effective co-operation of internal and external stakeholders is essential to implementing the above proposals and making improvements in air quality across the borough. Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving Air Quality by: Ensuring improved alternatives to use of the car are provided, and III 5, 6, 7 4G.Pr12 4G.Pr20 encouraging a shift towards public transport, walking and cycling; 4G.Pr24 4H.Pr3 4K.Pr3 4P.Pr4 Encouraging business to reduce the emission impacts and energy consumption of its transport activities; 3.Pr2 3.Pr6 Encouraging and promoting the benefits of the more rapid adoption of 4G.Pr10 4G.Pr11 cost-effective cleaner technologies and fuels, non-fossil fuels, and VI 7, 12 4I.Pr2 zero emission technologies for all road vehicles, concentrating on the 4K.Pr4 most polluting vehicles; 4J.Po1 Ensuring TfL and GLA vehicle fleets set a good example on emission 4J.Pr1 reduction, and developing plans for reducing emissions from the taxi fleet (currently regulated by TfL), and the private hire vehicle fleet (to 4G.Pr25 4G.Pr26 be regulated by TfL); VII 13 Developing and implementing traffic management measures that reduce emissions and energy use as well as encouraging safe, VIII 14 economical and considerate driving; Examining methods of reducing traffic pollution, including a joint feasibility study with the London boroughs, Government, the Association of London Government and others to consider the viability, costs and benefits of one or more low emission zones in London. Businesses will also be involved through a consultative forum; Supporting balanced and appropriate local transport measures proposed by the London boroughs to work towards the UK Air Quality Strategy Objectives; Working with the Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions to identify whether additional national measures may be required to improve air quality, especially to reduce emissions of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and 1870. Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy’s Policy Reference: 2-14, 19-20, 26- 3.Po10 30 3.Po11 3.Pr7 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, cycling, PTW, car, freight Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: N/A Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 202 Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 203 Form Number 14 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Summary of Proposal: Traffic and Transport Noise Reduction Programme.

Location: London Borough of Barking and Dagenham.

Dates: On-going.

Description of Main Elements: This programme seeks to reduce traffic and transport noise in the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham by better managing its traffic and transport system. The Council strongly supports the Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy (MANS), which aims to minimise the adverse impacts of noise on people living and working in, and visiting London using the best available practices and technology within a sustainable development framework. Barking and Dagenham is committed to working in partnership with the Government, TfL and the London boroughs to develop a better understanding of traffic and transport noise exposure and to integrate noise management into day-to-day activities. This programme identifies a range of proposals designed at reducing traffic and transport noise. The proposals are detailed in the following pages and can be categorised as: • Encourage and Promote Quieter Vehicle Technologies – Approx. £50k • Noise Mapping and Monitoring – Approx. £170k for the first year and £25k per year for the following years • Resurface roads using quieter materials • Traffic Management and Tackling Through Traffic • Promote Alternative Modes of Transport • Travel Plans and Travel Awareness Campaigns

Many of the proposals in this programme also support the Council’s Air Quality Improvement Programme (refer to Proposal Form 13). The Council will therefore implement these proposals on both noise and air quality grounds. The Council will also continue to work closely with neighbouring boroughs as part of Thames Gateway London Partnership (TGLP) to tackle shared noise pollution problems. This work will build on current projects that include the TGLP Car Sharing Scheme, Sub-Regional Freight Quality Partnership, the TGLP Cycling Strategy and Action Plan. The following table outlines funding requirements for this programme of work through to 2008/09.

Beyond 2008/09: It is anticipated that this level of funding will be increased through to 2010/11 as more initiatives are adopted.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 204 The detailed proposals for this programme are as follows: • Encourage and Promote Quieter Vehicle Technologies • Support the TGLP Freight Quality Partnership (refer to Proposal Form 51). • Work in partnership with the GLA and other boroughs to encourage take-up of quieter vehicles. • Explore ways in which motorcyclists, moped and scooter users can be encouraged to maintain the noise specification of their machines as type approved; to drive more quietly and smoothly, as well as more safely. • Ensure quieter Council’s fleet by acquiring quieter vehicles and providing appropriate driver training.

Noise Mapping and Monitoring: Purchase ambient noise monitoring equipment to enable the Council to monitor and measure noise level, including relating noise measurements to traffic flow and road surface type. This would cost in the order of £120k for the first year and £15k per year for the following years. Develop a noise model within the borough to predict prevailing transport noise exposure, and to predict reductions in noise which would be achieved by noise control proposals. This would cost in the order of £50k and approximately £10k each year for maintenance and keeping the model up to date. Noise mapping to identify the number of people adversely affected by transport noise, and to validate noise levels predicted by noise model. Identifying and mapping all road surface types in the borough as part of the Council’s Highway Asset management Plan. Carry out before and after surveys of selected measures involving changes in noise, including, where necessary, noise level measurement and attitude surveys of people affected, to support improvements in programme effectiveness (refer to Proposal Form 17 for more information).

Improve Transport Infrastructure: Taking account, in any ‘lane rental’ scheme encouraging rapid completion of road works, of the potential for adverse noise impact and providing appropriate mitigation, for example if there is night-time working. Improve co-ordination of road works and balancing needs of stakeholders. Contractors must notify the Council and affected residents of all road works operations and provide more effective signing around them. All works are undertaken to meet Environmental Health requirements to minimise work duration, inconvenience and disruption to the public. Ensuring the number and operation of night time works is managed to minimise disruption to residents. Work with the statutory undertakers to minimise noise generated by loose covers within the carriageway. Use low noise road surface materials, such as Stone Mastic Asphalt (SMA) which has noise reduction benefits, as well as good skid resistance, in maintenance/resurfacing schemes. Apply ‘Sound Audit’ or other appropriate appraisals to ensure that noise and vibration impacts of any transport projects and programmes are identified and reduced to a practical, cost effective minimum level, taking account of other needs. This includes identifying ‘soundscape’ improvement opportunities. Install signs in waiting areas of Council premises, bus garages, coach stations, major leisure venues and other public areas advising the public of the harm that idling engines cause in terms of both noise and air quality pollutions. Install noise barriers, bunds, plant trees, etc. at locations where people are exposed to high levels of noise (such as close to the A13). FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 205 TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A N/A 25k 25k 50k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A N/A TBD TBD TBD (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A N/A 25k 25k 50k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) If available, S106 money from OTHER (please specify) developer schemes may be used to contribute to this programme. Key Delivery Partners: Barking and Dagenham Officers; TfL; TGLP; Neighbouring boroughs; Freight and transport operators; Emergency services; Interest groups; Local businesses and Local resident communities; Consultants; Contractors; Software providers; Other stakeholders; and the general public.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 206 Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Reducing traffic and transport noise by: III 5, 6, 7 4G.Pr12 4G.Pr20 Working with the London boroughs and local communities living 4G.Pr24 4H.Pr3 adjacent to the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) to 4K.Pr3 4P.Pr4 develop a programme to reduce traffic noise in the worst affected areas – as a first step, a report on this issue will be prepared by 3.Pr4 the end of 2002; 3.Pr6 VI 7, 12 4G.Pr10 Ensuring that as the Underground is modernised, cost-effective 4G.Pr11 4I.Pr2 noise control engineering and management practices are 4K.Pr4 adopted, and by working with the rail industry, promote the use of such measures on the National Rail network; 4J.Po1 4J.Pr1 Making use of cost-effective low noise road surfaces and vehicles, 4G.Pr25 and designing traffic management measures to minimise noise; VII 13 4G.Pr26 Adopting cost-effective operating techniques to minimise noise. VIII 14 Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy’s Policy Reference: 3.Po10 3.Po11 3-11, 13-18, 23-27, 57-62, 68-69, 73-74, 76-77, 81-83, 85-97 3.Pr7 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, cycling, PTWs Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: N/A Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 207 Form Number 15 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Education, Training and Publicity. Summary of Proposal: To provide road safety education, training and publicity.

Location: Borough-wide.

Dates: On-going.

Description of Main Elements: Support to the Accident, Investigation and Prevention (AIP) Service: To provide support to the Accident, Investigation and Prevention (AIP) service of the borough by providing equipment which will provide localised assessment and benefits. Investigate units that are available and procure on a cost effective basis. Train staff in the use of equipment. Establish criteria for assessment and implementation of units. Monitor and review.

Road Safety Education and Publicity for School Children: To give the opportunity to schools to receive safety road shows such as ‘Smart Brothers’. Development and implementation of road safety education initiatives and publicity. The Council will support pan-London initiatives on education, training and publicity where these exist.

Road User Training: Training including training in ‘defensive riding’ for motorcyclists. The impacts of the training on accident rates will be monitored.

Beyond 2008/09: The programme will continue beyond 2008/09 and will require around £100k per annum from ‘LIP Funding’/BSP. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 18k 9k 43k 41k 111k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 0 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 18k 9k 43k 41k 111k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: Council members, police, Engagement with residents, community groups and emergency services and TfL. Dependencies and Risks: Insufficient funding. Staffing shortages. Lack of support for proposals or aspects of proposals.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 208 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Area Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving road safety. I 1 4G.Pr7 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Cycling, walking, PTW, car Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: N/A Balanced road space allocation: N/A Requirements for sustainable developments: N/A Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 209 Form Number 16 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Local Safety Schemes. Summary of Proposal: Undertake full assessment of accident criteria.

Location: Borough-wide.

Dates: On-going.

Description of Main Elements: The Council will implement a programme of site specific (junction or link) and area interventions to reduce accidents and the potential for accidents. Schemes will reduce the severity of accidents that may continue to occur and this will be monitored using accident data provided via the Police system. Sites are identified on a priority basis using accident statistics from the previous three years. Implement measures that reduce the speed of vehicles – for example traffic calming features (speed humps, speed tables, chicanes, pinch points) – in order to curtail speed in excess of the authorized speed limit and/or to curb excessive or inappropriate vehicle speed. Improve conditions for all pedestrians and for cyclists – in particular account will be taken of vulnerable and disabled people by highlighting crossing points and where necessary implementing controlled crossing points such as zebra, toucan and pelican crossings as appropriate to reduce or remove barriers to safe and convenient travel for all members of the community. Speed limits will be reduced adjacent to schools to 20mph if safety schemes are in close proximity. (This is a Council Policy when undertaking such works in the vicinity of the Borough’s schools). At all stages community engagement will be undertaken to ensure that the proposed works will be supported by the majority of local residents and businesses. As community groups differ across the borough, the nature and style of schemes will vary and will accord with site conditions and, as far as practicable, the wishes of the localised community. The programme will include the following roads: • Dagenham Road - whole length - £90,000 • Upney lane - whole length - £65,000 • Whalebone Lane North - £70,000 • New Road j/w Ballards Road - £65,000 • Longbridge Road/Lodge Avenue/Becontree Avenue - £135,000 • Becontree Avenue/Bennett’s Castle lane - £90,000

Beyond 2008/09: The programme will continue beyond 2008/09 and will require £560k in 2009/10 and £580k in 2010/11 from ‘LIP Funding’/BSP.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 210 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 364k 370k 515k 550k 1,799k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 0 83k 350k 400k 833k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 364k 453k 865k 950k 2,632k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP The borough has a rigorous assessment process for allocating Capital funds. Each year schemes are reassessed and prioritised based on the Council’s (and the Community’s) key priorities. In recent years the Council has approved considerable funding for BOROUGH RESOURCES 833k Requested Local Safety Schemes, particularly in the current financial year and while budgets cannot be confirmed for future years at this stage there is a reasonable expectation that funds will continue to be made available as set out above. PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: Council members, police, residents, community groups and emergency services and TfL. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Insufficient funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 211 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving road safety. I 1 4G.Pr7 4G.Pr9 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Car, freight, bus, walking, cycling, PTWs Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: N/A Balanced road space allocation: N/A Requirements for sustainable developments: N/A Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 212 Form Number 17 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Summary of Proposal: Monitoring.

Location: Borough-wide.

Dates: On-going.

Description of Main Elements: The Council is required to meet 14 targets to help deliver the Mayor’s Transport Strategy (MTS), and will consider setting local targets in relation to local objectives. To monitor progress towards achieving targets, the Council proposes to use a series of Performance Indicators (PIs) including those set out in the LIP Guidance (Table 4-1 and Table 5-1). These PIs will also help to monitor progress in delivering MTS proposals. Data for some of the PIs is already available and should not require any significant further work or expenditure on the part of the Council. Where data is not available, funding will need to be requested from the Council or external bodies for the collection and analysis of the data. Transport for London asks boroughs to carry out outcome monitoring on some of the schemes funded by Transport for London. The costs associated to outcome monitoring are included in the scheme costs. Table 9.1 in Chapter 9 of the LIP sets out the PIs that the Council proposes to use in order to monitor progress towards achieving the MTS implementation targets. The Council will report on these PIs to TfL, via its annual ‘LIP Reporting and Funding’ submissions. The Council proposes to use the following additional PIs: • Average car journey times between key locations in the borough – £10k for journey time survey; • Primary mode of transport used by council staff to travel to work (See Proposal Form 33 – Workplace Travel Plans); • Primary mode of transport used by staff of major employers in the borough to travel to work – the Council would ask major employers to supply the results of their staff travel surveys and could bid for funding from TfL to help employers carry out surveys; • Primary mode of transport used by school children to travel to school (See Proposal Form 30 – Travel Awareness); • Footfall in the borough’s town centres and on major pedestrian routes – £TBD; • Cycle flows (use of DfT annual counts and additional counts where needed); • Air Quality (See Proposal Form13 – Air Quality Management / Improvement); • Noise (See Proposal Form 14 – Traffic and Transport Noise Reduction); • Accessibility to key facilities (e.g. GP surgeries and schools) for residents of new developments (accessibility modelling using accessibility software) – £TBD.

It is proposed that monitoring of personal safety on the transport network be carried out in conjunction with the review of the borough’s Crime, Disorder and Drugs Strategy.

NB. This form should be read in conjunction with Table 9.1 in Chapter 9 of the LIP.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 213 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 0 0 0 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 0 10k TBD 10k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 0 10k TBD 10k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES 10k To be requested PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: Council officers; DfT; TfL. Dependencies and Risks: Insufficient funding. Staffing shortages. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 214 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS policies and proposals: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability. III 5, 6, 7, 8 4G.Pr12 4H.Pr3 4P.Pr4 Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport network. V 10 3.Pr1 4O.Pr8 4P.Pr5 Encourage walking. VI 12 3.Pr2 3.Pr4 4I.Pr1 Encourage cycling. VII 13 4J.Pr6 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, Cycling, Bus, Car, Freight Neutral Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 215 Form Number 18 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Summary of Proposal: Local Development Framework.

Location: Borough-wide.

Dates: 2006-2008.

Description of Main Elements: The Government has introduced new legislation that requires the Council to replace its existing Unitary Development Plan with a new style local development plan called a Local Development Framework (LDF). The aim of the LDF is to better engage the community in the planning of the borough, change the emphasis of development plans from a purely land use focus to a broader ‘spatial planning approach’ reflecting other local and regional strategies and incorporating assessments of all policies against sustainable development objectives. The LDF will be required to have regard to the aspirations identified in the Barking & Dagenham Partnership Community Strategy (see Chapter 3 of the LIP for a brief overview). The LDF will support the London Plan and the Mayor’s Transport Strategy. This form focuses on policies in the LDF that will support the Mayor’s Transport Strategy. The LDF will be made up of a folder of documents called Local Development Documents (LDD’s). Documents with Development Plan Status will be known as Development Plan Documents (DPDs). Other planning guidance will be known as Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs). The Council will prepare the following LDDs: • Statement of Community Involvement • Core Strategy • Proposals Map • Site Specific Allocations • Borough Wide Development Policies • Waste • Barking and Dagenham Urban Design Framework • Barking and Dagenham Public Realm Strategy • Broad Street Planning Brief.

Information on the Core Strategy, Site Specific Allocations and Borough Wide Development Policies is provided below. Further information on the LDF is available on the Council’s website www.barking-dagenham.gov.uk.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 216 Core Strategy Preferred Options: The Council is consulting on its Core Strategy and is currently at the Preferred Options stage. The Core Strategy will set out the spatial vision, strategic objectives, spatial strategy, strategic (core) policies and a monitoring and implementation framework for achieving delivery. Together, it is intended to deliver the key strategic development needs for the borough and help achieve the spatial vision over the next 10 – 20 years. The Core Strategy Preferred Options contains a series of preferred policy options aimed at better integrating land use and transport, increasing accessibility and achieving a sustainable and inclusive transport system. Extracts from the relevant preferred policy options are set out below. The full preferred policy options are available on the Council’s website www.barking-dagenham.gov.uk. Policy CE 1 – Vibrant and Prosperous Town Centres Mixed use schemes incorporating elements such as housing, offices, community and leisure facilities will be encouraged throughout town centres (subject to retention of main ground floor retail function within primary retail frontages). Policy CM 1 – General Principles of Development Location Sustainability: Development should be sustainable by using land efficiently; protecting natural resources, biodiversity and the Borough’s hierarchy and network of open spaces; taking account of natural constraints (particularly the risk of flooding); and minimising the need to travel through the integration of land use and transport. Residential Development: New residential development is generally encouraged on key regeneration sites (refer to map 3 in appendix B) and locations with good public transport access. Policy CM 2 – Managing Housing Growth Higher density development: To support the provision of a minimum of 1,190 additional homes per annum, the Council will encourage higher density housing (in line with Borough Wide Development Policy B180: Housing Density) at strategic regeneration sites (such as Barking Riverside and South Dagenham) and sites with good public transport links and services within a ten-minute walk of a major or district centre within the Borough’s hierarchy of town centres (such as Barking Town Centre) (refer to Core Strategy policy CM 5: Town Centre Hierarchy). Policy CM 4 – Strategic Transport Links Land will be safeguarded for existing and planned transport infrastructure schemes that will serve the economic, social and environmental needs of the Borough and the Thames Gateway area. New transport infrastructure, as identified in the draft Local Implementation Plan (LIP) (including any future updates of the LIP), will be encouraged. Policy CR 5 – Sustainable Transport Supporting the retention of local shops, community services and facilities within walking distance of residential neighbourhoods, where they contribute to the sustainability of the community and do not significantly compromise the ongoing attractiveness and performance of town centres; Ensuring new shops, services, community facilities and major trip generating developments are located in areas of maximum accessibility by non-car modes for their desired catchment; Encouraging mixed use developments and a mix of complementary uses across neighbourhoods (please refer to the ‘Mixed-use Development’ borough wide development policy for further details); Encouraging improvements to non-car transport including facilities and routes for public transport, pedestrians and cyclists; Providing disincentives for car use, unless essential to regeneration or provision for persons with disabilities; Encouraging building design and site layouts that provide safe, convenient and efficient means of access and movement for pedestrians and cyclists; and Requiring, where appropriate, the provision of a transport assessment and Travel Plan (please refer to the ‘Transport Assessments and Travel Plans’ borough wide development policy for further details).

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 217 Policy 38 – Promoting Healthy Lifestyles through Sustainable Transport Barking and Dagenham will ensure that transport systems and the location and design of development promotes transport which can promote healthy lifestyles in the borough […]. Policy 39 – Inclusive Access All new development proposals (including extensions and changes of use) for any building that the public may use will be required to provide safe, easy and inclusive access for all people, regardless of disability, age or gender. This should include access to, into and within the building and its facilities, as well as appropriate car parking and buildings include, but are not limited to, shops, restaurants, community buildings, and health and leisure facilities. In terms of parking for disabled people, all development proposals should provide appropriate car parking. In the case of non-residential development, the council will require parking bays designed for use by Blue Badge holders located adjacent to or within easy reach of the main entrance. The level of provision shall be in accordance with the Council’s parking standards. Where no off street parking is proposed, applicants must demonstrate where disabled drivers can park in order to easily use the development. Any proposal to pedestrianise streets should also incorporate parking facilities for Blue Badge Holders. In residential development the Council will require parking bays designed in accordance with Lifetime Homes Standards. The level of provision will be in accordance with the Council’s parking standards. Policy CP 3 – High Quality Built Environment Design of the Public Realm: The design of the public realm is expected to be compliant with the following nine principles: 1. To avoid segregation and provide integrated public spaces for physical activity and recreation within and external to development; 2. To provide public spaces and public routes that are attractive, uncluttered and work effectively for all in society, regardless of disability or age; 3. To promote accessibility and local permeability by making places that are easy to move through and connect with one another. A priority of pedestrian-oriented modes over automobile use and an integration of land use and transport is key; 4. To naturalise and green the urban environment through an interconnected network of parks, open spaces, tree- lined streets, wildlife corridors, woodlands, pedestrian and cycle routes (please refer to ‘CM3 Integrated Open Spaces’ core strategy policy for further details); 5. To provide attractive, useable, durable, flexible and adaptable public spaces (includes facility provision such as seating, public art, lighting, cycle stands and signage); 6. To provide a ‘sense of place’ in appropriate locations by creating landmarks, gateways and places that are a focus for community civic activity; 7. To protect views, vistas and landmarks in relation to buildings; 8. To provide safe environments that improve crime prevention and reduce ‘fear of crime’; and 9. To encourage active frontages at ground level to public spaces.

The Site Specific Allocations document will identify sites that are suitable for new development, including housing, transport, retail, employment, open space or where appropriate a mix of uses.

Borough Wide Development Policies Preferred Options: The Borough Wide Development Policies Preferred Options document sets out detailed policies that will help to control development in the borough and to deliver the vision, objectives and policies set out in the Core Strategy. The full preferred policy options are available on the Council’s website www.barking-dagenham.gov.uk. The Council has developed policy options covering a variety of issues including parking standards; walking and cycling; transport assessments and travel plans; transport safety and road hierarchy; hazardous and environmentally sensitive development; noise mitigation; and mixed-use development.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 218 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 0 0 0 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A TBD TBD TBD TBD (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 0 0 0 0 STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: Council members and officers, local community, stakeholders. Dependencies and Risks: Insufficient funding. Staffing shortages. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Delay in political agreement.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 219 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving road safety. I 1 4G.Pr9 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability III 5, 6, 7 4G.Pr12 by encouraging modal shift. Improving the working and of parking and loading arrangements. IV 7, 9 4G.Po6 Improving accessibility and social inclusion. V 10 3.Po7 3.Po8 3.Po9 3.Pr1 4K.Pr5 4P.Po2 Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 7, 12 3.Po5 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Po6 3.Pr2 3.Pr4 3.Pr6 4I.Po1 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Pr7 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) All modes Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals (see section 4.5 of this Guidance): (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 220 Form Number 19 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Regeneration Area Schemes. Summary of Proposal: To improve the environment and infrastructure of employment areas in the borough.

Location: Employment areas, principally in London Riverside.

The programme of improvements is expected to continue beyond the LIP planning Dates: cycle of 2006 – 2011.

Description of Main Elements: The borough has existing employment areas where investment in transport and other local improvements are needed in order to promote the retention and expansion of job and other opportunities.

Improvements to River Road/Creekmouth Employment Area: The River Road / Creekmouth Employment area is located to the north and west of the Barking Riverside development site, and is part of the London Riverside Zone of Change, which is identified as an ‘Opportunity Area’ in the London Plan. River Road, which is the main means of access to the area, experiences significant Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) movements and parking problems. This results in congestion, which reduces the competitiveness of the area. A partnership of the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham, the London Development Agency (LDA), English Partnerships and the Greater London Authority Architecture & Urbanism Unit are seeking to make movement through the area easier and to improve the appearance of the area, in order to make it a workplace of choice and a place that attracts investment. It is envisaged that HGV movements will be restricted from passing through new residential communities – without appropriate mitigation measures being taken this is likely to further significantly hinder the River Road employment area.

Creekmouth Loop Road Project and Study: The Creekmouth to Castlegreen Development Framework, commissioned by LDA and its partners, has recommended extending Creek Road southwards to River Road, linking River Road and Creek Road and forming a loop for HGV traffic. The loop road would relieve pressure on River Road and permit greater traffic separation between industrial and residential areas. It would also serve sites to the east of River Road, some of which are currently under-exploited. Creation of the loop road would also provide the opportunity to improve connectivity/accessibility across the area for vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians, as well as offering an opportunity to achieve a more satisfactory co-existence between residential and industrial uses. The project partners will seek, with the help of the Thames Gateway Urban Development Corporation, funding from Central Government to help build the loop road. The project partners have agreed that a study is needed to analyse the full potential of the project and to assess the cost implications and delivery risks and mechanisms. The estimated cost of the study into both the Loop Road feasibility study and interim improvements is £50k (£25k to be funded by TfL and £25k to be funded by English Partnerships).

River Road Interim Improvements: The project partners have identified other measures to improve the flow of traffic along River Road, which are not dependant on implementation of the loop road. These would include introducing parking bays, reviewing parking controls, and widening some sections of River Road. It is anticipated that these works will be carried out before the proposed Creekmouth loop road is built. The estimated cost of the improvements is being established, however £50k is given as a potential cost (£25k would be funded by TfL and £25k would be funded by English Partnerships).

Beyond 2008/09: It is anticipated that the Council and its partners will continue to progress the Creekmouth Loop Road project. Funding may be sought from ‘LIP Funding’/BSP to implement complementary measure to the Loop Road which could include measures to improve accessibility for pedestrians, cyclists and bus users.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 221 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 50k 0 TBD 50k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 60k 0 TBD 60k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 110k 0 TBD 110k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP 0 0 BOROUGH RESOURCES 0 0

PARTNERS (please specify) EP/Barking 50K Approved Riverside

OTHER (please specify) Section 106 10K Possible monies Key Delivery Partners: London Development Agency (LDA), London Riverside Action Group (LRAG), English Partnerships (EP), Barking Riverside, Greater London Authority Architecture & Urbanism Unit (GLA AUU), TfL, local businesses. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 222 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority MTS Proposal/ Target areas and MTS proposals and policies: Priority Area Policy number Number (Appendix C) Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability. III 6 4G.Po1 4G.Pr20 Improving the working of parking and loading arrangements. IV 9 4G.Pr15 Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Pr1 network. Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 4I.Po1 4I.Pr2 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Pr5 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Freight, car, PTW, walking, cycling, bus Positive Rail Neutral Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/A) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 223 Form Number 20 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Structural Maintenance of Principal Roads. Summary of Proposal: To bring all of the borough’s principal roads to a state of good repair by 2011.

Location: Various within the borough.

Dates: Annual Programme as detailed below.

Description of Main Elements: To undertake maintenance work to carriageway and footpaths on the borough’s principle road network. The proposed programme for 2007/8 is: • Porters Avenue (Gale Street to Wood Lane) carriageway & footpath resurfacing (£368,000) • Rainham Road North (Oxlow to Wood Lane) carriageway resurfacing (£491,000) • Whalebone Lane North (Morden Road to Mill Lane) carriageway resurfacing (£162,000) • Northern Relief Road (London Road to Longbridge Road) carriageway resurfacing (£202,000) • Heathway (Arnold Road to Church Elm Lane) carriageway resurfacing (£86,000) • Porters Avenue (Lodge Avenue to Gale Street) carriageway resurfacing (£142,000) • Wood Lane (Civic roundabout to Whalebone Lane) carriageway resurfacing (£74,000).

The programme of work for future years will be decided on the basis of the annual visual inspection of carriageways and footpaths in relation to best value performance indicators (BVPI) 223 for carriageways and 187 for footpaths. All schemes are reviewed by the access group and cycle audited. Access and accessibility improvements to bus stops are undertaken as a matter of course. The use of stone mastic asphalt (SMA) reduces traffic noise and restricted hours/weekend working ensures that disruption to traffic is kept to a minimum.

2008/09 and Beyond: The Structural Maintenance programme is an ongoing programme. External funding will be required to ensure that all of the borough’s principle roads are maintained in a good state of repair. The Council will require £1,650 in 2009/10 and a similar level of funding in 2010/11.

Additional information: Chapter 2 of the LIP provides background information on road maintenance in the borough. Section 10 and appendix D of the 2006 – 2010 Borough Spending Plan provide additional information including maps and photographs. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 885k 700k 1,525k 1,600k 4,710k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 0 0 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 885k 700k 1,525k 1,600k 4,710k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP Nil Nil N/A BOROUGH RESOURCES Nil Nil N/A PARTNERS (please specify) Nil Nil N/A OTHER (please specify) Nil Nil N/A

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 224 Key Delivery Partners: The schemes will be designed and supervised by the in house team. A major works contractor who has been successful in tendering for the Highways term contract will undertake implementation. Dependencies and Risks: Implications and notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Road condition survey results are not supplied. Suitable schemes are not developed. Sufficient funding not provided. Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 4F.Pr11 network. 4O.Pr10 Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 4I.Po1 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr8 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Po1 4J.Pr6 Bringing transport infrastructure to a state of good repair. VIII 14 4G.Pr25 4G.Pr26 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, cycling, wheelchair users, car, bus, PTW, freight Positive Rail Neutral Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 225 Form Number 21 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Maintenance and Repair of Non-Principal Roads. Summary of Proposal: To maintain and repair non-principal borough roads in the borough. Various locations borough wide, as determined by annual condition surveys and Location: subject to any coordination requirements arising from other planned works on the network.

Dates: On-going.

Description of Main Elements: Resources for the structural maintenance of principal roads in the borough have been available through Government or TfL financial support. However very little has been done to improve the residual life of district roads. This has been to the detriment of all road users, particularly disabled people, cyclists and pedestrians. The Council will continue to fund the maintenance and repair of carriageways and footways along non-principal roads in the borough.

Beyond 2008/09: The Council’s maintenance programme for non-principal roads will continue at the same level in order to reduce the maintenance backlog. Funding requirements are likely to remain similar or to increase.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 226 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 0 0 0 0 0 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 3398k 3,000k 4,000k 4,000k 14,398k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 3398k 3,000k 4,000k 4,000k 14,398k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP 0 0 The borough has a rigorous assessment process for allocating Capital funds. Each year schemes 14,398k Requested BOROUGH RESOURCES are reassessed and prioritised based on the Council’s (and the Community’s) key priorities. PARTNERS (please specify) 0 0 OTHER (please specify) 0 0 Key Delivery Partners: Contractors. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 227 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS policies and proposals: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport network. V 10 3.Po9 4F.Pr11 4O.Pr10 Encourage walking by improving the street environment, conditions for VI 12 3.Pr2 pedestrians. 3.Pr4 4I.Po1 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr7 4I.Pr8 4I.Pr10 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Pr5

Bringing transport infrastructure to a state of good repair. VIII 14 4G.Pr26 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, cycling, bus, taxi, car, freight. Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Neutral Balanced road space allocation: Neutral Requirements for sustainable developments: Neutral Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 228 Form Number 22 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Wayfinding Signage. Summary of Proposal: To provide wayfinding signage for pedestrians.

Location: Borough-wide.

Dates: 2007 – 2010.

Description of Main Elements: Wayfinding Signage: Walking is a sustainable mode of travel that is free and which has health benefits. Given the right conditions, more short journeys (under 2 miles) could be made on foot, helping to reduce road congestion and transport related pollution, and improving people’s health. The Council wishes to address the current lack of pedestrian signage by providing wayfinding signs or panels at key locations in the borough. Wayfinding panels and signs will help pedestrians find where they are as well as key destinations such as community facilities, car parks, shopping areas and parks. Signs will also provide reassurance to pedestrians and raise the profile of walking. The priority is to provide wayfinding signs in Barking Town Centre and Dagenham Heathway, where extensive public realm works will help to create high quality public spaces. These areas have high footfall and contain key destinations such as train stations, community facilities and car parks. Estimated cost of providing wayfinding signage for both areas: £100k (see Proposal Forms 44 and 47). To provide wayfinding signage at other key locations in the borough, such as railway stations and district centres will require an estimated additional £100k. This includes the cost of developing a wayfinding strategy. Wayfinding signage will need to be updated to keep abreast of changes taking place in the borough, especially in Barking Town Centre. The Council also wishes to provide wayfinding signage for ‘Just Walk’ Routes that it created to encourage people to take up regular walking. ‘Just Walk’ Routes are located in parks in the borough and were used by around 17,000 walkers in 2005. In 2004 the Council’s Sports Development Unit was awarded the ‘3 Heart Award’ for its ‘Just Walk Programme’. This award is the 'Walking the Way to Health Initiative’s' highest award. Estimated cost of providing wayfinding signage for ‘Just Walk’ Routes: £25k.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 229 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 25k 100k 125k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A TBD TBD TBD TBD (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A TBD 25k 100k 125k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: Contractors, TfL, Living Streets, Thames Gateway London Partnership, local interest groups, LTGDC. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Proposals or aspects of proposals do not obtain support. Staff shortages. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 230 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability by III 7 4G.Pr12 encouraging modal shift. Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport network. V 10 3.Pr1 Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 4I.Po1 4I.Pr1 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr3 4I.Pr7 4I.Pr8 4I.Pr10 The Walking Strategy will also support the Walking Plan for London, the Mayor’s Air Quality and Noise Strategies, the Public Health White Paper “Choosing Health” and the Council’s Local Area Agreement “Building Communities – Transforming Lives”. Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, bus, train, cycling Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 231 Form Number 23 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM

Summary of Proposal: Congestion Bottlenecks.

Location: Borough-wide.

Dates: 2006 – 2011.

Description of Main Elements: Congestion contributes to air pollution and creates delays for road users. It also affects the reliability of bus services; the ability of emergency services to reach their destination quickly; and can influence whether or not a business chooses to locate in the borough. There are a number of junctions and sections of road in the borough that regularly experience congestion. Areas adjacent to school access points also experience congestion at peak times during the week, due to illegal parking and parents driving their children to school. As stated in Chapter 3 of the LIP, in general the Council’s policy is the more effective use of existing roads rather than new build, with the exception of catering for new development. Chapter 3 of the LIP lists the road improvements that the Council supports. The Council has defined a hierarchy of roads and will discourage through traffic from using residential streets. The Council aims to reduce traffic growth in the borough through a variety of measures including promoting school and workplace travel plans, extending cycle and pedestrian routes, and planning conditions. The Council has implemented controlled parking zones (CPZs) around stations and will seek funding from Transport for London to improve and review existing CPZs (see Proposal Form 12). The Council will monitor congestion in the borough and look at ways of relieving congestion at bottlenecks. This could include measures such as: • Reviewing signing with a view to ensuring that through traffic remains on major roads (e.g. A406) • Improving junction layout and carriageway markings and carrying out localised road widening • Reviewing signal timings at signalised junctions • Providing bus priority measures on congested sections of road (see Proposal Form 3) • Enforcing all bus stop clearways • CCTV enforcement where indiscriminate parking causes congestion • Using mobile CCTV cameras around schools to enforce parking restrictions • Implementing a tow away facility • Providing more short-stay car parking spaces close to shops • Using new powers under the Traffic Management Act 2004 to better co-ordinate roadworks

This form does not identify a specific budget for measures to tackle ‘congestion bottlenecks’. Many of the measures will be part of other council programmes such as its bus priority programme, town centres programme, regeneration area programme etc. The Council would welcome it if Transport for London set up a specific funding pot to which boroughs could bid in relation to congestion reduction measures, especially since the Mayor of London has set boroughs traffic reduction targets. The Council will seek synergies between the locations identified as bottlenecks and any planned works or developments in the vicinity. The locations identified will also be checked against those that have a poor safety record to ensure that any improvements will be complementary. The Council will seek to minimise disruption to traffic in relation to the redevelopment of parts of Barking Town Centre, public realm improvements on the Heathway, and construction of East London Transit (ELT).

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 232 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A N/A 0 0 0 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A N/A 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A N/A 0 0 0 STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP

BOROUGH RESOURCES

PARTNERS (please specify) If available, S106 money from developer OTHER (please specify) schemes may be used to contribute to this programme. Key Delivery Partners: Barking and Dagenham Officers; TfL; TGLP; LTGDC; Neighbouring boroughs; Freight and transport operators; emergency services; local interest groups; local businesses, local residents; consultants and contractors. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 233 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving bus journey times and reliability. II 3, 4 4F.Pr2 4F.Pr6 4F.Pr8 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability III 5, 6, 7, 8 4G.Pr12 through the use of travel demand measures. 4GPr18 4GPr19 4GPr20 4K.Pr3 4P.Pr4 Improving the working of parking and loading arrangements. IV 7, 9 4G.Pr1 4G.Pr15 4H.Pr2 Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Pr1 network. Improving the natural environment 3.Pr2 3.Pr4 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) All Modes Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 234 Form Number 24 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM

Summary of Proposal: East London Transit Complementary Measures.

Location: Along proposed route of ELT through Barking and Dagenham.

Dates: 2007-2011.

Description of Main Elements: Improvements to Accessibility: The Council has supported the proposals for Phase I of the East London Transit (ELT) through Barking and Dagenham, subject to detailed design and consultation. The scheme is programmed for 2007. The Council will seek to implement complementary measures along the route of East London Transit such as: • Improving accessibility to ELT (footway works, cycle parking, pedestrian and cyclist crossings, dropped kerbs); • Providing direction signage to stops; • Mitigating against any negative impacts that the scheme may have on pedestrians, cyclists and wheelchair users (e.g. contra-flow lanes for cyclists).

Quality of Features and Materials: The Council is planning to create a high quality public realm in Barking Town Centre and will seek to ensure that ELT integrates well with the public realm, both through the way it is designed and the materials used. The Council has adopted the ‘Barking Code’, which includes guidelines on the use of materials for street paving and buildings.

Barking Station and Station Parade Bridge: Interchange facilities at Barking Station will need to be improved in order to accommodate ELT. ELT vehicles will use Station Parade Bridge. Early indications are that the bridge will need strengthening in order to carry the anticipated loads from ELT. The Council may need to seek funding from TfL outside of the normal bidding process for bridge strengthening.

Beyond 2008/09: Complementary measures are likely to be needed in relation to further phases of ELT and funding from ‘LIP Funding’/BSP will be required.

FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 TBD TBD TBD FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 0 TBD TBD TBD (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 0 TBD TBD TBD STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify)

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 235 Key Delivery Partners: Council members and officers, TfL, LB Newham, local interest groups and residents. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements (most importantly ELT). Availability of TfL resources for design and installation of traffic signals. Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability III 5, 6, 7, 8 4G.Pr12 through the use of travel demand measures. Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 7, 12 4I.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 4I.Pr8 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Po1 4J.Pr7 Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Pr1 network. 4P.Po2 4Q.Po1 4Q.Pr7 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Pedestrians, cyclists, bus Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 236 Form Number 25 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM

Summary of Proposal: Safe Transport.

Location: Borough-wide.

Dates: On-going.

Description of Main Elements: The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 places a statutory duty on the police and local authorities to form statutory Crime and Disorder Reduction partnerships in order to reduce crime and disorder. The Community Safety Strategic Partnership (CSSP) is the borough’s statutory Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership, and comprises of senior representatives from the Council, local Police, Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA), Primary Care Trust, National Probation Service, Victim Support, London Fire Brigade, Racial Equality Council, and Transport for London. The CSSP has produced a three-year strategy to reduce crime and disorder in the borough, the ‘Barking and Dagenham Crime, Disorder and Drugs Strategy 2005 to 2008’. The CSSP carried out in 2004 an audit of crime, disorder and drugs and consulted with the community as part of the development of its crime reduction strategy. Responses from the consultation showed that 68 per cent of respondents felt threatened by crime, and that parks, Barking Town Centre, bus stops and railway stations were the places where people felt most unsafe. Problems at Underground stations in the borough have resulted in ongoing active Dispersal Orders. Consultation carried out as part of preparation of the LIP also highlighted people’s concerns with safety around footbridges and on buses. The CSSP has adopted three key goals for the period 2005 to 2008: • Reduce overall crime by 20% over the next three years; • Reduce the fear of crime by 5% each year; and • Ensure those that carry out crime, especially priority crimes, such as domestic violence and hate crime, are brought to justice.

The CSSP has also identified a set of local strategic priorities that it will focus on in order to make Barking and Dagenham safer. These priorities include reducing antisocial behaviour, violent crime and property crime. The CSSP has set out, in its Crime, Disorder and Drugs Strategy 2005 to 2008, three-year outcomes and how it intends to achieve these. The CSSP will measure the outcomes of the strategy by comparing crime statistics and other data it collects with crime statistics and other data relating to a baseline year, which in most cases will be 2004/05. This proposal form sets out proposals to improve: • Safety around rail stations and bus stops; • Safety for people travelling to and from rail stations and bus stops; and • Safety for people travelling at night, particularly women.

The outcomes of the proposals below will be measured using crime statistics (including British Transport Police statistics and other data such as survey results.

Proposals: Include in the design of new infrastructure or new developments measures that reduce the opportunity for crime and anti-social behaviour (e.g. passive surveillance). Implement the recommendations of audits carried out on walking routes to stations and bus stops. Improvements to street lighting – £481k. Promotion of safe and legitimate late night travel options (distribution of localised publicity materials etc.) and the Mayor’s Safer at Night Travel Initiatives Measures to improve sight lines and safety on walking routes to and from stations and bus stops: better lighting; removal of low hanging vegetation; provision of exit routes where feasible; alley gating - £TBD.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 237 Improvements to footbridges and approach routes: introduction of CCTV; modifications to design to improve visibility; better lighting - £TBD. Installation of help points outside rail stations – £TBD. Installation of CCTV cameras at Dagenham East Station, Upney Station and Chadwell Heath Station (see Proposal Form 28) Installation of CCTV camera at Becontree Station - £29k Installation of CCTV cameras in Barking Town Centre - £205k Installation of CCTV cameras in the Gascoigne Estate, Rose Lane, Farr Avenue and Ibscott Close - £205k Installation of a late night marshalled taxi rank in Barking Town Centre - £TBD. Investigation of ways to increase the supply of late night transport services - £TBD. Replacement of subways with surface level crossings. Encourage the installation of hotlink phones at entertainment venues etc. Implementation of the above proposals will be subject to the availability of funds and feasibility. Barking and Dagenham’s CDRP is implementing various initiatives to reduce crime and the fear of crime and these will support the above proposals. A dedicated ‘Crime and Anti-Social Behaviour Unit’ set up within the Council is the lead agency responsible for tackling anti-social behaviour in the borough.

Beyond 2008/09: It is anticipated that in 2009/10 and 2010/11 funding requirements will be similar to previous years. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 0 0 0 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 650k 230k TBD 880k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 650k 230k TBD 880k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES 650k Requested PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: Community Safety Strategic Partnership, TfL, GLA, Metropolitan Police (Transport Operational Command Unit), local police, British Transport Police, local transport providers, entertainment venues. Dependencies and Risks: Insufficient funding. Proposals or aspects of proposals do not obtain support. Staffing shortages.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 238 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport network. V 10 4C.Pr12 4P.Pr5 Encourage walking by improving the street environment, conditions VI 12 3.Pr2 for pedestrians and through the use of travel demand measures. Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, cycling, taxi/PHV, bus, rail Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: N/A Requirements for sustainable developments: N/A Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 239 Form Number 26 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Summary of Proposal: Traffic Growth Reduction.

Location: Barking and Dagenham and East London sub-region.

Dates: 2007-2011.

Description of Main Elements: The challenge facing boroughs in the east sub-region of London is how to support substantial housing and employment growth whilst avoiding and mitigating unsustainable levels of traffic growth, congestion and pollution. Many roads and junctions in the east sub-region currently experience congestion on a regular basis and this could worsen with forecast growth in housing and employment. Rising car ownership levels also present a challenge. The Mayor of London has set TfL and the London boroughs targets in terms of reducing growth in road traffic. The Mayor has set different targets for inner and outer London boroughs and for the five sub-regions defined in the London Plan. Barking and Dagenham is an outer London borough located in the East London sub-region. The East London sub-region is the largest of the London’s sub-regions, covering 10 boroughs on both sides of the Thames. It contains the London part of the Thames Gateway. The targets for outer London boroughs in the east sub-region are to maintain traffic growth over the period 2001- 2011 at +6% or below over the whole region, and to maintain traffic growth in town centres at +1% or below These targets are based on the assumption that significant additional public transport capacity will be provided in the east sub-region. Traffic between the north and south sides of the Thames is constrained as there are few river crossings however this could change with the proposed construction of the Thames Gateway Bridge. The Council considers that to reduce traffic growth in the East London sub-region requires a coordinated approach by all the East London sub-region boroughs and TfL, not least to avoid traffic being displaced elsewhere. The Thames Gateway London Partnership, which is supported by the 10 East London sub-region boroughs, could help coordinate a sub-regional programme to reduce traffic growth. The Council will contribute to the traffic growth reduction target for East London by: • Adopting as part of its LDF planning policies that will ensure that new development is located and designed so as to reduce the need to travel, especially by private car; • Using its planning powers to ensure that new development encourages people to use alternatives to the car (workplace travel plans, facilities for pedestrians and cyclists, etc.); • Helping schools develop school travel plans (every school to have a school travel plan in place by 2009); • Managing the supply of off-street parking and reviewing parking standards in line with the London Plan; • Encouraging public transport trips by lobbying for improvements to public transport including a light transit system (ELT) and new north-south bus services; • Encouraging public transport trips by working with partners to make public transport easier and safer to use; • Encouraging alternative modes of travel by improving conditions for pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists; promoting walking, cycling, public transport, car-sharing and car clubs; • Promoting travel awareness including the ‘Good Going’ campaign; • Promoting freight quality partnerships and cycle powered delivery.

The funding required to achieve the above proposals is part of other council programmes such as ‘School Travel Plans’ and is not set out separately in this form. Funding that might be needed to enable TGLP to coordinate any sub-regional initiatives will be identified at a later date.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 240 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A N/A 0 TBD TBD FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A N/A TBD TBD TBD (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A N/A TBD TBD TBD STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP

BOROUGH RESOURCES

PARTNERS (please specify) If available, S106 money from developer OTHER (please specify) schemes may be used to contribute to this programme. Key Delivery Partners: TfL; TGLP; LTGDC; neighbouring boroughs; freight and transport operators; emergency services; local interest groups; local businesses, local residents; consultants and contractors. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Lack of support for proposals or aspects of proposals. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 241 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving bus journey times and reliability. II 3, 4 4F.Pr2 4F.Pr6 4F.Pr8 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability III 5, 6, 7, 4G.Pr12 through the use of travel demand measures. 8 4GPr18 4GPr19 4GPr20 4K.Pr3 4P.Pr4 Improving the working of parking and loading arrangements. IV 7, 9 4G.Pr1 4G.Pr15 4H.Pr2 Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport network. V 10 3.Pr1 Improving the natural environment 3.Pr2 3.Pr4 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) All Modes Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Neutral Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 242 Form Number 27 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Summary of Proposal: Parallel Initiatives on ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes.

Location: ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes (see below).

Dates: 2008/09 – 2010/11.

Description of Main Elements: The Council is responsible for the following ‘A’ roads in the borough: A124, A123, A1153, A1240, A1112, A1083, A118. The Council considers the following roads as Busy Bus Routes: A124, A1240, A1306 (between A1240 and B178), A1083, A118, Oxlow Lane (between A1112 and A1240), and Dagenham Road (between A124 Rush Green Road and A1112 Rainham Road North). LIP Guidance (TfL, July 2004) requires boroughs to apply ‘parallel initiatives’ to ‘A’ roads and ‘busy bus routes’. This means applying the approach adopted by Transport for London on ‘red routes’. On red routes, parking or stopping is restricted in order to keep traffic flowing and ease congestion. Parking and stopping restrictions are also designed to make bus services more reliable and to assist legitimate loading or unloading. The Council is already implementing measures to keep traffic flowing and to ease congestion such as: providing bus lanes on congested sections of road and beacon priority at signalised junctions; providing parking bays to cater for short-stay parking need and using CCTV to tackle illegal parking. The Council is currently designing a holistic scheme for the A1240 Heathway that aims to ease congestion; reduce delays for buses; and assist loading and unloading. The Council’s programme for ‘parallel initiatives is: • Identify sections of ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes to review; • Determine the principal functions of the section of network in terms of the different road users based on the Mayor’s Transport Strategy (including review of waiting and loading restrictions); • Assess the problems experienced on the section of network by road users taking account of the priorities for main roads identified above; • Design and develop schemes to address the problems identified (will involve consultation).

Neighbouring boroughs are also being asked to implement parallel initiatives. The Council may seek funding through the Thames Gateway London Partnership (TGLP) for cross-boundary schemes, which would ensure continuity between boroughs. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 0 25k 25k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 0 TBD TBD TBD (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 0 0 25k 25k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP

BOROUGH RESOURCES

PARTNERS (please specify) If available, S106 money from developer OTHER (please specify) schemes may be used to contribute to this programme.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 243 Key Delivery Partners: Barking and Dagenham Officers; TfL; TGLP; LTGDC; Neighbouring boroughs; Freight and transport operators; emergency services; local interest groups; local businesses, local residents; consultants and contractors. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements. Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability III 6, 7 4GPr18 through the use of travel demand measures. Improving the working of parking and loading arrangements. IV 7, 9 4G.Pr15

Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Pr5

Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Bus, cycling, walking, car, freight, PTW Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 244 Form Number 28 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Station Access Programme. Summary of Proposal: To improve access to train and underground stations in the borough.

Location: Borough-wide.

Dates: On-going.

Description of Main Elements: Background: Barking and Dagenham has two railway stations: Barking Station and Dagenham Dock Station. Barking Station is also a London Underground station. Barking and Dagenham has in addition four other London Underground stations: Upney, Becontree, Dagenham Heathway and Dagenham East. This proposal form also covers Chadwell Heath Station, which although in the neighbouring London Borough of Redbridge, is accessed from Station Road, which is inside Barking and Dagenham. Chadwell Heath Station is important to Barking and Dagenham as train services to Liverpool Street Station stop there and it is a proposed stop on the Crossrail line. Chadwell Heath station is also the closest station for many residents in the north of the borough. Barking and Dagenham participates in the TGLP ‘Station Access Study’ programme, through which station access improvements are identified and prioritised (see Proposal Form 52). The stations most in need of works to improve access from the surrounding area are: • Dagenham East Station • Chadwell Heath Station • Barking Station • Dagenham Heathway Station • Dagenham Dock Station.

Improvements to other stations will be considered subject to the availability of funding.

Barking Station: Barking Station is the borough’s main interchange, and is used by National Rail and London Underground services, buses, taxis, pedestrians and cyclists. The Council aspires to an improved internal layout of the station and lifts and escalators to every platform. The Council also aspires to a second entrance to the station, and to an improved interchange area outside the station that will be able to accommodate ELT (additional bus stops, improved cycle parking facilities, ‘kiss and ride’ bays, parking for disabled persons, improved signing and public transport information, improved pedestrian crossings). Improvements to the interchange area will need to take into account the implementation of ELT, both in terms of design and timing. This form does not set out proposals for Barking Station. These will need to be brought forward jointly by the Council, the LTGDC, TfL, Network Rail, London Underground, 8C and other stakeholders).

Dagenham Heathway Station: The ‘Dagenham Heathway Public Realm Improvements’ scheme includes proposals that will improve access to Dagenham Heathway Station and opportunities for interchange, including: • Improvements to pedestrian crossings • Removal of railings • Cycle lanes • New footways and kerbs • Installation of new lamp columns • Installation of new bus shelters.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 245 Dagenham East Station: Through TGLP’s ‘Station Access Study’ programme, a ‘Step 1’ bid was submitted in 2005 to TfL for Dagenham East Station. The Council aspires to implement a Station Access scheme at Dagenham East Station in 2006/07, subject to approval by TfL of the detailed scheme and release of funding. The key elements of the scheme are: • CCTV cameras to monitor station forecourt • Improvements to footways • Introduction of cycle lanes • Entry treatments on side roads • Creation of taxi ranks and ‘kiss and ride’ bays.

Funding required from LIP funding: approx. £200k

Chadwell Heath Station: The Council aims to submit in 2006 a ‘Step 1’ bid to TfL for Chadwell Heath Station. Proposals could include direction signage, improvements to pedestrian crossing facilities and footways, side road entry treatments, cycle parking, CCTV cameras. Funding required from LIP funding: approx. £200k

Dagenham Dock Interchange: The Department for Communities and Local Government has allocated £3 million to create an interchange at Dagenham Dock. TfL has allocated £250k in 2006/07 to implement lifts at Dagenham Dock Station. Additional funds are likely to be needed in future years to improve access to the future interchange and to integrate it with local pedestrian and cycle routes such as the proposed Dagenham Spine (see Proposal Form 41). The nature and timing of the improvements will be governed by the proposals for the interchange.

Beyond 2008/09: The Council’s Station Access programme will continue beyond 2008/09. Funding requirements from LIP funding will be in the order of £200k per year.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 246 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) 250k FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 250k 150k 150k 800k (allocated) FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 0 200k 200k TBD 400k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 250k 450k 350k 150k 1200k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP 400k Requested TGLP Station Access programme BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) If available, S106 money from OTHER (please specify) developer schemes may be used to contribute to this programme. Key Delivery Partners: TfL, TGLP, LTGDC, Contractors, Living Streets, Local Access Group and local interest groups. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 247 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority MTS Proposal/ Priority Target areas and MTS policies and proposals: Policy number Area Number (Appendix C) Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability. III 7 4G.Pr12

Improving the working of parking and loading arrangements. IV 7, 9 4G.Pr15 4H.Pr2 Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport network. V 10 3.Pr1 4E.Pr9 4E.Pr13 4F.Pr11 4O.Pr10 4P.Po2 Encourage walking by improving the street environment, conditions VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr7 4I.Pr8 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Pr5 4J.Pr7 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, cycling, bus, train, taxi, car Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 248 Form Number 29 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Summary of Proposal: School Travel Plans / Safe Routes to School Programme.

Location: Borough-wide.

Dates: On-going.

Description of Main Elements: Implement measures to the carriageways and footways around nine schools that are highlighted as barriers to the safe movement of pedestrians/cyclists. Implement measures to facilitate the introduction of walking buses and ‘park and stride’ initiatives (parents use parking spaces provided close to the school and then accompany their children by foot to the school entrance). Detailed consultation exercises with the school communities and local residents. Ongoing appointment of a dedicated officer to work on promotion and development of school travel plans and the associated works. The DfES is providing £17k in 2006/07 and £17k in 2007/08 to part-fund the post of a school travel plan officer. The Council is seeking match funding from TfL. Review safety around 18 schools in order to achieve target of reviewing safety around all schools by 2008 (statutory target 2 - targets for implementation of the Mayor's Transport Strategy).

Beyond 2008/09: The School Travel Plan / Safe Routes to School programme will continue beyond 2008/09 and will require around 200k per year from ‘LIP Funding’ (BSP). FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 107k 180k 373k 350k 1010k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 0 0 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 107k 180k 373k 350k 1010k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) Approved for DfES/DfT funding to employ one 41k 2006/07 and OTHER (please specify) school travel advisor 2007/08 Key Delivery Partners: Schools, TfL, Council Members, police, parents and residents, community groups and emergency services. Dependencies and Risks: Insufficient funding. Staffing shortages. Lack of support for proposals or aspects of proposals.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 249 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving road safety. I 1, 2 4G.Pr7 4G.Pr9 Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 12 4I.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 4I.Pr8 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Po1 4J.Pr5 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Cycling, walking Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive Children and young people

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 250 Form Number 30 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Travel Awareness Programme. Summary of Proposal: To raise awareness of sustainable transport amongst the public and businesses.

Location: Various locations borough-wide.

Dates: On-going.

Description of Main Elements: The Council recognises the need to raise awareness amongst the public and businesses of: • The impacts that their travel choices have on the environment (noise and air pollution, CO2 emissions; congestion, etc.) • How they can reduce the need to travel; and • How they can travel in a more sustainable manner (by using public transport, car-sharing, walking and cycling).

The Council aims to promote travel awareness and to promote the image of car-sharing, public transport, walking and cycling through marketing, events and the production of local travel information. Some events will target specific groups of people such as school children and their parents.

‘Walk to School Weeks’ The Council aims to continue to organise with the support of local schools ‘Walk to School Weeks’ in May and October. In 2006/07 36 out of 49 primary schools have agreed to take part. The Council also aims to continue to monitor the impact of ‘Walk to School Weeks’ by carrying out surveys before, during and after the events. The Council now has data spanning several years. Estimated annual cost of organising ‘Walk to School Weeks’ and monitoring: £25k.

‘Big Green Borough Day’: ‘Big Green Borough Day’ is an annual event that the Council organises during the London Sustainability weeks. The aim of the event is to promote sustainable living including sustainable travel. During the two-day event the public can visit stands, exhibits and take part in activities such as a bike try-out roadshow get a free health check for their bicycle. Estimated annual cost of organising transport related aspect of ‘Big Green Borough Day’: £10k.

General Promotion: Promotion of the ‘Good Going’ and ‘Safer Travel at Night’ campaigns and promotion of car clubs and car sharing. Participation in local events (East London Walking Festival) London-wide or national events such as Good Going Week, European Mobility Week, Bike Week etc. Estimated annual cost of general promotion: £20k. Promotional stalls, advertising, representation at council and community events, events for businesses – estimated cost: £5k.

Travel Information: Updating and printing of the borough’s cycling map – estimated cost: £15k. Updating and printing of self-help packs for the borough’s ‘Just Walk’ Routes – £4k. Design and printing of a walking map of the borough – estimated cost: £15k.

Beyond 2008/09: It is anticipated that beyond 2008/09 funding requirements from BSP/LIP Funding will be at least £60k per year.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 251 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 35k 65k 65k 165k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 5k 5k 5k 15k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 40k 70k 70k 180k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP 0 0 BOROUGH RESOURCES 15 Approved Staff salaries PARTNERS (please specify) 0 0 OTHER (please specify) 0 0 Key Delivery Partners, TfL, local schools, businesses, organisations specialising in promotional activities, voluntary organisations. Dependencies and Risks: Insufficient funding. Staffing shortages. Lack of support for proposals or aspects of proposals.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 252 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability. III 5, 6, 7 4G.Pr12 4H.Pr3 4P.Pr4 Encourage walking. VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 3.Pr4 3.Pr7 4I.Po1 4I.Pr1 4I.Pr2 4P.Pr5 Encourage cycling. VII 13 4J.Po1 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) All modes (Walking, cycling, PTW, bus, rail, car, freight) Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: N/A Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 253 Form Number 31 TGLP / London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Sub Regional Travel Plan Co-ordinators. Summary of Proposal: Continued employment of TGLP Travel Plan Co-ordinators.

Location: London Borough of Barking and Dagenham and TGLP Boroughs.

Dates: Annual programme. TfL FUNDING GUARANTEED TO 2010.

Description of Main Elements: To undertake Travel Plan promotion within the borough and Thames Gateway area. This scheme will comprise the continued employment of the Thames Gateway London Partnership (TGLP) Travel Plan Co-ordinators. At present there are two TGLP Travel Plan Co-ordinators covering workplace travel plans in the TGLP region. One post uses the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham as the lead Borough and the other post uses the London Borough of Havering as the lead borough. This form is for the post based in Barking and Dagenham. The posts are to encourage the development of workplace travel planning within the Thames Gateway, both through the planning process and on a voluntary basis. This element of the budget covers only the salary and associated on-costs. A separate form will be used for the promotional budget. The funding requirements set out in this form are for the post based in Barking and Dagenham only. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 35k 35k 35k 36k 141k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 0 0 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 35k 35k 35k 36k 141k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: Transport for London, TGLP Boroughs, Good Going, London Travelwise, Sustrans, Living Streets, London Cycling Campaign. Dependencies and Risks: Insufficient funding. Staffing shortages. Lack of support for proposals or aspects of proposals.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 254 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability. III 5, 6, 7 4G.Pr12 4H.Pr3 4P.Pr4 Encourage walking. VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 3.Pr4 3.Pr7 4I.Po1 4I.Pr2 4P.Pr5 Encourage cycling. VII 13 4J.Po1 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, cycling, bus, rail, car-sharing Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: N/A Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 255 Form Number 32 TGLP / London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Summary of Proposal: Promotional Budget for Sub-Regional Travel Plan Co-ordinators.

Location: London Borough of Barking and Dagenham and TGLP Boroughs.

Dates: Annual programme. TfL FUNDING GUARANTEED TO 2010.

Description of Main Elements: To undertake Travel Plan promotion within the borough and Thames Gateway area. This scheme will comprise the spending budget of the Thames Gateway London Partnership (TGLP) Travel Plan promotional budget. At present there are two TGLP Travel Plan Co-ordinators covering workplace travel plans in the TGLP region. One post uses the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham as the lead Borough and the other post uses the London Borough of Havering as the lead borough. This form is for the post based in Barking and Dagenham. The post is to encourage the development of workplace travel planning within the Thames Gateway, both through the planning process and on a voluntary basis. This element of the budget covers the promotional campaigns to be undertaken as follows: • Good Going Week – Worth the Walk type Event, Possibly St Katharine’s Dock, or Trafalgar Square. This will be largely a public event, however businesses will be invited for teams of staff to take part in the event, and the stalls at the event will be promoting Travel Planning. • Workplace Travel Initiatives – Working with existing Travel Plans, such as Barking, Havering and Redbridge NHS Trust, Ford, B&Q on cycle to work days, Travel Plan promotion and enhancement of car sharing scheme. • New workplace Travel Plans, budget to promote new Travel Plans, for events such as Chamber of Commerce, Tower Hamlets, Newham and Hackney and working with the LDA and other business agencies. • Workplace Travel Plan Grants – Budget set aside for Grants of £1,000 (to be match funded by organisation), this is to be confirmed by TfL, as discussed at the Sub Regional Co-ordinators Meeting. • General Budget – For general events, promotions, advertising, new initiatives, training, Open University Travel Plan Course etc. • Promotion and development of Travel Plan Toolkit. Please note, that this will be independent and will not be further using consultants. • Thames Gateway Travel Planning Conference.

The funding requirements set out in this form cover only the promotional budget of the Travel Plan Co-ordinator based in Barking and Dagenham. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 15k 20k 22k 22k 79k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 0 0 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 15k 20k 20k 22k 79k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify)

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 256 Key Delivery Partners: Transport for London, TGLP Boroughs, Good Going, London Travelwise, Sustrans, Living Streets, London Cycling Campaign. Dependencies and Risks: Insufficient funding. Staffing shortages. Lack of support for proposals or aspects of proposals. Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability. III 5, 6, 7 4G.Pr12 4H.Pr3 4P.Pr4 Encourage walking. VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 3.Pr4 3.Pr7 4I.Po1 4I.Pr2 4P.Pr5 Encourage cycling. VII 13 4J.Po1 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, cycling, bus, rail, car-sharing Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: N/A Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 257 Form Number 33 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Workplace Travel Plans. Summary of Proposal: To develop and implement workplace travel plans in the borough.

Location: Borough-wide.

Dates: On-going.

Description of Main Elements: Council Workplace Travel Plan: The Council is the largest employer in Barking and Dagenham, employing around 8,000 staff. The Council aims to produce a workplace travel plan for its staff in order to increase the number of staff using more sustainable modes of transport (car-sharing, public transport, walking, cycling) and to reduce unnecessary travel. To develop the plan will cost around £15k. To implement and monitor the plan will cost around £27.5k.

Promoting and Supporting Workplace Travel Plans: The Council will require that workplace travel plans be prepared for new employment developments above a certain size. The Council will seek to encourage the voluntary uptake of workplace travel plans by existing local businesses, by providing advice and by promoting workplace travel plans through publicity and events – estimated cost per year: £15k. The Council will also seek to support businesses that are developing or implementing a workplace travel plan by using a variety of measures, which could include: • Producing travel information aimed at people working in the borough – estimated cost: £10k; • Organising training relating to developing and implementing a workplace travel plan – estimated cost to be confirmed; • Helping to set up a Transport Management Association (TMA), which could take a lead role in helping businesses to develop and implement workplace travel plans (including plans covering several businesses) and developing partnerships with public transport providers – estimated cost to be confirmed; • Providing incentives to businesses such as facilities for pedestrians and cyclists and parking bays for car- sharers – estimated cost to be confirmed.

Beyond 2008/09: It is anticipated that the Council will need to spend: • Around £22.5 per year to run and monitor its Workplace Travel Plan (to be funded from Council’s resources); • At least £10k per year to promote workplace travel plans (from ‘LIP Funding’/BSP).

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 258 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) 15k N/A 10k 10k 35k FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP (approved) FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 5k 17.5 22.5 45k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 20k 27.5 32.5 80k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP 0 0 5k towards costs of staff survey in 45k Approved BOROUGH RESOURCES 2006/07. PARTNERS (please specify) 0 0 OTHER (please specify) 0 0 Key Delivery Partners: TfL, Council Officers and Members, local businesses, public transport providers. Dependencies and Risks: Lack of funding. Lack of support for proposals or aspects of proposals. Staff shortages.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 259 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability. III 5, 6, 7 4G.Pr12 4H.Pr3 4P.Pr4 Encourage walking. VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 3.Pr4 3.Pr7 4I.Po1 4I.Pr2 4P.Pr5 Encourage cycling. VII 13 4J.Po1 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) All modes (Walking, cycling, PTW, bus, rail, car, freight) Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Neutral Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: N/A Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 260 Form Number 34 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Walking. Summary of Proposal: To develop and implement a Walking Strategy for Barking and Dagenham.

Location: Borough-wide. Annual programme expected to continue beyond the LIP planning cycle of 2006 – Dates: 2011.

Description of Main Elements: Development of Walking Strategy: The Walking Strategy will set out what needs to be done to improve conditions for pedestrians and to encourage people to walk more. The strategy will also set local targets out how progress in achieving these aims will be monitored. The strategy will provide a structured approach to walking and will support the Walking Plan for London, produced by the Mayor of London. It is proposed to develop the strategy in 2007/08 subject to the availability of funding. Estimated cost to develop the strategy: £15k.

Walking Proposals: The Walking Strategy will provide a framework for all council initiatives in relation to walking. Current and future initiatives include: • Street audits for areas with a poor pedestrian environment – £80k • Walking audits of highway and traffic schemes • Providing wayfinding signs and panels at key locations in the borough (funding and details are set out in Proposal Form 22) • Producing a printed walking map aimed at residents, visitors and businesses – see Proposal Form 30 • Updating information packs for the public on the borough’s ‘Just Walk’ Routes (£4k of Travel Awareness funds to be used in 2006/07) – see Proposal Form 30 • Organising campaigns and events to promote and encourage walking (funding and other details are set out in Proposal Form 30) • Carrying out engineering works (footway works, removal of street clutter, traffic calming, works to pedestrian crossings and footbridges etc.) – covered under council programmes for town centres, local area accessibility, local safety schemes and 20mph zones • Introducing pedestrian phasing at signalised junctions and reviewing pedestrian crossings • Creating new walking routes linking to key facilities and green spaces.

The Council’s programmes for street lighting, street cleaning, community safety (including CCTV cameras), parks and leisure (supporting the ‘Walking the Way to Health’ initiative) will also contribute to the delivery of the Walking Strategy and improvements for pedestrians. The Council will seek funding from TfL to implement pedestrian improvements in Dagenham Heathway (see Proposal Form T8) and Barking Town Centre (see Proposal Form T7), which it considers as priorities for improvement. Both town centres have high levels of footfall due to the presence of shops, services, train stations and bus stops. Walking in the town centres is made difficult by physical barriers (busy roads, railings, etc.) and street clutter, congestion on footways and crossings, and the poor state of some footways. By creating better conditions for pedestrians, the Council aims to encourage more walking and to support regeneration.

Beyond 2008/09: It is anticipated that beyond 2008/09 funding requirements from BSP/LIP Funding will be around £150k per year.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 261 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP n/a 0 10k 150k 160k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES n/a 48k 120k 20k 188k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED n/a 48k 130k 170k 348k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES 188k Requested PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: Contractors, TfL, Living Streets, Thames Gateway London Partnership, local interest groups, LTGDC. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 262 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability III 7 4G.Pr12 by encouraging modal shift. Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Pr1 network. 4I.Pr9 4P.Pr5 Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 4I.Po1 4I.Pr1 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr3 4I.Pr4 4I.Pr6 4I.Pr7 4I.Pr8 4I.Pr10 The Walking Strategy will also support the Walking Plan for London, the Mayor’s Air Quality and Noise Strategies, the Public Health White Paper “Choosing Health” and the Council’s Local Area Agreement “Building Communities – Transforming Lives”. Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 263 Form Number 35 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Summary of Proposal: Rights of Way Improvement Plan.

Location: Borough-wide.

Dates: 2006-2007.

Description of Main Elements: The Rights of Way Improvement Plan (RoWIP) provisions in sections 60 to 62 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 came into force from November 2002. The legislation introduced an obligation on all local authorities in England to prepare and publish RoWIPs within five years (November 2007) of the commencement of this section. This obligation does not apply to the council of an inner London borough or the Common Council of the City of London unless by resolution they adopt sections 60 to 61 of the Act. In drawing up the plan, authorities are required to: assess the extent to which local rights of way meet the present and likely future needs of the public; the opportunities provided by local rights of way (and in particular by footpaths, cycle tracks, bridleways and restricted byways) for exercise and other forms of open-air recreation and the enjoyment of their area; the accessibility of local rights of way to blind or partially sighted persons and others with mobility problems; and such other matters relating to local rights of way as the Secretary of State may direct (section 60(1)-(2)). It is a requirement of the legislation that a RoWIP must contain: • The Highway Authority's assessment of: - the extent to which local rights of way meet the present and likely future needs of the public - the opportunities provided by local RoWs for exercise, open air recreation and enjoyment of the area - the accessibility of local RoWs to those who are blind or partially sighted or who have other mobility problems - such other matters as the Secretary of State may direct. • A statement of the action the Authority proposes to take: - for the management of local RoWs - for securing an improved network of local RoWs - such other matters as Secretary of State may direct. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 0 0 0 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 0 10k 0 10k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 0 10k 0 10k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: DEFRA, Countryside Agency, TfL, and neighbouring boroughs.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 264 Dependencies and Risks: Insufficient funding. Staffing shortages. Lack of support for proposals or aspects of proposals. Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Po9 network. 3.Pr1 4O.Pr10 Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr5 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr8 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Po1 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, cycling, horse riding Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 265 Form Number 36 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM 20 Mph Zones. Summary of Proposal: Introduction of 20 mph zones to reduce speeds and volume of traffic.

Location: Borough-wide.

Dates: On-going.

Description of Main Elements: The Council proposes to introduce additional 20 mph zones in order to reduce vehicle speeds, traffic volumes and ‘rat-running’. The expected benefits are: • A reduction in the number and severity of road accident casualties • Safer streets including around schools • Streets that are more pedestrian and cyclist friendly • A reduction in rat-running • A reduction in noise and air pollution (providing motorists drive sensibly).

In the 20 mph zones the Council will introduce traffic management measures and traffic calming features in order to reduce vehicle speeds towards 20 mph and gain the support of the Police. Area perimeters will be highlighted to ensure that drivers consider the area as a residential area and drive more slowly and carefully. Traffic volumes will be reduced by making convenient rat-running routes less attractive to through traffic. Consultation with the community will be essential to ensure that the design requirements are sympathetic with the nature of the area and the aspirations of the community. Due to the varying nature of the sites, there will be a need for site specific intervention measures (such as speed control and pedestrian facilities) to counter the likelihood of accidents and the severity of accidents that continue to occur. The Council will seek to improve conditions for pedestrians and cyclists – with particular regard for vulnerable and disabled people in order to reduce and remove barriers to safe and convenient travel by all members of the community. This could include highlighting crossing points and where necessary introducing controlled crossing points. The proposed 2007/08 programme for 20mph zones will cover the following areas: • Langley Crescent Area - £45,000 • Manor Road (Dagenham) Area - £55,000 • Bell Farm Avenue Area - £45,000 • Geneva Gardens Area - £45,000 • Cambell School area - £60,000

Beyond 2008/09: The Council will continue to introduce 20 mph zones and will require from ‘LIP Funding’/BSP £270k in 2009/10 and £310k in 2010/11.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 266 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 210k 165k 250k 270k 895k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 0 0 TBD TBD TBD (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 210k 165k 250k 270k 895k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: Council members, police, residents, community groups and emergency services, TfL. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements. Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving road safety I 1 4G.Pr9 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, cycling Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 267 Large Capital Proposals

See Forms 37 – 49, overleaf)

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 268 Form Number 37 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM City to Sea Pedestrian and Cycle Routes. Summary of Proposal: To implement through Barking and Dagenham a section of the Thames Path City to Sea. From and connecting the west borough boundary with Newham at Barking Creek flood Location: defence to the east borough boundary with Havering along the River Thames.

Dates: 2007 – 2011.

Description of Main Elements: The City to Sea walking and cycling initiative is a priority green corridor connectivity project identified in the East London Green Grid, the Barking and Dagenham Parks & Green Spaces Strategy and the Barking and Dagenham Urban Design Framework/Landscape Framework Plan. It also contributes toward the Mayor of London’s London Plan and the Department for Communities and Local Government’s (DCLG’s), formerly the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister’s (ODPM’s), Greening the Gateway Implementation Plan. Barking and Dagenham sit on the Thames Chase, Ingrebourne, Beam Green Grid strategic sub-area steering group, with London Borough of Havering, Thames Gateway London Partnership (TGLP) and Thames Chase. Barking and Dagenham also sit on the Urban Development Corporation (UDC) Green Grid and Roding Valley steering groups. The section of the route within Barking and Dagenham is 5,000m in length and provides vital east-west connectivity across the borough. The route will provide not only east-west walking and cycling opportunities connecting London to the sea, but will connect to other transport systems both within the borough and cross- boundary to Havering, Redbridge, Newham and beyond. The City to Sea routes will also provide connections to other long-distance recreational routes such as the Capital Ring, London Outer Path (LOOP), the LEE VALLEY path (Sustrans Route 1), the Ingrebourne Valley Greenway, Mardyke Way, Thames Chase Forest Circle, the Beam Valley (Collier Row to River Thames), the Roding Valley Way and the North East Thames Cycle Route (Sustrans Route 13). In addition to this, the routes would be a vital connection between the UDC/London Riverside regeneration and Green Grid strategic sub area, the Beam, Ingrebourne, Thames Chase Green Grid strategic sub-area and the Roding Valley strategic sub-area. The route will provide a strategic coherence for a number of cycle schemes which have previously been promoted at the local level and aim to encourage cycling for short-distance commuting and personal trips between residential, employment, Universities, Colleges and retail areas and for long-distances recreational travel. The routes will also extend the length of footpaths available for the Council’s Healthy Walking Routes programme (‘Just Walk Routes’). Costs have been established as follows: • Length of circa 5,000m x £210/m for newly constructed segregated cycling and walking route = £1.05m. • All figures contain fees, preliminaries, contingencies and inflation.

Beyond 2008/09: The project is likely to continue beyond 2008/09 especially if agreement has not been reached on a route alignment. If the design and implementation is help up, the funding requirements given for 2007/08 and 2008/09 are likely to be needed instead for 2009/10 and 2010/11 (costs will need to be adjusted for inflation).

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 269 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 0 0 0 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 0 505k 500k 1,005k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 0 505k 505k 1,005k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TfL’s Green Cycle Corridor 1,005k Requested TFL OUTSIDE BSP Programme BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) If available, S106 money from OTHER (please specify) developer schemes may be used to contribute to this programme. Key Delivery Partners: Thames Gateway London Partnership, London Borough of Havering, London Borough of Newham, London Borough of Redbridge, TfL, the GLA, the UDC/London Riverside and local interest groups. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements. Lack of support for proposals or aspects of proposals. Land ownership issues in London Riverside.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 270 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral priority Priority Target MTS Proposal/ areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving road safety. I 1 4I.Pr2 4J.Po1 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability by III 7 4G.Pr12 encouraging modal shift. Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Pr1 network. Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 3.Pr5 4I.Po1 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr6 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Po1 4J.Pr5 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, cycling Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 271 Form Number 38 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Beam Valley (Collier Row to the River Thames) Pedestrian and Cycle Routes. Summary of Proposal: To provide pedestrian and cycle routes along the Beam Valley. From the River Thames along the Beam Valley, through Eastbrookend Country Park, Location: through Central Park and through other green spaces and Green Belt land to the northern borough boundary at Collier Row.

Dates: 2006 – 2011.

Description of Main Elements: The Beam Valley (Collier Row to River Thames) walking and cycling initiative is a key green corridor connectivity project identified in the East London Green Grid, the Barking and Dagenham Parks & Green Spaces Strategy and the Barking and Dagenham Urban Design Framework/Landscape Framework Plan. It also contributes toward the Mayor of London’s London Plan and the Department for Communities and Local Government’s (DCLG’s), formerly the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister’s (ODPM’s), Greening the Gateway Implementation Plan. Barking and Dagenham sit on the Thames Chase, Ingrebourne, Beam Green Grid strategic sub-area steering group, with London Borough Havering, Thames Gateway London Partnership (TGLP) and Thames Chase. Barking and Dagenham also sit on the Urban Development Corporation (UDC) Green Grid and Roding Valley steering groups. The route is 10,500m in length and provides vital connectivity to and across man-made barriers, including the A12, the A13, the A1306 and rail networks that cut east-west across the borough. Approximately 40% of the route will be completely new construction, with the remaining 60% being adaptations to existing. Some bridge work is allowed for, including adaptations to existing plus new-build. The routes will provide a north-south connection across the borough and will connect to the River Thames. They will also connect to the east-west transport network that provides connections across Barking and Dagenham and on into the neighbouring boroughs of Havering and Redbridge. The route will provide a strategic coherence for a number of cycle schemes which have previously been promoted at the local level and aim to encourage cycling for short-distance commuting and personal trips between residential, employment, Universities, Colleges and retail areas and for long-distances recreational travel. The Beam Valley (Collier Row to River Thames) will also be a footpath route and will link other strategic routes such as the Capital Ring, London Outer Path (LOOP) and the LEE VALLEY path (Sustrans Route 1). Ingrebourne Valley Greenway, Mardyke Way, Thames Chase Forest Circle, the Roding Valley Way and City to Sea. In addition to this, the route would be a vital connection between the UDC/London Riverside regeneration and Green Grid strategic sub-area and the Beam, Ingrebourne, Thames Chase Green Grid strategic sub-area. The total estimated cost of the scheme is in the region of £2.63m, as follows: • Total length of circa 10,500m, of which 40% (4,200m) is new construction @ £140/m for segregated cycle and walking lanes separated by a planting strip with crossing points, and 60% (6,300m) is adaptations to existing provision. 4,200 x £210 = £882k. 6,300 x £39 = £245,700. Sub total: £71,127,700. • £1m (estimate) for a significant new bridge, plus 5 x £100k for amendments to existing bridges. • Grand Total: £2,627,700.

Achievable works within the period to the end of 2009 is £657k, representing 25%. All figures contain fees, preliminaries, contingencies and inflation.

Beyond 2008/09: Completion of route. The remaining 75% of the overall cost (£2,627,700) will need to be funded.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 272 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 0 0 0 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 0 300k 357k 657k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 0 300k 357k 657k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP Council capital has been BOROUGH RESOURCES prioritised toward park-specific improvements. PARTNERS (please specify) If available, S106 money from OTHER (please specify) developer schemes may be used to contribute to this programme. Key Delivery Partners: Thames Gateway London Partnership, Thames Chase, London Borough of Havering, TfL, the GLA, the UDC/London Riverside and local interest groups. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements. Lack of support for proposals or aspects of proposals. Land ownership issues in UDC regeneration area. Land ownership issues in Green Belt.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 273 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral MTS Proposal/ Priority Target priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Policy number Area Number (Appendix C) Improving road safety. I 1 4I.Pr2 4J.Po1 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time III 7 4G.Pr12 reliability by encouraging modal shift. Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Pr1 network. Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 3.Pr5 4I.Po1 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr6 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Po1 4J.Pr5 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walk, cycle Positive

Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/A) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 274 Form Number 39 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Castle Green to River Thames Pedestrian and Cycle Routes. Summary of Proposal: To provide pedestrian and cycle routes linking Castle Green to the River Thames. From Castle Green park, crossing and linking to the barriers presented by the A13 and Location: the rail networks, through Barking Riverside to the River Thames.

Dates: 2007-2011.

Description of Main Elements: The Castle Green to River Thames walking and cycling initiative is a priority green corridor connectivity project identified in the East London Green Grid, the Barking and Dagenham Parks & Green Spaces Strategy and the Barking and Dagenham Urban Design Framework/Landscape Framework Plan. It also contributes toward the Mayor of London’s London Plan and the Department for Communities and Local Government’s (DCLG’s), formerly the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister’s (ODPM’s), Greening the Gateway Implementation Plan. The route is 2,500m in length and provides vital north-south connectivity between the River Thames and the borough’s green spaces. The route will provide not only north-south walking and cycling opportunities connecting the borough to the Thames, but will connect to other transport systems both within the borough and cross-boundary to Havering, Redbridge, Newham and beyond. The routes will provide a strategic coherence for a number of cycle schemes which have previously been promoted at the local level and aim to encourage cycling for short-distance commuting and personal trips between residential, employment, Universities, Colleges and retail areas and for long-distances recreational travel. The routes will also extend the length of footpaths available for the Council’s Healthy Walking Routes programme (‘Just Walk Routes’). The Cycling in Parks routes will also be footpath routes and will link other strategic routes such as the Capital Ring, London Outer Path (LOOP) and the LEE VALLEY path (Sustrans Route 1). Ingrebourne Valley Greenway, Mardyke Way, Thames Chase Forest Circle, the Beam Valley (Collier Row to River Thames), City to Sea and the Roding Valley Way. In addition to this, the routes would be a vital connection between the Urban Development Corporation (UDC)/London Riverside regeneration and Green Grid strategic sub area, the Beam, Ingrebourne, Thames Chase Green Grid strategic sub-area and the Roding Valley strategic sub-area. Length of circa 2,500m x £210/m for new construction of segregated cycling and walking route = £525k. Achievable elements within period to 2009 could be anywhere from £350k to £10,350,000. Opted only to include the £525k at this stage. All figures contain fees, preliminaries, contingencies and inflation.

Beyond 2008/09: ‘Green’ bridges across the A13 and the rail systems could cost in the region of £10m to £50m.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 275 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 0 0 0 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 150k 150k 225k 525k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 150k 150k 225k 525k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TfL’s Green Cycle Corridor 525k Requested TFL OUTSIDE BSP Programme Council capital has been BOROUGH RESOURCES prioritised toward park-specific improvements. LBBD sit on the Thames Chase, Ingrebourne, Beam Green Grid strategic sub area steering group, PARTNERS (please specify) with LB Havering, TGLP and Thames Chase. LBBD also sit on the UDC Green Grid and Roding Valley steering groups. If available, S106 money from OTHER (please specify) developer schemes may be used to contribute to this programme. Key Delivery Partners: Thames Gateway London Partnership, London Borough of Havering, London Borough of Newham, London Borough of Redbridge, TfL, the GLA, the UDC/London Riverside and local interest groups. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements. Land ownership issues in London Riverside.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 276 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving road safety. I 1 4I.Pr2 4J.Po1 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability III 7 4G.Pr12 by encouraging modal shift. Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Pr1 network. Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 3.Pr5 4I.Po1 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr6 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Po1 4J.Pr5 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walk, cycle Positive Bus, rail, car, freight, PTW Neutral Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/A) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 277 Form Number 40 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Roding Valley Way Pedestrian and Cycle Routes. Summary of Proposal: Completion of Roding Valley Way Cycle Route and Footpath through Barking and Dagenham. From the River Thames at the Barking Creek flood defence to Fresh Wharf Road, Location: connecting the City to Sea walking and cycling route to the Roding Valley Way. Annual programme expected to continue beyond the LIP planning cycle of 2006 – Dates: 2010.

Description of Main Elements: The Roding Valley Way walking and cycling initiative is a key green corridor connectivity project identified in the East London Green Grid, the Barking and Dagenham Parks & Green Spaces Strategy and the Barking and Dagenham Urban Design Framework/Landscape Framework Plan. It also contributes toward the Mayor of London’s London Plan and the Department for Communities and Local Government’s (DCLG’s), formerly the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister’s (ODPM’s), Greening the Gateway Implementation Plan. The route is 3,000m in length and provides vital north-south links connecting the River Thames along key green corridors identified in the East London Green Grid. The route will provide not only north-south walking and cycling opportunities connecting Essex to the Thames, but will provide connections to the Olympics sites and connect to other transport systems both cross-borough-boundary and within the borough and beyond. The route will provide a strategic coherence for a number of cycle schemes which have previously been promoted at the local level and aim to encourage cycling for short-distance commuting and personal trips between residential, employment, Universities, Colleges and retail areas and for long-distances recreational travel. The routes will also extend the length of footpaths available for the Council’s Healthy Walking Routes programme (‘Just Walk Routes’). The Roding Valley Way route will also be a footpath route and will link other strategic routes such as the Capital Ring, London Outer Path (LOOP) and the LEE VALLEY path (Sustrans Route 1). Ingrebourne Valley Greenway, Mardyke Way, Thames Chase Forest Circle, the Beam Valley (Collier Row to River Thames) and City to Sea. In addition to this, the route would be a vital connection between the Urban Development Corporation (UDC)/London Riverside regeneration and Green Grid strategic sub-area and the Roding Valley Green Grid strategic sub-area. Costs have been established as follows: • Length of circa 3,000m x £210/m newly constructed segregated cycling and walking route = £630k. • £100k for work to overcome barriers, e.g. bridges etc. • Total: £730k.

All figures contain fees, preliminaries, contingencies and inflation.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 278 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 0 0 0 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 240k 0 0 0 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 240k 0 0 240k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TfL’s Green Cycle Corridors 240k Approved TFL OUTSIDE BSP Programme BOROUGH RESOURCES LBBD sit on the UDC Green Grid PARTNERS (please specify) and Roding Valley steering groups. If available, S106 money from OTHER (please specify) developer schemes may be used to contribute to this programme. Key Delivery Partners: Thames Gateway London Partnership, London Borough of Newham, London Borough of Redbridge, TfL, the GLA, the UDC/London Riverside and local interest groups. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Land ownership issues in UDC regeneration area.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 279 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving road safety. I 1 4I.Pr2 4J.Po1 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time III 7 4G.Pr12 reliability by encouraging modal shift. Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Pr1 network. Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 3.Pr5 4I.Po1 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr6 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Po1 4J.Pr5 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, cycling, bus, rail Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/A) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 280 Form Number 41 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Dagenham Spine Pedestrian and Cycle Route – Section of TGLP North East Summary of Proposal: Thames Cycle Route (NETCR). To build a key section of the TGLP NETCR through Dagenham. From Dagenham Dock Station / Chequers Lane, Breach Lane, Fords The Vale, Kent Avenue, Thames Avenue, A13, Marsh Way Interchange and connects directly into the Location: proposed cycle and pedestrian route linking the A1306 to CEME and across the borough boundary with Havering.

Dates: 2007 – 2010.

Description of Main Elements: The Dagenham Spine will connect Dagenham Dock Station / Chequers Lane to the borough boundary with Havering. It will form a key link in the Thames Gateway London Partnership (TGLP) North East Thames Cycle Route (NETCR), connecting Tower Gateway in Tower Hamlets and Purfleet in Thurrock. Proposal Form 71 sets out proposals in relation to the section of the NETCR between Alfreds Way A13 to Dagenham Dock Station / Chequers Lane. The NETCR forms part of the National Cycle Network (Route 13) and also the developing Green Grid Network for the Thames Gateway. The route will provide a strategic coherence for a number of cycle schemes which have previously been promoted at the local level and aim to encourage cycling for short-distance commuting and personal trips between residential, employment, Universities, Colleges and retail areas and for long-distances recreational travel. The NETCR will also be a footpath route and will link other strategic routes such as the Capital Ring, London Outer Path (LOOP) and the LEE VALLEY path (Sustrans Route 1). Ingrebourne Valley Greenway, Mardyke Way and Thames Chase Forest Circle. The Dagenham Spine will connect to other cycle and pedestrian routes in Dagenham Dock, where an estimated 4,000 new jobs will be created. The Council has secured £3m from the Department for Communities and Local Government's Sustainable Communities Fund to create an interchange at Dagenham Dock Station. The Council has worked with the London Development Agency to secure £5m from the Department for Communities and Local Government's Sustainable Communities Fund and a further £2.5m from the European Union's European Regional Development Fund to carry out infrastructure works in Dagenham Dock. The £10m project is to be carried out in two phases and will result in a reconstructed Chequers Lane with new drainage, services, footpaths on both sides and a cycleway. The work is due for completion in 2006 whilst a planning application for the second phase of the infrastructure project is expected in Summer 2006.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 281 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 0 149K 375k TBD 524k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 200k TBD TBD TBD 200k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 200k 149k 375k TBD 724k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) 200k Approved S106 agreement Key Delivery Partners: TGLP, TfL Cycling Centre of Excellence, London Development Agency, London Riverside Action Group, London Thames Gateway Urban Development Corporation, local interest groups. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Staffing shortages. Insufficient funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 282 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving road safety. I 1 4G.Pr7 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time III 5, 6, 7 4G.Pr12 reliability by encouraging modal shift. Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Pr1 network. Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 3.Pr5 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr6 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Pr1 4J.Pr8 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walk, cycle, rail (opportunity for multi-mode trips using Positive Dagenham Dock station) Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/A) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (pleas specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 283 Form Number 42 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM TGLP North East Thames Cycle Route (NETCR) – Section from A13 Alfreds Way Summary of Proposal: to Dagenham Dock Station. To build a section of the NETCR through Barking and Dagenham. From Alfreds Way A13 via Movers Lane, River Road, Bastable Avenue and Renwick Location: Road to Dagenham Dock Station / Chequers Lane.

Dates: 2006 – 2009.

Description of Main Elements: The North East Thames Cycle Route (NETCR) is a cross-boundary project, 40km in length between Greenwich, Tower Gateway in Tower Hamlets and Purfleet in Thurrock, crossing five Thames Gateway London Partnership (TGLP) Boroughs with onward connections to South Essex. The route forms part of the National Cycle Network (Route 13) and also the developing Green Grid Network for the Thames Gateway. The route will provide a strategic coherence for a number of cycle schemes which have previously been promoted at the local level and aim to encourage cycling for short-distance commuting and personal trips between residential, employment, Universities, Colleges and retail areas and for long-distances recreational travel. The NETCR will serve as an east-west companion scheme to the north-south Roding Valley Way currently being implemented by TGLP through Redbridge, Newham and Barking and Dagenham. It will form an important link within the National Cycle Network (NCN) and complementary scheme to the LCN+. The NETCR will also be a footpath and will link strategic footpath routes such as the Capital Ring, London Outer Orbital path (LOOP), Ingrebourne Valley Greenway, Mardyke Way, Thames Chase Forest Circle and the Lee Valley Path (Sustrans Route 1). Within the catchment area, the scheme will integrate with proposals for Phase 1 of East London Transit (e.g. at Dagenham Dock or through Barking Reach). It will also link to the Thames Gateway Bridge which, when completed, will provide a route for pedestrians and cyclists to cross the Thames to Thamesmead, Belvedere and Woolwich. The NETCR was first proposed by Sustrans as part of the NCN in 1999 when a route plan was published, partly based on existing proposals. To date, whilst major progress has been made in Tower Hamlets and Newham, there has been little progress in realising the strategic significance of the route or in achieving cycle access east of the River Roding. This has been due to a number of reasons, including lack of finance, reliance on lengthy and difficult negotiations with developers for some sections and lack of a strong “route champion” to progress the project. It is intended to speed up the delivery of the NETCR.

Beyond 2008/09: Funding requirements from ‘LIP Funding’/BSP will be in the order of £100k for 2009/10. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 284 TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 270k 275k 545k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 55k TBD TBD 55k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 55k 270K 275K 600k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TfL’s Green Cycle Corridor 55k Approved TFL OUTSIDE BSP Programme BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) If available, S106 money from OTHER (please specify) developer schemes may be used to contribute to this programme. Key Delivery Partners: The NETCR will be progressed by a single Steering Group comprising the four Boroughs of Tower Hamlets, Newham, Barking and Dagenham and Havering, the Partnership itself and Sustrans. The TfL Cycling Centre of Excellence, Mayor’s Architecture and Urbanism Unit and Environment Agency will also be invited to participate. It is proposed that a single project management structure, headed by a “Route Champion” will be put in place to secure delivery of the whole project, a model applied successfully for the Roding Valley Way, also being funded by TfL. Other key delivery partners: London Riverside Action Group, London Thames Gateway Urban Development Corporation, local interest groups. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Staffing shortages. Insufficient funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 285 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving road safety. I 1 4G.Pr7 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time III 5, 6, 7 4G.Pr12 reliability by encouraging modal shift. Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Pr1 network. Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 3.Pr5 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr6 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Pr1 4J.Pr8 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walk, cycle, rail (opportunity for multi-mode trips using Positive Dagenham Dock station) Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/A) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 286 Form Number 43 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Tree-lined Streets. Summary of Proposal: To provide an interconnected network of tree-lined streets.

Location: Borough-wide.

Annual programme expected to continue beyond the LIP planning cycle of 2006 – Dates: 2010.

Description of Main Elements: The Green Corridors walking and cycling initiative is an interconnected network of tree-lined streets which will provide informal walking and cycling opportunities at a local level, ensuring that people can get from A to B, whether it be from park to park, from the shops to the health centre or school etc, via tree-lined streets. This green connectivity project is identified in the East London Green Grid, the Barking and Dagenham Parks & Green Spaces Strategy and the Barking and Dagenham Urban Design Framework/Landscape Framework Plan. It also contributes toward the Mayor of London’s London Plan and the Department for Communities and Local Government’s (DCLG’s), formerly the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister’s (ODPM’s), Greening the Gateway Implementation Plan. The combined routes are 104,000m in length and provide vital connectivity between all of the boroughs parks and green spaces, wildlife corridors and transport infrastructure. The routes will provide a ‘green’ alternative route to any destination, taking in important leisure, heritage and other features and linking to the borough’s Healthy Walking routes. Two types of tree-lined streets are proposed: Strategic tree-lined streets which line the main arterial routes through the borough, and local tree-lined streets, which line the residential areas. In total the scheme will cost in the region of £20.6m which will be delivered by 2020. The routes will provide a strategic coherence for a number of cycle and walking schemes which have previously been promoted at the local level and aim to encourage cycling for short-distance commuting and personal trips between residential, employment, Universities, Colleges and retail areas and for long-distances recreational travel. The Green Corridor routes will also be footpath routes and will link other strategic routes such as the Capital Ring, London Outer Path (LOOP) and the Lee Valley path (Sustrans Route 1). Ingrebourne Valley Greenway, Mardyke Way, Thames Chase Forest Circle, the Beam Valley (Collier Row to River Thames), City to Sea and the Roding Valley Way. In addition to this, the routes would be a vital connection between the Urban Development Corporation (UDC)/London Riverside regeneration and Green Grid strategic sub area, the Beam, Ingrebourne, Thames Chase Green Grid strategic sub-area and the Roding Valley strategic sub area. Costs have been established as follows: • Proposed strategic tree-lined streets: 44,912m x £480/m = £21.558m • Proposed local tree-lined streets: 58,938m x £158/m = £9.312 • Total proposed tree lined streets: 103,850m = £30.87m

All figures contain fees, preliminaries, contingencies and inflation Achievable by 2009: 5% = approx £1m

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 287 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 0 0 0 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 0 500k 500k 1,000k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 0 500k 500k 1,000k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) If available, S106 money from OTHER (please specify) developer schemes may be used to contribute to this programme. Key Delivery Partners: Thames Gateway London Partnership, London Borough of Havering, London Borough of Newham, London Borough of Redbridge, TfL, the GLA, the UDC/London Riverside and local interest groups. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements. Land ownership issues in the UDC regeneration area.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 288 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving road safety. I 1 4I.Pr2 4J.Po1 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability III 7 4G.Pr12 by encouraging modal shift. Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Pr1 network. Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 3.Pr5 4I.Po1 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr6 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Po1 4J.Pr5 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walk, cycle, bus, rail (pedestrian and cycle connections to University, Barking College, Rail Stations/London Underground Positive and Dagenham Dock Station would provide an opportunity for multi-mode trips) PTW, car, freight Neutral Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 289 Form Number 44 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Barking Town Centre Movement Strategy. Implementation of Barking Town Centre Movement Strategy. This identifies a Summary of Proposal: programme of interrelated projects that seeks to ensure a co-ordinated approach is taken to improving the movement of people and all forms of transport, as part of Barking Town Centre’s Regeneration Programme.

Location: Barking Town Centre.

Dates: 2007 – 2010.

Description of Main Elements: Barking Town Centre acts as a focal point for everyday activities such as work and shopping and is also an important transport hub. Cars, lorries, buses, taxis, cyclists and pedestrians all use the town centre and all suffer varying degrees of delay. Although parts of the town centre were pedestrianised a number of years ago there are a number of factors that make walking unpleasant or difficult in the town centre, such as severance from the surrounding residential areas caused by the inner ring road and the railway lines; crowded footways; street clutter; disjointed streets; and fear of crime. The principal aims of the Barking Town Centre Movement Strategy are: • Creating good pedestrian routes around Barking Town Centre, adding to its vitality and ensuring full integration of the regeneration sites; • Improving the attractiveness of streets and emphasising the function of streets as social spaces; in line with the ‘Streets-for-People’ concept (refer to 4G.Pr10 in ‘Mayor’s Transport Strategy’); • Facilitating high quality public transport access and connections especially in and around Barking Station and in relation to East London Transit (ELT) Phase 1A; • Helping to redress the balance between vehicles and pedestrians on roads that are currently car dominated or perceived unsafe; • Keeping through-traffic on the major routes of the Northern Relief Road, A406 and A13; and • Improving for all users key junctions in the town centre.

The Movement Strategy identifies a programme of works for the next 15 years across Barking Town Centre that will involve: • Redesigning junctions to make them pedestrian and cyclist friendly and improving vehicular movement around the town centre; • Improving the balance between vehicles and pedestrians on key roads by providing wide, at-grade crossings; • Increasing footway widths, reducing carriageway widths, and removing clutter and pinch points along footways; • Improving accessibility for pedestrians through additional footbridges, new pedestrian links, better lighting, new pedestrian crossings, replacement of subways by surface level crossings, removal of guardrail, widening of pedestrian islands; • Locating parking for shoppers so as to reduce vehicle speeds and create activity; • Providing additional on-street parking around Abbey Green and on East Street at night; • Improving the interchange facilities in and around Barking Station (to be brought forward jointly by the Council, the LTGDC, TfL and other stakeholders); • Ensuring the seamless integration of ELT with the station and public realm / streetscape; • Providing landscaping and clear wayfinding signage to enable pedestrians to better navigate the town centre; • Clarifying vehicle signage by differentiating between through traffic and town centre traffic; • Relocating street nameplates to more visible locations, installing new plates where needed and regularly reviewing location and condition of street nameplates; and • Introducing variable message signing for car park spaces at key gateways to the town centre.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 290 Over the lifetime of the LIP the Council will focus on the implementation of short-term priority projects within the strategy. Design and costing work will be carried out to develop key projects in 2006, which will be implemented in the following three years 2007-2010 subject to the availability of funding. The key short-term priorities from the Movement Strategy that the Council will prioritise over the life time of the LIP can be summarised as: • Abbey Green Pedestrian and Cyclist improvements / traffic calming.

Currently the roads surrounding Abbey Green are designed for significant over capacity, being predominantly dual carriageways. This makes them difficult for pedestrians and cyclists to cross, whilst footways are narrow and pedestrian unfriendly. It also encourages cars to cut through Barking Town Centre rather than remaining on the major routes of the Northern Relief Road, A406 and A13. This hinders critical town centre traffic around the Town Centre e.g. buses through traffic jams at peak times. This also acts to segregate Abbey Green and the River Roding from the rest of Barking Town Centre. The following projects will help to address these problems and will help to make the town centre a ‘Streets-for-People’ area: • London Road / North Street Junction Improvements £235K • St Paul’s Road Bus Improvement Scheme £500k • Abbey Road Pedestrian and Cyclist Improvements / Traffic Calming Measures / on-street parking £1,100k • North Street / Broadway traffic calming measures / pedestrian improvements £2,500k • Reconfiguration of the St Paul’s Road Roundabout • Creation of Pedestrian Walking Circuits in the core and the Periphery of the Town Centre.

A critical part of a successful town centre is ensuring the environment for pedestrians and cyclists is attractive, accessible and creates safe and convenient routes. To help address this, the Movement Strategy recommends the creation of an inner walking wheel and an outer walking wheel. These aim to create circuits of linked, important sites within the Town Centre enabling people to wander without the need to retrace their steps. For instance the inner walking wheel will connect the station interchange, the retail core, the civic core and amenity areas such as Abbey Green. Both walking circuits will help to make the town centre a ‘Streets-for-People’ area. Tying these projects together is the programme to create a high quality public realm within the Town Centre through the adoption of the Barking Code. This outlines a palette of materials that must be used for any public realm works. East Street Public Realm Improvements £5m London Road Development Site Public Square £TBD Town Square Public Realm Improvements £1m.

Beyond 2008/09: It is anticipated that beyond 2008/09 the Council will seek an additional £0.5 million to £1.0 million through the TfL / LIP funding stream. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 291 TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 0 0 1,100k 535k 1,635k TfL Bus Priority (Traffic calming, bus prioritising, pedestrian crossing and on-street 100k 200k TBD TBD 300k parking)

LBBD funding (Traffic calming, provision of on- street parking, site acquisition for car park) 0 860k TBD TBD 860k

ODPM funding (Footway materials, street furniture, as part of traffic calming measures) 575K 0 TBD TBD 575K

TfL / East London Transit (To create a new public square to relocate Barking Market once ELT is under construction, and implement the 0 0 750k TBD 750k walking wheel)

TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 675k 1,060k 1,850k 535k 4,120k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) Funding to help create a new TFL OUTSIDE BSP public square which will significantly improve pedestrian East London Transit 750k In negotiation movement around the Town Centre (part of the Barking Town Centre walking wheel) and re- house Barking Market, enabling ELT Phase 1 to commence.

300k Approved £100k has been spent in 05/06 TfL Bus Priority Scheme constructing on-street parking and road traffic calming, and bus priority measures with another £200k agreed for this financial year, subject to submission of detailed design. This is funding generated by the sale of a council owned site (Axe Street Car Park). Authorisation has been given by the Council’s Executive to use this funding to implement car parking to replace 860k Approved BOROUGH RESOURCES that which is being lost by bringing forward development on existing car park sites. This is also being used to implement traffic calming schemes and improved pedestrian crossings.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 292 LBBD secured this money to implement part of the traffic calming proposals around Abbey Green. This has been used to secure the materials (granite paving slabs and street furniture), all of which contribute to implementing the Barking Code (a Office of the Deputy Prime Minister 575k Spent (ODPM) strategy to uplift the public realm across the whole of the town centre for pedestrians and cyclists in particular). However, these materials are in storage until further role out of the traffic calming programme can be implemented. It is recognised that Barking Station is a major interchange in East London and is critical to the PARTNERS (please specify) growth of Barking and the surrounding area. Consequently London Thames Gateway Urban TBC In negotiation LTGDC has allocated significant Development Corporation resources (c£20m TBC) within its Corporate plan for site acquisition to develop and improve the interchange area around Barking Station. OTHER (please specify) Section 106 contributions as part of TBD To be negotiated planning consents, as and when developments come on board Key Delivery Partners: London Thames Gateway Urban Development Corporation: The Corporation has become the responsible body in deciding all major planning applications within the Corporation’s area, including Barking Town Centre. Any projects developed as part of this bid (e.g. the station and/ or interchange area) may be deferred to the Corporation for decision. It is also envisaged that major applications will be a potential source of external funding for the implementation of the movement strategy. It is therefore vital that these projects are developed in consultation with the Corporation to ensure they give their full support to the projects. However, it is recognised that Barking Station is a critical piece of infrastructure within the Corporation’s area and acts as a linchpin for regeneration within Barking and the wider area, which may affect regeneration schemes the Corporation wishes to bring forward. It is therefore a core project within LTGDC’s corporate plan for funding. Transport for London (including London Buses, East London Transit, Taxis) and stakeholders within Barking Station (London Underground, 8C, Network Rail, Strategic Rail Authority, Silverlink Metro): These modes of transport will be impacted by any changes in or around Barking Station, it is therefore important to have their buy in to any proposals around the station. Critical to this will be working with ELT to ensure any works fit in with the designs for Phase 1. TfL will also be a key consultee with regards to any junction changes or road redesigns within the town centre to ensure that the impact upon buses, cyclists and pedestrians is fully explored. All roads where works are proposed are borough roads and under the control of the Council. Local businesses and interest groups.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 293 Dependencies and Risks: No one responds to tender to undertake design works. The risk of cost overruns: The contract for works will be for a fixed fee sum. Missing Deadlines: As part of the contract a timetable with target dates will be agreed. Progress will be closely monitored as the project proceeds to ensure the timetable does not slip. Failing to secure internal funding: No formal agreements/ instructions will be made prior to the funding being secured. All projects will be phased and scaleable to ensure implementation can happen under a number of variable funding scenarios. The Movement Strategy has been adopted as Council Policy and has been included within the LIP. The Council’s Executive Committee has agreed to ring fence £860,000 from the sale of a Council owned site to commence the implementation of the Movement Strategy. Failing to secure external funding: No formal agreements/ instructions will be made prior to the funding being secured. All projects will be phased and scaleable to ensure implementation can happen under a number of variable funding scenarios. The Movement Strategy has been adopted as Council Policy, has been included within the LIP, and forms the basis of 2 masterplans that English Partnerships and London Borough of Barking and Dagenham are preparing for Barking Town Centre, as well as an overarching framework of urban design principles to guide development. The implementation of the Movement Strategy will therefore be a high priority in terms of securing Section 106 contributions as part of Development Proposals.

Dependencies: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements (e.g. East London Transit). Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Insufficient funding.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 294 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving road safety. I 1 4G.Pr9 Improving bus journey times and reliability. II 3, 4 4F.Pr2 4F.Pr6 4F.Pr7 4F.Pr8 4G.Pr4 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability III 5, 6, 7 4G.Pr12 by encouraging modal shift. 4G.Pr22 Improving the working of parking and loading arrangements. IV 7, 9 4G.Pr15 4G.Pr16 4H.Pr2 Improving accessibility and social inclusion. V 10 3.Po9 3.Pr1 4E.Pr9 4E.Pr13 4F.Pr11 4O.Pr10 4O.Pr13 4P.Pr5 Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 7, 12 3.Po5 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Po6 3.Pr2 3.Pr4 4G.Pr10 4G.Pr11 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr7 4I.Pr8 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Pr4 4J.Pr5 4J.Pr7 Bringing transport infrastructure to a state of good repair VIII 14 4G.Pr26 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Buses The implementation of the Movement Strategy will help to ensure good bus accessibility across the Town Centre. This will be especially critical around the station where 11 bus routes stop in a very compacted area. There are often jams caused by Positive buses queuing to get to their designated stop. With the introduction of ELT, which will operate and stop outside the station as well, this problem will only increase. Junction improvements will also aim to improve/ prioritise bus journeys within the Town Centre.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 295 East London Transit (ELT currently require dedicated bus stops in an over congested area. Without planning and implementing an expanded Positive interchange area this will not be possible without having a severe negative impact on most bus services within Barking as most routes stop outside the station. Pedestrians / Commuters / Cyclists (The Station currently hits capacity at peak hours, with significant queues of people forming behind the ticket barriers and outside the Station on a narrow pavement (which is consequently an accident hotspot). There is also only one lift currently at the station, which only serves one platform. An unpleasant, ramped underpass is located at the opposite end of Positive the station linking to all other platforms. Station improvements are therefore a key improvement within the Movement Strategy. Similarly a key part of the movement strategy is designing more convenient pedestrian routes within the Town Centre, encompassing 2 ‘walking wheels’ and a leisure route for pedestrians and cyclists linking the green areas of Barking Town Centre – Barking Park to the River Roding.) Trains and Tube Improvements to the station and interchange area will not have a direct impact on the journeys of trains or tube, but will have a Positive marked improvement on passengers going through the station to use these modes. Car and Freight Cars will benefit from clearer vehicle signage; the relocation of street nameplates; the introduction of variable message signs for Positive car park spaces; additional on-street parking; and the opening- up of East Street to vehicles at certain times of the day. Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive

Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive

Balanced road space allocation: Positive

Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive

Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 296 Form Number 45 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Cycleways and Pedestrian Routes in Parks (Green Corridors). Summary of Proposal: To provide cycle and pedestrian ‘green corridors’ through the borough’s parks.

Location: Parks – Borough-wide.

Dates: 2006 – 2010.

Description of Main Elements: The Cycleways in Parks walking and cycling initiative is a key element of green infrastructure connectivity identified in the East London Green Grid, the Barking and Dagenham Parks & Green Spaces Strategy and the Barking and Dagenham Urban Design Framework/Landscape Framework Plan. It also contributes toward the Mayor of London’s London Plan and the Department for Communities and Local Government’s (DCLG’s), formerly the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister’s (ODPM’s), Greening the Gateway Implementation Plan. The combined routes are 5,000m in length and provide vital connectivity throughout the borough. The routes will provide not only walking and cycling opportunities within the specific parks, but will contribute to the overall connectivity of and beyond the borough, connecting to other transport systems both within the borough and cross-boundary to Havering, Redbridge, and Newham. The scheme allows for replacement of some bridges within and between park path networks. The route will provide a strategic coherence for a number of cycle schemes which have previously been promoted at the local level and aim to encourage cycling for short-distance commuting and personal trips between residential, employment, Universities, Colleges and retail areas and for long-distances recreational travel. The routes will also extend the length of footpaths available for the Council’s Healthy Walking Routes programme (‘Just Walk Routes’). The Cycling in Parks routes will also be footpath routes and will link other strategic routes such as the Capital Ring, London Outer Path (LOOP) and the LEE VALLEY path (Sustrans Route 1). Ingrebourne Valley Greenway, Mardyke Way, Thames Chase Forest Circle, the Beam Valley (Collier Row to River Thames) and the Roding Valley Way. In addition to this, the routes would be a vital connection between the Urban Development Corporation (UDC)/London Riverside regeneration and Green Grid strategic sub-area, the Beam, Ingrebourne, Thames Chase Green Grid strategic sub-area and the Roding Valley strategic sub-area. Costs have been identified as follows: Phase 1: Goresbrook Park £272k, Pondfield Park £150k, Old Dagenham Park £150k, Castle Green £150k Total Phase 1: £722k Phase 2: Mayesbrook Park £150k Barking Park £100k Abbey Green £50k St. Chad’s Park £50k Parsloes Park £100k Link between Goresbrook Park and Parsloes Park: £100k Total Phase 2: £450k Grand Total: £1,272,000. All figures contain fees, preliminaries, contingencies and inflation. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 297 TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 0 0 0 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 722k 250k 300k 1,272k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED N/A 722k 250k 300k 1,272k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TfL’s Green Cycle Corridor 1,272k 722k requested TFL OUTSIDE BSP Programme Significant Council capital (£4m) is BOROUGH RESOURCES being spent until end of 2008 on upgrading parks. The Council works in partnership with Groundwork East London on a number of park improvement schemes. LBBD sit on the Thames Chase, PARTNERS (please specify) Ingrebourne, Beam Green Grid strategic sub area steering group, with LB Havering, TGLP and Thames Chase. LBBD also sit on the UDC Green Grid and Roding Valley steering groups. If available, S106 money from developer schemes may be used to contribute to this programme. OTHER (please specify) Significant external funding has been secured through HLF, BLF etc and further funds will continue to be sought for general park improvements. Key Delivery Partners: Thames Gateway London Partnership, London Borough of Havering, London Borough of Newham, London Borough of Redbridge, TfL, the GLA, the UDC/London Riverside and local interest groups. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 298 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving road safety. I 1 4I.Pr2 4J.Po1 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability III 7 4G.Pr12 by encouraging modal shift. Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Pr1 network. Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 7, 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 3.Pr5 4I.Po1 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr6 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Po1 4J.Pr5 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, cycling, bus, PTW, car, freight Positive Rail Neutral Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/A) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 299 Form Number 46 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Access Route Provision for 12.9ha Lymington Fields Mixed Use Development. Summary of Proposal: To upgrade existing and provide new access routes for vehicles, cycles and pedestrians.

Location: Lymington Fields, Dagenham. National Grid reference TQ 482 872.

Dates: 2006/7 and 2007/8.

Description of Main Elements: Barking and Dagenham Council wishes to promote the development of a 12.9ha site at Lymington Fields for a mix of residential, community and open space uses. The site is located approximately 500m away from Chadwell Heath Train Station. In order to ensure that Lymington Fields has good access and achieves its maximum potential, the Council is seeking a capital grant from the Community Infrastructure Fund (CIF). Transport schemes to the value of approximately £700,000 will be undertaken by the Developer in order to meet planning requirements. Additional works funded by the CIF could achieve significant additional benefits to the scheme. With additional access to the site, it may be possible to deliver a higher density of more affordable housing, and potentially a more sustainable development. The total application for funds from the CIF is £4.9 million. The principal component of the scheme is land acquisition located to the north of the site, enabling vehicular access onto Freshwater Road. To the south of the site, improved pedestrian and cycle access routes are planned. The proposed programme details all improvements to be made in 2006/7 and 2007/8. This is because in keeping with Department for Transport constraints, all CIF grants must be spent by the end of 2007/8.

Additional information: In February 2003, the Deputy Prime Minister launched the Sustainable Communities Plan (Sustainable Communities; Building for the Future). Set out is the Government’s aim to deliver successful, thriving and inclusive communities. Lymington Fields lies within the Thames Gateway, a Growth Area identified within the wider South East growth agenda. The Greater London Authority’s (GLA) London Plan identifies the shortfall in affordable housing provision in the Greater London Area. The Lymington Fields site was acquired under the London Wide Key Workers Initiative, which aims to increase the supply of affordable housing for key workers within London. As of 05/2006, the first round of CIF funding allowances was announced on the 19th December 2005. A second round of CIF funding allowances was announced on February 16th 2006. Additional awards are still pending.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 300 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 0 0 0 0 0 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 0 2,128k 3,472k 0 5,600k (Details To Be Provided Below) 2,128k 3,472k TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 0 (38% of (62% of 0 5,600k spend) spend) STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP Nil Nil N/A BOROUGH RESOURCES Nil Nil N/A i) New vehicle/ped/cycle access ii) New ped/cycle access iii)New signalised junction at Lymington Rd/Green Lane & Valence Avenue/Kemp Rd. PARTNERS - Developer selected for site iv)Adjust operation of signals at will invest in some infrastructure 700 To be requested Green Lane/Valence Avenue improvements v)Relocation of bus stops vi)New pedestrian crossing vii)Traffic safety scheme at Kemp Rd/Lymington Rd viii)Covered cycle parking at Chadwell Heath station

OTHER - DfT / ODPM Community 4,900 Requested Must be spent by end of 2007/08 Infrastructure Fund Key Delivery Partners: The London Borough of Barking and Dagenham is the official promoter of the CIF bid to the DfT and ODPM. English Partnerships acquired the Lymington Fields site for the London Wide Key Workers Initiative (LWI) in March 2004. LWI is being delivered in joint collaboration with the Housing Corporation, the Greater London Authority and the London Development Agency. At present, three private sector developers have been selected to deliver the LWI sites with EP and its public sector partners. TfL, residents, and local interest groups will all be involved in securing delivery. Dependencies and Risks: Unsuccessful in CIF funding bid. Objections from local residents to new vehicle accesses. Unable to secure land from third party owners. London buses are not prepared to modify route 499 as required. Environmental Constraints (contamination, ecology, and drainage) on the site are critical and force abandonment of the whole scheme.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 301 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: Enhancing accessibility to the Lymington Fields Mixed Use Priority Target MTS Proposal/ Development site will support the following Mayoral priority Area Number Policy number areas, policies and proposals: (Appendix C) Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability III 5, 7 4G.Pr12 (by encouraging modal shift) Encouraging walking VI 12 4I.Po1, 4I.Pr2 Encouraging cycling VII 13 4J.Pr5 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walk, cycle, car, PTW Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 302 Form Number 47 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Summary of Proposal: Dagenham Heathway Public Realm Improvements.

Location: Dagenham Heathway, Dagenham.

Dates: 2006/07 – 2008/09.

Description of Main Elements: Dagenham Heathway Public Realm Improvements are set to deliver environmental improvements to the Heathway (A1240) in Dagenham, as recommended in the Dagenham Heathway Regeneration Strategy, which was approved by the Council’s Executive on 24 May 2005. The prime objectives of this strategy and proposals are: • To ensure that Dagenham Heathway District Centre remains a key centre for retail and local service provision; • To keep apace with the changes and opportunities emerging in the surrounding regeneration areas of this part of East London; • To improve the attractiveness of the Heathway as a street and to emphasise its function as a social space in line with the ‘Streets-for-People’ concept (refer to 4G.Pr10 in ‘Mayor’s Transport Strategy’) and its status as part of the ‘Mayor’s 100 Public Spaces Programme’; and • To deliver-in-one a solution that addresses the full range of issues facing road users on the Heathway, in line with TfL’s concept of Parallel Initiatives.

Dagenham Heathway is a linear centre of over 100 shop units that straddle the Heathway. The strategy has critically assessed the Heathway’s urban context and the public realm and recommends amongst other measures, interventions to upgrade the existing public realm on the Heathway and to ensure effective links with the rapidly changing regeneration areas in London Riverside. LBBD is working in partnership with TfL, GLA, LDA, Dagenham Heathway Business Forum and local residents groups in progressing this strategy. Key sites are being brought forward for redevelopment (library, one-stop-shop, convenience store) and borough initiatives have been directed towards the area. The Dagenham Heathway Public Realm Improvements fit into the wider ‘Dagenham Heathway to the Thames’ project, which is a north-south connection between the Dagenham Heathway underground station, Chequers Lane, the Dagenham Dock area and the River Thames, and features in “The Mayor’s 100 Public Spaces Programme”. The project will create better facilities for pedestrian, cyclists and public transport, improve active street frontages and establish an access route to the riverbank. The Chequers Lane enhancements south of Dagenham Dock station have already started as part of a larger programme of infrastructure renewal (Dagenham Dock Infrastructure improvements). For the purpose of delivery the Heathway section of the project is divided into three areas: • Phase 1 - Section 1 ‘the Bridge’ – Parsloes Avenue/Reede Road to Hedgemans Road/Church Elm Lane • Phase 2 - Section 2 ‘the Heathway’ – Church Elm Lane to Arnold Road • Phase 3 - Section 3 ‘Chequers Corner’ – Arnold Road to Chequers Corner at the junction with New Road (A1306).

The initial design for all 3 phases has been designed by Burns + Nice with advice by MVA on bus priority issues and in consultation with TfL and the GLA’s A+UU. Throughout the 3 Heathway areas (see above) the scheme proposes streetscape treatment works, including hard and soft landscaping. A pallet of materials to be applied, describing products and construction techniques, will assist in developing a distinctive character for the Heathway in line with its status as part of “The Mayor’s 100 Public Spaces Programme” and as a major public transport corridor.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 303 The improvements include: • Enhancement of the public realm: better pavements, de-cluttering the streetscape – removal of railings, dilapidated and obstructing street furniture and signage, making crossing easier • Bus priority measures • Civil works to implement new streetscape and carriageway design: - Road re-surfacing and intersection treatments to distinguish town centre and pedestrian sensitive areas - New kerbs, footpaths and drainage works - New cycle lanes - delivery & parking bays • Robust materials: effective maintenance and longer lasting • Street furniture – coordinated installation of new benches, litter bins and cycle racks • Street lighting – installation of new lamp columns that will improve visibility at night and help to reduce the fear of crime • Bus shelters – installation of new shelters in Dagenham Heathway District Centre • Tree planting to enhance the streetscape and improve local air quality – implementation of biodiversity strategy along length of Heathway, including planting of mature trees, coordinated species and locations.

The original concept scheme was approved by the Council’s Executive in November 2005.

Public Realm Improvements Scheme – Cost Estimate Phase: Costs: Phase 1 £3,096,019.26 Phase 2 £2,141,894.87 Phase 3 £1,311,565.92 Bus priority £542,832.92 (in phases 1 & 2) Total £7,092,312.97

To illustrate the Council’s commitment to this strategically important scheme the Executive agreed to fund the phases of the improvement works up to £2,255,000. Urban design and landscape architects Burns + Nice have been working with transportation consultants MVA to produce a detailed design for this first phase, which has been subjected to both internal and external consultation with TfL and a 1-2 stage Safety Audit. The scheme has been amended to take account of bus priority measures which indicate the current design would result in a 101% improvement in bus times if fully implemented. Phase 1 will deliver improvements to the underground station and commercial area using high quality materials, reflecting the importance of its role as a focus for social and economic activity and its significance for the regeneration of the Dagenham area. The costing for Phase 1 consists of a prioritised schedule of works which will be implemented and deliver benefits immediately to the locality. It is anticipated that works will start late in 2006 or early 2007. The introduction of ‘virtual bus lanes’ on the bridge with feeder bus lanes on the northern and southern approaches, traffic signal adjustment and a right turn lane help to achieve bus priority and represents good value for money. Public consultation on the detailed design is taking place in August and September 2006 after which a report on the outcome will be produced. Phase 2 will continue the implementation of the design from Phase 1 and deliver improvements to a section of the Heathway which the Council also intends to resurface subject to the availability of funds (the Council has submitted a road maintenance bid to TfL). Whilst the maintenance scheme proposes standard maintenance-type works, the costing for a Phase 2 funding bid will allow for this scheme to be upgraded to a level of design quality and specification consistent with the Public Realm Strategy and the area’s status as included in the second phase of “The Mayor’s 100 Public Spaces Programme”. Phase 3 will deliver improvements to the final section of the Heathway (Arnold Road to Chequers Corner) to a level of design quality and specification similar to that delivered in Phase 2. The Borough’s Executive Council will be asked in the autumn of 2006 to approve the outcome of the public consultation.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 304 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 1,287k 2081k 649k 4,017k FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 46k 709k 1,600k 2,255k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 46k 709k 2,887k 2,081k 649k 6,272k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) To be 543k Bus priority TFL OUTSIDE BSP requested BOROUGH RESOURCES 2,255k Approved 3yr funding 2005/08 PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify)

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 305 Key Delivery Partners, Dependencies and Risks:

LBBD is working in partnership with TFL, GLA, LDA, London Riverside Ltd, Dagenham Heathway Business Forum and local resident groups in developing the Dagenham Heathway Public Realm Strategy. The initial design and subsequent reviews and detailing have been refined in consultation with TfL and the AUU.

Delivery Risks Mitigating Actions No one responds to the tender It is proposed to select term contractors with experience of this kind of work. The risk of cost overruns To draw a fixed fee sum contract for works. Framework Agreement in operation Missing Deadlines To prepare a monitoring timetable with target dates, close attention to deadlines and what impact on them, will be needed. Failing to secure internal funding No formal agreements/instructions will be made prior to the funding being secured. £2,255,000 has been allocated in the capital programme 2005/08. Failure to secure external funding The project is phased and is scaleable. Provisional spend profiles based on variable funding scenarios will be prepared in order to allow for a managed, prioritised delivery of phase 1 and 2 to deliver immediate benefits. Dagenham Heathway is included in “The Mayor’s 100 Public Spaces Programme” (second phase) which TfL is committed to implement. No funding is forthcoming for Phases 2 & 3 Scheme benefits are compromised. There is limited mitigating action if no further funding will be available from Council sources.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 306 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: MTS Proposal/ Priority Target Policy number Area Number (Appendix C) Priority Area I. Improving road safety The proposed design incorporates a different allocation of the highway space. The aim is to improve pedestrian comfort and safety and obtain an appropriate level of bus priority to remedy the impacts which the current levels of congestion have on reliability of bus journeys. These measures help enhanced reliability of the bus service through the Heathway 4F.Pr2 and prevent any negative impact arising from the scheme. Additional environmental benefits are expected in connection 4F.Pr6 I 3, 4 with the adjoining popular destinations (the commercial centre, tube station, future library, generally more attractive 4F.Pr8 environment for pedestrians). The Borough has already committed its own resources to start the phase 1 proposals. A 4G.Pr4 reduction in number and severity of casualties in this deprived area is anticipated. A 20mph zone will become operational upon completion of phase 1 terminating a period of inappropriate speeds. MVA also produced a safety audit in accordance with the ‘Guidelines for the Safety Audit of Highways’ which helped to finalise the proposals.

Priority Area II. Improving bus journey times and reliability The new designs for safety alluded to above, also affect the existing bus service very positively. The scheme will be constructed around a ‘virtual’ bus lane on ‘the bridge’. Traffic queueing on ‘the bridge’ will be relocated to the north and south approaches of the bridge by adjusting traffic signal timings; new bus lanes on the north and south approaches will ensure that buses get to the front of any queues. This proposal was tested with TRANSYT and it was confirmed that the II queue lengths on the side roads would be reduced to acceptable levels. The scheme provides reduced journey times and improved bus priority together with a reduction in the intrusive effect of private vehicles and represents good value for money. The cost-benefit analysis in the MVA report shows a FYRR of 101%.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 307 Priority Area III. Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability The Heathway A1240 is an important route connecting the north and south of the borough. Currently the Heathway suffers from congestion, particularly on ‘the bridge’ section, which acts as a bottleneck. The Council intends to introduce 4G.Pr12 measures that can be considered as ‘parallel initiatives’ and which will ease current congestion. By providing parking 4G.Pr15 III bays, the scheme will help to reduce obstructive parking that currently causes delays. The bus priority measures will 4G.Pr18 improve bus journey times and the reliability of bus services without significantly increasing delays to other vehicles. 4G.Pr20 Delivery bays will facilitate deliveries to local businesses and reduce congestion caused by delivery vehicles. The Council aims to enforce clearways at all bus stops by the end of 2007/08 and CCTV cameras on the Heathway will help to enforce parking and loading restrictions. Priority Area VI. Encourage walking by improving the street environment The new designs for the Heathway aim to stimulate the use of the highway by pedestrians. Improved general layout and better pavement helped by clearer lines and new lights lay down the right conditions to attract more walking, affecting adjoining commercial premises. Bus stops and tube station are popular destination amidst the shops and businesses. The removal of guardrails and further de-cluttering of the highway enhances the public realm and achieves a safer and more accessible pedestrian environment. Implementation is expected to be completed within the next 2 years. Detailed designs are under way and public consultation is being organised to take place later this year. The expressed desire for a range of physical improvements to the Dagenham Heathway was reflected in the 4I.Pr2 Regeneration Strategy. The design approach also directly supports the objectives of “The Mayor’s 100 Public Spaces VI Programme” in connecting the Heathway with the Thames via Chequers Corner. These improvements are underpinned 4I.Pr8 by the Public Realm Strategy with the overarching objective to ensure the Heathway remains a key centre for retail and service provision. The changes and opportunities emerging in the surrounding regeneration areas of London Riverside also necessitate this wider approach. Accordingly the improvements seek to achieve a level of design consistent with the Heathway’s inclusion with “The Mayors 100 Public Spaces Programme” which recognises the improvement of the Heathway public realm as ‘critical to the regeneration of the Dagenham area’. To this end the project also incorporates a public art component establishing design features along the Heathway that will serve to further define it as a distinctive public place.

Priority Area V. Improving accessibility and social inclusion The upgrade proposed by the new design should generate an increase in pedestrian activity and attract more repeat visits if standards are maintained. A dedicated cycling provision in the form of lanes and racks will accommodate bicycle V 13 4J.Pr4 users who access the district centre and reduce conflict between cyclists and pedestrians on the footpath. All pedestrian crossings will feature disabled facilities (BV 165).

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 308 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Buses Bus prioritisation in the layout of the phases 1 and 2 sections is designed to improve journey times and the reliability of bus services. Positive Improvements to bus stops will make it easier for buses to pull up parallel to the kerb and will facilitate boarding and alighting. Cycling The markings of a cycle lane over “the bridge” will improve access through the Dagenham District Centre and reduce conflict between Positive cyclists and pedestrians on the footpath. Phases 2 and 3 will show similar demarcations for cyclists along the route. Walking The revised design creates a more accessible, safer and pleasant public realm for pedestrians. Better pavements, less obstructed and with improved visibility, encourages pedestrian movements along the Heathway to visit the district shopping centre and use the transport Positive interchange. Instead of only three formal pedestrian crossings, there will be a much greater choice to cross over when there is the opportunity. Cars

The scheme seeks to rebalance the interests of all highway users of the Heathway. With respect to road space allocation, priority traffic Neutral measures will be implemented that benefit the largest number of the people who use the Dagenham district centre. New parking bays will allow cars to park legally on the Heathway and to not obstruct traffic.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 309 Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: The scheme proposes to improve the safety and amenity of the public realm for all users. Improvements include removal of railings, road re-surfacing and intersection treatments to distinguish highway allocations, pedestrian sensitive areas (shared surfaces) and new cycle Positive lanes. The safety of these improvements will be increased with the introduction of a 20 mph speed limit.

Encouraging sustainable means for travel: The proposals seek to improve the Dagenham Heathway as a safer and more attractive and inviting environment for pedestrians, cyclists Positive and public transport.

Balanced road space allocation: The revised design re-organises the carriageway allocation in the Dagenham Heathway area to benefit pedestrians, cyclists and buses. Positive

Requirements for sustainable developments: Where possible, the scheme seeks to incorporate sustainable building techniques and materials eg. use of ‘Conservation’ paving in later Positive phases of the scheme.

Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): The improved design directly supports the Mayor’s regeneration objectives for the area, in particular “The Mayor’s 100 Public Spaces Positive Programme,” by seeking to transform the public realm of the Heathway which is a community focal point for social and economic activity.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 310 Form Number 48 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Dagenham Dock Infrastructure Works. Summary of Proposal: To improve the infrastructure and public realm in Dagenham Dock.

Location: Dagenham Dock, Dagenham.

Dates: 2006-2011.

Description of Main Elements: Dagenham Dock covers 133 hectares of brownfield land in a major development corridor between the A13 and the River Thames. As part of the wider London Riverside regeneration, the Council in partnership with the London Development Agency has developed a vision for Dagenham Dock as a Sustainable Industrial Park (SIP), centred on an Environmental Technology Resource Centre for London (ETRCL). In the past Dagenham Dock has suffered from poor physical infrastructure, notably road access. Tackling Dagenham Dock's poor infrastructure is an essential task in delivering the SIP and job creation. As part of the advanced works for the Channel Tunnel Rail Link, a new link road (Choats Manor Way) between Dagenham Dock and the Goresbrook Interchange (A13) has been built, improving access to the trunk road network and the borough’s road network. The Council also wishes to improve access to Dagenham Dock by public transport, foot and bicycle. The Council has secured £10m to implement a first phase of infrastructure works along Chequers Lane. Chequers Lane is an historic north-south route linking to the River Thames, and features in the ‘Mayor’s 100 Public Spaces Programme’. Work is underway to reconstruct Chequers Lane with new drainage, services and a transformed public realm (which will include footways and cycleways). Improvements to Chequers Lane will make Dagenham Dock Station as well as employment sites within Dagenham Dock more accessible for pedestrians and cyclists. The Council also supports the completion of the North East Thames Cycle Route (NETCR) / National Route 13 through Barking and Dagenham, and has secured funding to design a section of the route through Dagenham Dock (see Proposal Form 42). A second phase of infrastructure works worth £8m is planned for Hindmans Way.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 311 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 0 0 0 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 5,000k 5,000k 8,000k TBD 18,000k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 5,000k 5,000k 8,000k TBD 18,000k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP 0 0 BOROUGH RESOURCES 0 0 Bulk for Phase 2. Funding likely 8,902k In negotiation LONDON DEVELOPMENT AGENCY from utilising land values. Phase 1 of works. Sustainable DEPARTMENT FOR COMMUNITIES 5,000K Approved AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT Communities Fund

EU (EUROPEAN REGIONAL 3,000k Approved Phase 1 of works DEVELOPMENT FUND) SECTION 106 CONTRIBUTIONS/FORMER SRB 1,098k Approved Phase 1 of works FUNDING Key Delivery Partners: London Development Agency; Contractors. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 312 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS policies and proposals: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Po9 network. 4F.Pr11 4O.Pr10 Encourage walking by improving the street environment, VI 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 4I.Po1 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr7 4I.Pr8 4I.Pr10 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Pr5

Bringing transport infrastructure to a state of good repair. VIII 14 4G.Pr26

Improving road safety. I 1 4G.Pr7 4G.Pr9 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Walking, cycling, bus, taxi, car, freight Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes:

Roads in Dagenham Dock have a high proportion of HGV traffic. Positive New footways and segregated cycleways will improve road safety for pedestrians and cyclists. Encouraging sustainable means for travel:

New segregated cycleways will encourage cycling to and within Positive Dagenham Dock. New footways will encourage walking to and from Dagenham Dock station and within Dagenham Dock. Balanced road space allocation: Positive Road space is being reallocated to pedestrians and cyclists. Requirements for sustainable developments: Neutral Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 313 Form Number 49 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Dagenham Dock Interchange. Summary of Proposal: To create a new transport interchange at Dagenham Dock station.

Location: Dagenham Dock station, Dagenham.

Dates: 2006-2011.

Description of Main Elements: Dagenham Dock station is currently served by the London to Southend railway line (c2c services), which provides a fast service to central London. There are plans for the East London Transit and the extension of the Docklands Light Railway to run to Dagenham Dock station, providing improved access for local people to Barking Riverside, the Dagenham Dock Sustainable Industrial Park, Barking Town Centre, Ilford and Central London. The Council is working with its partners to secure a new transport interchange at Dagenham Dock Station, in order to enable quick interchange between National Rail services, DLR, ELT, local bus services, walking and cycling). The Council also wishes to improve access to the station for pedestrians and cyclists. Cycle parking will be provided at the new interchange. The Council has secured £3m of Sustainable Communities funding to commence the masterplanning of Dagenham Dock Interchange. The Council has also secured funding from TfL to install lifts at Dagenham Dock station, so as to improve accessibility for passengers crossing the railway lines (see Proposal Form 28).

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 314 FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP N/A 0 0 0 0 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 0 3,000k TBD TBD 3,000k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 0 3,000k TBD TBD 3,000k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP 0 0 BOROUGH RESOURCES 0 0

DEPARTMENT FOR COMMUNITIES 3,000k Approved Sustainable Communities Fund AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT Key Delivery Partners: TfL; 8C; London Development Agency; Contractors. Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient funding. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 315 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS policies and proposals: Area Number Policy number (Appendix C) Improving accessibility and social inclusion on the transport V 10 3.Po9 network. 4F.Pr11 4O.Pr10 Encourage walking by improving the street environment, VI 12 3.Pr2 conditions for pedestrians. 3.Pr4 4I.Po1 4I.Pr2 4I.Pr7 4I.Pr8 4I.Pr10 Encourage cycling by improving conditions for cyclists. VII 13 4J.Pr5

Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Rail, light transit (DLR, ELT), walking, cycling, bus, taxi Positive Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Neutral Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Neutral Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 316 Proposals from Other TGLP Boroughs

(See Forms 50 – 52, overleaf).

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 317 Form Number 50 TGLP / London Borough of Bexley

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Summary of Proposal: TGLP Bus Initiative.

Location: Thames Gateway.

Dates: 2006 – 2010.

Description of Main Elements: Considerable progress has been made in the quality of bus services and by bus priority measures in the Thames Gateway London Partnership (TGLP) area since 2000. There is now a need to review the benefits achieved and identify and take forward gaps. The objectives of the Thames Gateway Bus Initiative are: • To identify routes of regional importance which could benefit from bus priority measures to improve journey time and service reliability, but which are not covered by the London Bus Priority Network (LBPN) initiative. • To undertake a review of the effectiveness of existing bus priority measures which have been funded through the TGLP Regional Spending Plan (RSP) or, if routes are considered to be of regional significance, through the BSP process.

Routes will be determined following discussions with TfL Buses and Bus Priority Unit. The scheme will contribute to Mayoral objectives 7, 45 and D1. It will contribute to TGLP objectives RR1, RR2, RE1, RE3, RE4, and RE5. Routes will be agreed with involvement of TGLP, TfL and relevant boroughs. Routes will be assessed under the Whole Route Implementation Plan (WRIP) guidance which involves: • Scoping of route improvement potential • Preliminary planning • Preliminary design • Detailed design • Implementation.

Existing bus priority for review will be agreed between TGLP, TfL and relevant boroughs. Audits of existing bus priority will be undertaken to identify any necessary remedial action. Improvements to existing bus priority measures will be implemented. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 150 300 300 750 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 150 300 300 750 STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: TfL Bus Priority Team (BPT), London buses, TGLP boroughs.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 318 Dependencies and Risks: Dependent on scheme cost benefit analysis and subsequent approval by BPT. Support from interest groups and the general public. Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient external funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements. Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number Improving bus journey times and reliability II 3, 4 4F.Po1 4F.Pr2 4F.Pr6 4F.Pr7 4F.Pr8 4G.Pr4 Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability III 5, 6, 7 4G.Pr12 by encouraging modal shift 4G.Pr18 Improving the working of parking and loading arrangements IV 9 4G.Pr15 Improving the natural environment 3.Pr2 3.Pr4 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Bus, Community transport, taxi, walking, cycling Positive Train, PTW (impact for PTW could be positive if PTWs were Neutral allowed in the future to use bus lanes) Car, Freight (possibility of reduction in road space) Neutral/Negative Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 319 Form Number 51 TGLP / London Borough of Bexley

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Summary of Proposal: TGLP Sub-Regional Freight Quality Partnership.

Location: Thames Gateway.

Dates: 2006-2010.

Description of Main Elements: This proposal builds on the Thames Gateway Freight Study commissioned by the Thames Gateway Strategic Partnership in 2002 and the forthcoming publication, by TfL, of the London Freight Plan. A vital element of the delivery of this Plan is the establishment and active participation of Sub-Regional Freight Quality Partnership (SRFQP), providing a balance between strategic planning and action at the local level. Within this context, Thames Gateway London Partnership (TGLP) is aiming to develop a strategy on how the sub- region’s businesses can be effectively serviced by road, rail and water in a way that supports the contribution of the distribution and logistics sector to the economy whilst minimising environmental impacts. Whilst a large element of this strategy concerns promoting the need for major transport infrastructure to serve freight movements (e.g. Thames Gateway Bridge), the Partnership is also endeavouring to be proactive in encouraging the development of a Sub-Regional Freight Quality Partnership which: • Develops proactive partnerships of local authorities, businesses, operators and other stakeholders; • Provides a sub-regional forum for consideration of the strategic issues within the London Freight Plan, London Plan and East London Sub-Regional Development Framework (EL-SRDF); • Proposes, develops and pilots innovative demonstration projects for managing freight within an urban context and addressing capacity issues in the key radial and orbital corridors; • Provides a ready partner for the TfL Freight Unit, London Sustainable Distribution Partnership (LSDP) and the Greater London Authority in raising the profile of freight planning within London and the Thames Gateway.

This proposal is the logical progression of TGLP’s three stage proposal, first set out TfL in 2002, to develop freight as part of its wider Transport Agenda through a three stage process as follows: • Stage 1 – Demonstration Freight Quality Partnership (FQP) based on a pilot town centre (Bexleyheath) • Stage 2 – Demonstration FQP based on an industrial area (Belvedere) • Stage 3 – Sub-Regional “Umbrella” FQP bringing local issues together with broader strategic issues.

Stages 1 and 2 have now been implemented and it is now time to move onto the sub-regional scale, focusing on the unique role of the Thames Gateway as a transit sub-region between the Channel Ports (including the Channel Tunnel), Port of London and the English Regions / Eire. Key partners within the SRFQP will include the TGLP boroughs, Freight Transport Association, Greater London Authority, TfL Freight Unit, Network Rail, Rail Freight Operating Companies, the British Airports Authority, the Port of London Authority and other local port operators. The Highways Agency and adjoining County / Unitary Authorities (e.g. Kent, Essex, Dartford, Thurrock) may wish to participate in an advisory role. The focus will be on proactive delivery of action on the ground, based on a better understanding of the key freight issues. TGLP will seek to develop the Thames Gateway SRFQP through the establishment of a small Executive Group to take key decisions and drive forward initiatives, combined with a wider reference group. The Executive Group will consist of 8 individuals from local government, industry and operators and have an independent chair. The Executive Group will be provided with dedicated professional advice and consultancy support in order to operate effectively, develop specific deliverables and provide an overall co-ordination role. Key deliverables in 2006-2007 will include: • Initial analysis of problems and issues on the road and rail networks and a Baseline Report, including the application of the London Freight Plan at the sub-regional level and analysis of supply chains for Thames Gateway businesses; • A memorandum of understanding with the TfL Freight Unit and LSDP; • A database of key stakeholders from industry, operators, local authorities and strategic transport providers;

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 320 • A set of mapping resources setting out the key freight generators, intermodal freight depots and pinchpoints; • A future vision, set of objectives and targets, critical success factors and barriers/enablers to delivery; • The development of a specific, timed and measurable Action Plan; • The development of associated Communications and Marketing Plans; • A dedicated website, linked to the TfL Freight online facility; • The development of a “toolkit” for local Freight Quality Partnerships to be developed for all TGLP boroughs and stakeholders, building on the lessons learnt from the Belvedere and Bexleyheath pilot projects, and coordinated with other relevant London / urban FQPs; • The development of initial guidance for the incorporation of freight within Employer Travel Plans; and • Proposal of key areas for demonstration projects with TfL, industry and local authorities.

The Thames Gateway SRFQP will work across industry, but will have a particular focus on servicing and utilities, construction and waste, given the importance of these sectors in East London and the issues raised by delivery of the London Plan. A particular spatial focus will also be placed on industrial generators alongside the Thames, for example in London Riverside, Belvedere Employment Area, Lower Lea Valley and North West Greenwich Peninsula. The freight implications of the construction and operation of the Olympic Village will also be addressed. Initial ideas for initiatives include urban freight logistics, alternative fuels, information technology for route guidance, river transport of waste and construction materials, and securing / enhancing a network of intermodal and multimodal transfer points. The Thames Gateway SRFQP will be monitored against the following key outcomes: • Establishment of the FQP itself as a proactive and sustained grouping, making a positive contribution to regional and national policy; • The number of sub-regional businesses and operators on the contact database; • The delivery of a communications and stakeholder engagement plan; • The agreement of a Sub-Regional Freight Action Plan; and • In-kind contributions from external partners secured. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 100 60 60 220 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 10 10 20 (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 100 70 70 240 STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: TGLP boroughs, Freight Transport Association, Greater London Authority, TfL Freight Unit, Network Rail, Rail Freight Operating Companies, the British Airports Authority, the Port of London Authority and other local port operators. Dependencies and Risks: Insufficient external funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 321 Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS proposals and policies: Area Number Policy number Relieving traffic congestion and improving journey time reliability III 5, 6, 7 4G.Pr12 by encouraging modal shift. 4E.Pr8 4K.Po1 4K.Pr1 4K.Pr2 4K.Pr5 4M.Po1 4M.Po2 4M.Pr2 Encourage walking by improving the street environment and VI 7, 12 4K.Pr4 conditions for pedestrians. Improving the natural environment. 3.Pr2 3.Pr4 3.Pr6 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Car, freight, train, water Positive Bus, PTW, walking, cycling Neutral Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 322 Form Number 52 TGLP / London Borough of Havering

LIP PROPOSAL DELIVERY FORM Summary of Proposal: Thames Gateway London Partnership - Station Access Study.

Location: Thames Gateway.

Dates: 2006/7-2008/9.

Description of Main Elements: The London Borough of Havering plays a very important role within the Thames Gateway London Partnership (TGLP). Through the work of the TGLP Transport Task Group, Havering voluntarily put itself forward to be lead borough for the TGLP area wide Station Access Study. The study is a package of funding to the tune of £25,000 per year (directly from and approved by TfL for three years from 2005/6 onwards), to fund and support the appointment of a team of Consultants to undertake Station Access Studies, (based on TfL's new Area Based Scheme Guidance - published in April 2005) to develop proposals for capital delivery of Station Access Improvement Schemes. Following a period of selection that took place in partnership with the TGLP, MVA were appointed to undertake this work in July 2005. They have now commenced their commission and are developing so called 'Step 1' scheme bid submissions for between 8 and 10 Station Access Studies for stations throughout the TGLP area for the first tranche for 2005/6. These stations were chosen following the submission of initial background information to support a maximum of three stations for each borough in the TGLP area. In order for a station access scheme to be considered, the overall delivery funding requirement from TfL must be within a reasonable limit of no more than £300k, therefore allowing an even spread of several potential schemes to be taken forward for capital funding within each year. After the schemes have been developed to Step 1, further discussions with TfL will be necessary to agree taking the scheme development forward to Step 2, where TfL will be in a position to take decisions on funding scheme proposals for capital delivery. The work to progress this first tranche of stations takes place through the TGLP Rail Working Group, which the London Borough of Havering also lead and Chair, therefore complementing this particular programme well.

Future Years: 2009/10 – £40k estimate. FUNDING REQUIRED TO DELIVER PROPOSAL TOTAL FUNDING TABLE (£K) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£K) FUNDING REQUIRED FROM BSP 0 0 0 0 0 FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES 25k 25k 25k 25k 100k (Details To Be Provided Below) TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED 25k 25k 25k 25k 100k STATUS AMOUNT OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (Requested, COMMENTS (£k) Approved) TFL OUTSIDE BSP BOROUGH RESOURCES PARTNERS (please specify) OTHER (please specify) Key Delivery Partners: All London boroughs within the TGLP area; TfL.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 323 Dependencies and Risks: Notification requirements of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Insufficient external funding. Where the works are related to other works or planned improvements. Proposals or aspects of proposals are not supported. Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: The above proposals will help deliver the following Mayoral Priority Target MTS Proposal/ priority areas and MTS policies and proposals: Area Number Policy number Improving accessibility and social inclusion. V 10 3.Pr1 4E.Pr1 4E.Pr9 4E.Pr13 4P.Po2 Impact: Modal Impact: (Please list the Modes affected) (Positive, Negative, Neutral) Rail, Bus, Walking, Cycling, motor vehicles, powered two wheelers. Positive Those with disabilities and elderly persons who have restricted mobility. Impact: Cross Cutting Goals: (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) (Positive, Negative, Neutral, N/Al) Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: Positive Encouraging sustainable means for travel: Positive Balanced road space allocation: Positive Requirements for sustainable developments: Positive Equality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): Positive All

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 324 Table 5.5: LIP Proposal Summary Sheet – Form 2

LIP PROPOSAL SUMMARY SHEET PROPOSALS, POLICIES & TARGETS CATEGORIES AS PER MATRIX Priority REFERENCE NUMBERS OF FORM 1 Proposal Policy Target (APPENDIX C) Area

3.Po5 18, 44, 47, Po3, Po5, Po7 3.Po6 18, 44, 47 3.Po7 18, 46, Po3, Po9, Po21, Po22, Po26 3.Po8 18, Po4 3.Po9 2, 4, 18, 48, 21, 46, 44, 47, 35, Po1, Po2, Po8 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 45, 40, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 11, 17, 18, 19, 48, 22, 43, 23, 24, 26, 28, 52, 44, 47, 34, V 3.Pr1 10, 11 35, Po1, Po2, Po5, Po8 Strategies 3, 50, 7, 8, 9, 45, 40, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 11, 13, 51, 17, 18, 19, 48, 20, 21, 22, 43, 23, 46, 25, 26, 28, 30, VI 3.Pr2 7, 12 31, 32, 33, 44, 47, 34, 35, Po3, Po4, Po5, Po6, Po7, Po8, Po9, Po10, Po11, Po13, Po20, Po21, Po24, Po25, Po26, Po28 3, 50, 7, 8, 9, 45, 40, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 11, 14, 51, 17, 18, 19, 48, 20, 21, 22, 43, 23, 46, 26, 28, 30, 31, VI 3.Pr4 7, 12 32, 33, 44, 47, 34, Po14, Po19, Po29 VI 3.Pr5 7, 12 45, 40, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 46, 35, Po11 VI 3.Pr6 7, 12 13, 14, 51, 18 13, 14, 46, 30, 31, 32, 33, Po1, Po5, Po6, Po10, Po13, Po15, Po16, Po17, Po18, Po19, Po27, Po28, 3.Pr7 Po29 Underground 4C.Pr12 25, Po8 DLR & Tramlink 4D.Pr3 10, 11 DLR not currently in borough 4D.Pr4 DLR not currently in borough 4D.Pr5 No Tramlink in borough

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 325 LIP PROPOSAL SUMMARY SHEET PROPOSALS, POLICIES & TARGETS CATEGORIES AS PER MATRIX Priority REFERENCE NUMBERS OF FORM 1 Proposal Policy Target (APPENDIX C) Area

V 4D.Pr6 10, 11 No Tramlink in borough 4D.Pr7 No Tramlink in borough 4E.Pr7 Paragraph 5.66 4E.Pr8 51, Po7 V 4E.Pr9 10, 11 28, 52, 44, Po8 Rail 4E.Pr10 Po8 V 4E.Pr13 10, 11 2, 28, 52, 44 4E.Pr14 Paragraph 5.189 4E.Po3 Paragraph 5.188 II 4F.Pr2 3, 4 3, 50, 23, 26, 44, 47, Po7 II 4F.Pr3 3, 4 Paragraphs 5.82; 5.88 II 4F.Pr6 3, 4 3, 50, 23, 26, 44, 47 Bus II 4F.Pr7 3, 4 3, 50, 6, 44, 47 III 4F.Pr8 3, 4 3, 50, 23, 26, 44, 47 V 4F.Pr11 10, 11 1, 2, 6, 20, 21, 46, 28, 44, 47 IV 4F.Pr21 7, 9 Parking and Enforcement Plan Streets IV 4G.Pr1 7, 9 23, 26, Po17 III 4G.Po2 Po14 4G.Pr2 Paragraph 5.183 4G.Pr3 Paragraph 5.66 II 4G.Pr4 3, 4 3, 50, 44, 47, Po27

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 326 LIP PROPOSAL SUMMARY SHEET PROPOSALS, POLICIES & TARGETS CATEGORIES AS PER MATRIX Priority REFERENCE NUMBERS OF FORM 1 Proposal Policy Target (APPENDIX C) Area

I 4G.Pr7 1, 2 70, 71, 15, 16, 29 I 4G.Pr9 1, 2 16, 18, 29, 44, 47, 36, Po19, Po20, Po29 VI 4G.Pr10 7, 12 13, 14, 44, 47 VI 4G.Pr11 7, 12 13, 14, 44, 47 3, 50, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 45, 40, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 11, 12, 13, 14, 51, 17, 18, 48, 22, 43, 23, 46, 24, 26, III 4G.Pr12 5, 6, 7, 8 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 44, 47, 34, Po21 III 4G.Pr14 5, 6, 7, 8 Borough not in Congestion Charge Zone 4G.Po5 12, Po23 IV 4G.Pr15 7, 9 2, 3, 50, 12, 19, 23, 26, 27, 28, 44, 47, Po18, Po23 4G.Po6 18, Po22, Po23 IV 4G.Pr16 7, 9 12, 44, 47 IV 4G.Pr17 7, 9 Po23 III 4G.Pr18 5, 6, 7, 8 3, 50, 23, 26, 27 III 4G.Pr19 5, 6, 7, 8 23, 26, Po27 III 4G.Pr20 5, 6, 7, 8 13, 14, 19, 23, 26 4G.Pr22 44 4G.Pr23 All street works and maintenance of TRLN are the responsibility of TfL street works sections. III 4G.Pr24 5, 6, 7, 8 13, 14 VIII 4G.Pr25 14 5, 13, 14, 20 VIII 4G.Pr26 14 5, 13, 14, 20, 21, 44, 47 Car 4H.Pr1 Po27

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 327 LIP PROPOSAL SUMMARY SHEET PROPOSALS, POLICIES & TARGETS CATEGORIES AS PER MATRIX Priority REFERENCE NUMBERS OF FORM 1 Proposal Policy Target (APPENDIX C) Area

IV 4H.Pr2 7, 9 2, 12, 23, 26, 28, 44, 47, Po2 III 4H.Pr3 5, 6, 7, 8 13, 14, 17, 30, 31, 32, 33, Po9 7, 8, 45, 40, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 11, 13, 14, 19, 20, 21, 22, 43, 46, 24, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 44, 47, 34, VI 4I.Pr2 7, 12 35, Po10 VI 4I.Pr3 7, 12 22, 34 Walking VI 4I.Pr4 7, 12 34 VI 4I.Pr6 7, 12 45, 40, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 34 VI 4I.Pr7 7, 12 21, 22, 46, 28, 44, 47, 34 VI 4I.Pr8 7, 12 1, 20, 21, 22, 46, 24, 28, 29, 44, 47, 34, 35, Po5 4J.Po1 7, 8, 9, 45, 40, 37, 38, 39, 11, 13, 14, 20, 43, 24, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, Po6 VII 4J.Pr1 13 9, 41, 42, 11, 13, 14 VII 4J.Pr3 13 11 VII 4J.Pr4 13 7, 8, 11, 44, 47, Po6 Cycling VII 4J.Pr5 13 7, 8, 9, 45, 40, 37, 38, 39, 19, 21, 43, 46, 27, 28, 29, 44, 47, Po6 VII 4J.Pr6 13 17, 20 VII 4J.Pr7 13 10, 18, 46, 24, 28, 44, 47, Po6 VII 4J.Pr8 13 9, 41, 42, Po10 Freight 4K.Pr1 51 4K.Pr2 51 III 4K.Pr3 5, 6, 7, 8 13, 14, 23, 26, Po25, Po26 4K.Pr4 7, 12 13, 14, 51, Po24

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 328 LIP PROPOSAL SUMMARY SHEET PROPOSALS, POLICIES & TARGETS CATEGORIES AS PER MATRIX Priority REFERENCE NUMBERS OF FORM 1 Proposal Policy Target (APPENDIX C) Area

4K.Pr5 51, 18, Po24 International 4L.Po6 Issues Paragraph 5.169 4M.Pr2 51, Po24 Water 4M.Po2 51, Po24 4N.Po2 Paragraph 5.157 Taxi 4N.Pr1 Paragraph 5.157 V 4N.Pr5 10, 11 2, Po12 4O.Po1 2 V 4O.Pr1 10, 11 2 4O.Po2 2 V 4O.Pr3 10, 11 2 V 4O.Pr4 10, 11 2 Accessible V 4O.Pr5 10, 11 2 Transport V 4O.Pr6 10, 11 2 V 4O.Pr9 10, 11 Paragraph 5.157 V 4O.Pr12 10, 11 Po2 V 4O.Pr13 10, 11 2, 44, 47, Po22, Po23 V 4O.Pr14 10, 11 Paragraph 5.189 Integration 4P.Po2 18, 24, 28, 52, Po1, Po8 4P.Pr3 Po4

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 329 LIP PROPOSAL SUMMARY SHEET PROPOSALS, POLICIES & TARGETS CATEGORIES AS PER MATRIX Priority REFERENCE NUMBERS OF FORM 1 Proposal Policy Target (APPENDIX C) Area

III 4P.Pr4 5, 6, 7, 8 4, 9, 13, 14, 17, 23, 26, 30, 31, 32, 33, Po8, Po9, Po10 V 4P.Pr5 10, 11 17, 25, 44, 47, 34, Po27 4Q.Po1 24 Major Projects 4Q.Pr7 24 denotes priority area Notes: ‘Po’ denotes a LIP policy (see Chapter 3 of LIP) ‘Paragraph’ refers to paragraphs in the LIP.

Chapter 5: LIP Proposals 330