A3) Tolworth Road Junction with (A240) Kingston Road, (Tolworth Roundabout

(A3) Tolworth Road Junction with (A240) Kingston Road, (Tolworth roundabout)

Consultation Report July 2021

Contents

Executive summary ...... 3 1. Summary of consultation responses ...... 4 1.1 Summary of responses to Question 1 ...... 5 1.2 Summary of responses to Question 2 ...... 5 1.3 Summary of responses to Question 3 ...... 6 1.4 Summary of responses to Question 4 ...... 8 1.5 Stakeholder responses ...... 9 2. About the consultation ...... 11 2.1 Purpose ...... 11 2.2 Potential outcomes ...... 11 2.3 Who we consulted ...... 11 2.4 Dates and duration ...... 12 2.5 What we asked ...... 12 2.6 Methods of responding ...... 13 2.7 Consultation materials and publicity ...... 13 2.8 Equalities Assessment ...... 14 2.9 Analysis of consultation responses ...... 14 2.10 Consultation report and responses to issues raised ...... 14 3. About the respondents ...... 15 3.1 Number of respondents ...... 15 3.2 How respondents heard about the consultation ...... 15 3.3 Methods of responding ...... 15 3.4 Comments on the consultation process and material ...... 16 4. Next steps ...... 18 Appendix A: Detailed analysis of comments ...... 19 Appendix B: Consultation questions ...... 24 Appendix C: Consultation letter/leaflet ...... 30 Appendix D: Summary of Stakeholder replies ...... 36 Appendix E: List of stakeholders consulted ...... 40 Appendix F Response to issues raised ...... 45

Executive summary

Tolworth is a district centre located adjacent to the A3 in outer London in the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames.

High volumes of traffic use the A3 and A240 junction and create a poor environment for pedestrians and cyclists and result in poor air quality.

Delays and congestion negatively impact on the reliability and journey times of all vehicles including buses using the junction.

New developments are planned in the area adjacent to the A3 and Tolworth junction that includes over 1300 new homes and new head office building that will bring up to 750 jobs into the area.

These developments are likely to increase the demand (from all road users) on carriageway road space on the approaches to and at Tolworth junction roundabout. Traffic modelling has shown that the traffic impacts of the committed developments will result in a significant adverse impact on an already poor road performance including increase in bus journey times. The proposed changes have been designed to provide for the increased demand for all road users, and particularly with the aim to ensure that vehicle journey times and queues are not worsened.

We consulted on proposed improvements at this junction between 29 October 2019 and 5 January 2020.

We received 232 responses to the consultation (including seven responses from stakeholders).

The largest number of respondents who indicated that they travel through the area two to three times a week or more were those using motor vehicles (69 per cent) or walking (37 per cent).

49 per cent of respondents stated the proposed additional traffic lane for traffic turning left onto the A3 would make their journey quicker, 25 per cent advised it would not make any difference. However, regarding the other aspects of the proposals, most respondents advised they would make no difference to, or increase, their journey time.

41 per cent of those who answered advised wider traffic lanes on the roundabout would make them feel safer or a lot safer. For the proposal to introduce an additional lane for traffic turning left onto the A3, the largest number of respondents (35 per cent) stated the changes would make them feel safer or a lot safer, although this was only slightly more than the number of those who stated the proposal would make them feel less safe or very unsafe (33 per cent) or would make no difference (30 per cent). For each of the other aspects of the proposals, the largest number of

responses were from those who advised that they would make no difference to how safe they felt.

The main themes raised by respondents included:

 Concern that the proposals are for motorists only and do not improve things for cyclists, pedestrians or public transport  General support for the scheme  Concern that the proposals will increase congestion/journey times/pollution  Opposition to the proposed subway closure

More detailed analysis can be found in Chapters 1 and 3 of this report.

Next Steps

Subject to funding and future decisions, we will work with the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames and other stakeholders to deliver this scheme. Having analysed the consultation responses and considering the current and forecasted traffic in and around the Tolworth roundabout junction area, we are going to implement the scheme with some changes following the consultation and further reviews of the area. The changes are:

 Keeping the subway entrance/exit ramp at the Sunray Estate side of the junction but removing one set of steps instead  Changing the design of the drop off area outside of the Hollywood Bowl  Investigating options to remove pinch point for cyclists travelling northbound at Tolworth national rail station

We are now working on developing the detailed design of the scheme. We anticipate starting work in late 2022 with the construction taking around 6-9 months.

The publication of this report was delayed due to the pandemic. Our project staff were furloughed and delivery of projects paused. Our programme of investment in Healthy Streets restarted in December 2020, upon approval of funding from central Government, and the Tolworth project was restarted. The Healthy Streets programme (our portfolio of projects proposed to improve London’s highways for people walking, cycling and travelling by public transport) will support London’s recovery from the coronavirus pandemic and avoid a potentially damaging increase in private car-use.

1. Summary of consultation responses

We received 232 responses to consultation; 225 were from members of the public and seven were from stakeholders. Chapter 3 summarises the demographic information about the respondents.

In order to more clearly show the numbers of people who had a view on the aspect of the proposal, the graphs and tables in the sections 1.1 to 1.3 do not include numbers for those who did not answer each question or who responded ‘not applicable’.

1.1 Summary of responses to Question 1 The first question asked how respondents travelled through the junction and how often they did so.

1.1.1 Overall summary The table below sets out the public responses to this question. Of those who responded to each aspect of the question, 37 per cent of those who walked through the junction indicated that they did so 2-3 times a week or more, as did 69 per cent of those travelling by motor vehicle. The number of cyclists and public transport users who used the junction at least 2-3 times a week was lower, at 13 per cent and 20 per cent respectively.

Public Walking Cycling Motor vehicle transport Total % Total % Total % Total % Daily 25 18% 4 3% 13 10% 45 30% 2-3 times a week 27 19% 14 10% 14 10% 58 39% Once a month 16 11% 20 15% 29 21% 15 10% Less than once 27 19% 24 18% 28 21% 12 8% a month Never 45 32% 74 54% 51 38% 19 13% Total answered 140 100% 136 100% 135 100% 149 100%

1.2 Summary of responses to Question 2 Question 2 asked respondents what impact they thought six aspects of our proposals would have on their journey time through and around the junction.

1.2.1 Overall summary The graph below shows the responses to this question. Regarding the proposed additional traffic lane for traffic turning left onto the A3, the largest number of those

who responded (49 per cent) stated that this would make their journey quicker. However, for the other aspects of the proposals, most respondents advised that they would make no difference or increase their journey time.

What impact do you think our proposals will have on your journey time through and around the junction? 100% 11% 15% 90% 27% 32% 32% 80% 49% 34% 70% 34% 60% 39% 50% 43% 41% 40% 25% 32% 31% 30% 18% 20% 19% 22% 18% 23% 10% 20% 16% 7% 8% 0% 4% Closure of Additional subway lane for Improved Wider Closure of ramp on traffic pedestrian Putting in traffic subway south east turning left crossings new bus lanes on outside corner of from with bay near the Hollywood junction Kingston pedestrian Ewell Road roundabout Bowl (Sunray Road on to countdown Estate the A3 side) Make it quicker 87 58 56 26 18 48 Make no difference 44 77 71 58 57 69 Make it slower 40 32 34 52 54 32 Don’t know 7 1214343929

Figure 1: shows public responses to question

1.3 Summary of responses to Question 3 Question 3 asked respondents what impact they thought the same six aspects of our proposals would make them feel when travelling through and around the junction?

1.3.1 Overall summary Figure 2 shows the responses to this question. Most of those who responded (57 per cent) said that the improved pedestrian crossings would make them feel safer or a lot safer. For the proposed wider traffic lanes on the roundabout, 41 per cent of those who responded advised that this would make them feel safer or a lot safer, with 29 per cent of respondents stating it would either make them feel less safe or very unsafe, or would make no difference.

For the proposal to introduce an additional lane for traffic turning left onto the A3, the largest number of respondents (35 per cent) thought the changes would make them feel safer or a lot safer, although this was only slightly more than the number of those who said the proposal would make them feel less safe or very unsafe (33 per cent) or would make no difference (30 per cent).

For the other three aspects of the proposals (the closure of the subway outside Hollywood Bowl, the closure of the subway ramp on the south east corner of the junction and putting in the new bus bay near Ewell Road) the largest number of respondents (35 per cent, 38 per cent and 46 per cent respectively) stated that the proposed changes would make no difference to how safe they felt. In the case of the proposals to close the subway outside Hollywood Bowl and to close the subway ramp on the south east corner of the junction, the next largest group of respondents (30 per cent in both cases) advised the proposal would make them feel less safe or very unsafe.

How do you think our proposals will make you feel when you are travelling through and around the junction? 100% 8% 7% 13% 90% 16% 17% 16% 6% 9% 80% 15% 19% 24% 70% 38% 41% 35% 60%

50% 30% 46% 29% 40% 21% 20% 30% 16% 30% 12% 10% 20% 9% 8% 6% 17% 10% 17% 5% 17% 19% 3% 12% 5% 0% 3% Closure of Additional subway lane for Improved Closure of ramp on traffic Wider pedestrian Putting in subway south east turning left traffic lanes crossings new bus outside corner of from on the with bay near Hollywood junction Kingston roundabout pedestrian Ewell Road Bowl (Sunray Road on to countdown Estate the A3 side) A lot safer 30 32 30 14 12 24 Safer 35 46 76 16 11 27 Make no difference 55 56 56 62 67 83 Less safe 29 23 10 37 36 14 Very unsafe 32 33 5 16 18 11 Don’t know 5 0 10 30 33 21

Figure 2: Shows public responses to question 3

1.4 Summary of responses to Question 4 Question 4 gave respondents the opportunity to provide further comments about the scheme. 192 people responded to this question.

1.4.1 Issues commonly raised The top comments, concerns and suggestions are listed in the table below. The full code frame of responses is shown in Appendix A.

Top issues raised

These measures are for motorists only and do not improve things for 47 cyclists, pedestrians or public transport General support for the scheme 31 Junction needs segregated cycle lanes/better cycling infrastructure 23 Proposals will increase congestion/journey times 22 Proposals will not have a positive effect on air quality 17 Oppose closing subway 16 Why isn't more being done to make the junction less car-dominated? 16 Negligible improvements to cyclist safety 15 More bus priority measures are needed to ease congestion 15 This doesn’t go far enough - TfL needs to look at the wider area for a long- 13 term solution to traffic problems Improving traffic flow will just encourage more traffic 13 General opposition to the scheme 12 Concern that improved lane markings will not improve lane discipline 12 The new lane markings are much needed 11 Scheme is a waste of money 11

1.5 Stakeholder responses

Stakeholder analysis

We received seven stakeholder replies to the consultation.

One stakeholder completed the online survey, two stakeholders completed the online survey and sent in responses by email, these have been consolidated as one reply and four stakeholders emailed their response. All of the responses have been summarised and can be found in Appendix D.

Five stakeholders stated that they considered the proposals are for motorists only and do not improve things for cyclists, pedestrians or people using public transport. They also stated the proposals did not make the junction less car dominated.

Four stakeholders considered that the proposals do nothing or very little to improve air quality in the area. The same number of stakeholders also noted that the proposals go against The Mayors guidance and or strategy on transport.

The same number of stakeholders also considered the shared space in the middle of the road south of the junction along Kingston Road is not inviting due to traffic speed or design.

One stakeholder generally supported the proposals although did raise concern about the loss of the mature tree outside of Hollywood Bowl.

Top issues raised by stakeholders

These measures are for motorists only and do not improve things for 5 cyclists, pedestrians or public transport Why isn't more being done to make junction less car dominated? 5 Shared space in the middle of the road south of the junction along Kingston 4 Road is not inviting due to traffic speed or design. Goes against Mayoral guidance and strategy on transport 4 Proposals will not have a positive effect on air quality 4 Oppose closing subway 3 This doesn’t go far enough - TfL needs to look at the wider area for a long- 3 term solution to traffic problems No benefit for cyclists 3 Junction design at Donald Woods Gardens fails to give priority to people 3 using the two-way cycle track despite putting it on a raised crossing. Cyclists should not have to dismount directly north of the Tolworth station 3 entrance more should be done with the scheme. Proposals go against TfL guidance 3

A full stakeholder code frame can be found in Appendix A.

2. About the consultation

2.1 Purpose The objectives of the consultation were:

 To give stakeholders and the public easily understandable information about the proposals and allow them to respond;

 To understand the level of support for the proposals;

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

2.2 Potential outcomes The potential outcomes of the consultation were:

 Following careful consideration of the consultation responses, we decide to proceed with the scheme as set out in the consultation

 Following careful consideration of the consultation responses, we modify the proposals in response to issues raised and proceed with a revised scheme

 Following careful consideration of the consultation responses, we decide not to proceed with the scheme Our conclusion and next steps are set out in Chapter 4 and briefly in the executive summary.

2.3 Who we consulted We consulted the general public, the local community and local stakeholders on the proposals.

We sent a letter to 1987 residents in the surrounding area to the junction.

Figure 3: Map showing scope of consultation letter drop

We sent an email to 6255 customers who have registered their Oyster card with us to receive information about consultations. A copy of this email can be found in Appendix C. 50 per cent of the emails sent were opened and of these, six per cent of people clicked through to the consultation web page.

We contacted local stakeholder groups such as cycle groups and resident associations. Engaging with these groups allows us to receive a collective view of many members of the local community and people that travel through it. A full stakeholder list can be found in Appendix E

2.4 Dates and duration The consultation was planned to be open between 29 October and 12 December 2019.

A General election was called on the evening of the 29 October 2019 to be held on the 12 December. To allow our audience time to work through the implications of the general election, the consultation was extended on 7 November 2019 to 5 January 2020.

2.5 What we asked The scheme aims to improve journey times through the junction for all users. We wanted to know how often people travel through the junction and how.

Through the work we had done, we understood that some journeys could change if we close some of the access off to the subways so, we asked how people felt the proposals would impact on their journey times through the area.

We sought views on how safe people would feel with the changes we proposed, especially regarding the new road layout around the junction and again people using the subways.

We provided an open text box so consultees could let us know any other views that they may have on the proposals.

We also wanted to know people’s views on the consultation material that we had produced and distributed. People were also able to leave comments about the quality of the consultation.

A full list of the questions we asked can be found in Appendix B.

2.6 Methods of responding People were able to respond to the consultation through a number of ways. They could complete our online survey on the consultation website. They could also write to us at our free post address. We also provided an email address for people to respond to the consultation.

2.7 Consultation materials and publicity As well as the letters and emails we sent out, we carried other activities to promote the consultation, these are listed below.

2.7.1 Media activity A local media briefing was produced, a copy of this can be found in Appendix C.

2.7.2 On-site advertising We had an exhibition board placed in the Tolworth Library between 16 November 2019 and 5 January 2020. The board was placed in the library by the staff and delivered to the Library on the 14 November by us. A copy of the board can be found in Appendix C.

2.7.3 Public meetings drop in sessions We presented the proposals at two local community meetings prior to the consultation launching;

 Thursday 5th September, South of the Borough Neighbourhood Committee, Tolworth Girls School, Tala Close, Surbiton, KT6 7EY

 Tuesday 10th September, Surbiton Neighbourhood Committee at Glenmore House

These meetings were attended by local ward councillors and members of the local communities.

2.8 Equalities Assessment Assessment of the area and who could be interested in the proposals did not highlight any specific issues within the Equalities Impact Assessment (EqIA) or the consultation plan, for example the need for whether any special measures should be taken in regard to producing different formats of consultation material. The local area demographic is mainly English speaking as a first language.

Different formats of the material were available if requested. No formats were requested during the consultation period.

2.9 Analysis of consultation responses Development of a codeframe which summarises and counts the number of comments for the two open questions and analysis of the consultation responses has been carried out by one of our in-house Consultation Analysts. The full codeframe can be seen in Appendix A.

We received 21 responses by letter or email, which were manually entered onto our online consultation portal for analysis.

Duplicate responses were received from two respondents, and these were consolidated.

2.10 Consultation report and responses to issues raised We were due to publish this report in March 2020. Due to the breakout of Covid-19, our staff were furloughed, put on other duties and the future of the scheme was uncertain.

We were unable to pass the report through our internal processes until recently. The report has been revised and updated for publication 10 months later than planned.

3. About the respondents

We received 232 responses to consultation; 225 were from members of the public and seven were from stakeholders.

3.1 Number of respondents The majority of responses were received from the general public.

Respondents Total % Public responses 225 98% Stakeholder responses 7 2% Total 232 100%

3.2 How respondents heard about the consultation Most members of the public who responded heard about the consultation via social media or by an email from TfL.

How did you find out about this Total % consultation? Social media 90 40% Received an email from TfL 52 23% Not Answered 31 14% Received a letter from TfL 17 8% Other (please specify) 17 8% Saw it on the TfL website 10 4% Read about in the press 8 3% Total 225 100%

3.3 Methods of responding The majority of responses from the public were received via our online consultation portal.

Methods of responding Total % Website 204 91% Email and letter 21 9% Total 225 100%

3.4 Comments on the consultation process and material We asked respondents to let us know what they thought about the following seven aspects of the consultation process:

 Website structure & ease of finding what you needed  Written information  Maps, images & related diagrams  Online survey format  Website accessibility  Events & drop-in sessions  Promotional material The graph below shows the responses to these questions. This does not include numbers for those who did not answer each question or who responded ‘not applicable’, in order to show the numbers of people who had a view on each of these aspects of the quality of the consultation.

What do you think about the quality of this consultation? 100%

16% 18% 90% 22% 21% 23% 26% 27% 80% 13% 10% 70%

29% 32% 29% 60% 34% 34% 29% 30% 50%

40% 16% 34% 26% 32% 18% 30% 30% 35% 20%

15% 26% 10% 9% 11% 23% 7% 6% 5% 5% 2% 0% 3% 2% Website structure Maps/ Online Website Events & & ease of Written Promo images/ survey accessibili drop-in finding info material diagrams format ty sessions what you needed Very good 48 40 39 42 45 11 14 Good 63 52 59 54 57 9 8 Adequate 57 61 47 60 58 20 23 Poor 13 16 28 20 4 11 14 Very poor 61191041818

Figure 4: Public responses to question 11 - What do you think about the quality of this consultation?

Most respondents advised that the quality of the consultation website and the online information and visuals were either good or very good. However, fewer of those who responded were satisfied with the quality of the events and promotional material.

Respondents were also able to give us their comments about the quality of the consultation. The top responses are listed in the table below; the full list of responses to this question can be found in Appendix A.

Top responses Consultation not publicised widely enough 12 The questions are loaded to get response TfL wants 8 Maps not clear/too small/too detailed 5 Information not clear/detailed enough 5

4. Next steps

Subject to funding and future decisions, we will work with the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames and other stakeholders to deliver this scheme. Having analysed the consultation responses and considering the current and forecasted traffic in and around the Tolworth roundabout Junction area, we are going to implement the scheme with some changes following the consultation and further reviews of the area. The changes are:

We are now working on developing the detailed design of the scheme. We anticipate starting work in late 2022 with the construction taking around 6-9 months.

Appendix A: Detailed analysis of comments

The analysis of the consultation responses has been carried out by one of our in- house Consultation Analysts.

A draft coding framework of the same or similar themed comments was developed by the Analyst for responses to the two ‘open’ questions. This was finalised following validation by an internal expert, allowing the responses to be reviewed and grouped into themes – these are listed in the tables below, along with the number of comments we received for each theme.

Question 4: Please let us know any comments you have about the scheme.

Support No. of comments General support for the scheme 31

The new lane markings are much needed 11

Support new left turn lane onto A3 10

Support improvements for cycling and walking 6

Proposals will improve traffic flow 6

Support improved pedestrian access to Tolworth station 3

Proposals will make the junction safer 3

Support closure of subway 3

Support new bus bays 1

Opposition

These measures are for motorists only and do not improve things for 47 cyclists, pedestrians or public transport users Proposals will increase congestion/journey times 22

Proposals will not have a positive effect on air quality 17

Oppose closing subway 16

Negligible improvements to cyclist safety 15

This doesn’t go far enough - TfL needs to look at the wider area for a 13 long-term solution to traffic problems General opposition to the scheme 12

Scheme is a waste of money 11

Oppose cyclist dismount/give way signage on cycle lanes 8

Proposals do nothing to speed up traffic flow on A3 7

Cycle provision does not link to other local cycle lanes 7

Scheme will make using the roundabout more dangerous 6

Proposals will make things more difficult for motorists 4

Not convinced by the Healthy Streets assessment 4

Oppose removal of trees 3

Closing subway will mean more pedestrians use surface crossings 3 causing congestion This is not a preferred cycling route 1

General anti-cycling comment 1

Oppose changes which slow down bus journeys 1

Concern

Why isn't more being done to make junction less car-dominated? 16

Improving traffic flow will just encourage more traffic 13

Concern that improved lane markings will not improve lane discipline 12

There isn't enough traffic enforcement at roundabout and surrounding 9 area Subway better than surface crossing for people in wheelchairs/sight 8 impaired etc Concern about the impact of developments in the area - the scheme 5 should be put on hold until it is all complete Signal phasing needs to be reviewed 4

More journey time modelling information is needed to see the impact of 3 the proposals Pedestrians have to wait for too long at crossings and then don't have 3 enough time to cross What will be the impact on local residents/road users when the works are 3 taking place? Will the proposed new 281 bus stop still be installed? 2

If the new shared cycle path doesn't go far enough south, there will be 2 conflict with queuing traffic

Removal of parking bays will displace parked cars to other local roads, 2 causing congestion Concern about the integration of the new lane with the existing A3 slip 1 lane Closing subway will mean pedestrians are stuck if there are problems 1 with road crossings Two left turn lanes will cause a hazard with larger vehicles 1

Pedestrians and cyclists must have priority on crossing across Donald 1 Woods Gardens New traffic lane will mean traffic coming from Tolworth Broadway will not 1 be able to cross roundabout safely Suggestion

Junction needs segregated cycle lanes/better cycling infrastructure 23

More bus priority measures are needed to ease congestion 15

Clear lane markings and signage are needed on the roundabout 10

Separate cycling and pedestrian facilities are preferable to a shared use 9 path Greenway is a failure and should not be extended 7

Access to/from the A3 at Hook roundabout also needs to be considered 6

More trees/greenery needed 4

More needs to be done to make the subways safer 4

The A3 between Tolworth & New Maldon should be submerged in a 3 tunnel Have you considered impact of new developments in the area? 3

There should be four traffic lanes all the way around the roundabout 3

The surface of the cycle/pedestrian crossing on the roundabout should be 2 the same pattern as the Greenway Make the left turn from Kingston Rd onto A3(S) a dedicated filter lane 2 with separate signals Why does northbound A240 need 4 lanes but southbound only 2 lanes? 2

Want bus route between Tolworth and Hook Rise South 1

All subways should be removed 1

A pedestrian bridge over Kingston Road would ease traffic congestion 1 caused by crossing

The scheme should be extended to provide improved cycle access to 1 Worcester Park Any new bus bay needs to be wide enough to allow buses to fully pull off 1

Remove roundabout and replace with crossroads 1

More buses needed to alleviate congestion 1

Why does one minor road near station have a yellow box and the other 1 have keep clear markings? Roundabout should be reduced in size to allow for a straighter approach 1

Better vehicle access to Tolworth station needed 1

Bus stop outside M&S on Tolworth Broadway blocks access to junction 1

Northbound exit onto A3 also needs filter lane 1

The only solution that will improve traffic flow is to build a flyover over the 1 junction Height restriction signage needed for HGVs 1

Pedestrianise the Broadway and reroute traffic via Ewell Rd 1

Replace signalised crossings with zebra crossings 1

Not related to consultation proposals

Comment not relating to consultation 14

Question 11: What do you think about the quality of this consultation

Positive The consultation material was clear 1 Negative Consultation not publicised widely enough 12 The questions are loaded to get response TfL wants 8 Maps not clear/too small/too detailed 5 Information not clear/detailed enough 5 Sham consultation/decision already made 2 The survey screens are not accessible 2 No option to say what modes of transport are used 1 Generally negative 1

There should be alternative, less car-centric options 1 More options needed for frequency of travel question 1 Concerns and other comments Would have liked to have had public meetings about the scheme 1 Please notify respondents of the outcome 1 Would have liked to see more visuals/mock-ups 1 Separate maps for each different travel mode would make things clearer 1 Would like to able to add a picture to response 1

Detailed stakeholder code frame Support No. of comments General support for the scheme 1

Support improvements for cycling and walking 1

Proposals will improve traffic flow 1

Support improved pedestrian access to Tolworth station 1

Support closure of subway 1

Opposition

These measures are for motorists only and do not improve things for 5 cyclists, pedestrians or public transport users Why isn't more being done to make junction less car dominated? 5

Shared space in the middle of the road risks conflict 4

Proposals will not improve air quality 4

Proposals go against Mayoral guidance 4

Oppose closing subway 3

This doesn’t go far enough - TfL need to look at the wider area for a long- 3 term solution to traffic problems There are no cycle benefits 3

The junction design at Donald Woods Gardens fails to give priority to 3 people using the two-way cycle track despite putting it on a raised crossing Cyclists should not have to dismount directly north of the Tolworth station 3 entrance more should be done with the scheme Proposals go against TfL guidance and priorities 3

General opposition 2

Oppose removal of trees 2

Scheme is negative for bus journeys 2

Scheme goes against borough aims 2

This goes against government guidance 2

Staggered crossings should be made straight ahead 2

Healthy Streets assessments are not credible 1

There isn't enough traffic enforcement at junction/roundabout 1

Subway is better than crossing for people in wheelchairs/sight impaired 1 etc Scheme should be stopped 1

Suggestion

Signal controlled pedestrian crossings needed 1

More buses needed to alleviate congestion 1

Appendix B: Consultation questions

Questions

1. Overall, how do you travel through the junction and how often? (select one from each line)

2-3 2-3 times Once a Daily times a Less Never a month month week Walking Cycling Using public transport Using motor vehicles for personal or business journeys

2. Considering our proposals, what impact do you think they will have on your journey time through and around the junction?

(select one from each line)

Make it Make no Make it Don’t know N/a quicker difference slower

Additional lane for traffic turning left from Kingston Road on to the A3

Wider traffic lanes on the roundabout

Improved pedestrian crossings with pedestrian countdown

Closure of subway outside Hollywood Bowl

Closure of subway ramp on south east corner of junction (Sunray Estate side)

Putting in new bus bay near Ewell Road

3 Considering our proposals, how do you think you will feel when you are travelling through and around the junction? (select one from each line)

A lot Make no Very Don’t Safer Less safe N/a safer difference unsafe know

Additional lane for traffic turning left from Kingston Road on to the A3

Wider traffic lanes on the roundabout

Improved pedestrian crossings with pedestrian countdown

Closure of subway outside Hollywood Bowl

Closure of subway ramp on south east corner of junction (Sunray Estate side)

Putting in new bus bay near Ewell Road

4 Please let us know any comments you have about the scheme.

5 Are you responding as: (please tick all that apply)

A local resident A local business Someone who currently works in the area Someone who is going to work in the area in the future Not local, but interested in the proposals Someone who travels through the area

About you

Privacy notice: TfL, its subsidiaries and service providers will use your personal information for the purpose of administering this consultation and assessing the responses. If you provide your email address, TfL may send you updates about this consultation and the proposed scheme. Your personal information will be properly safeguarded and processed in accordance with the requirements of the General Data Protection Regulation 2018.

Responses to the consultation may be made publicly available, but any personal information will be kept confidential. You do not have to provide any personal information, but this information may help TfL to understand the range of responses. For example, responses may be analysed by postcode to help identify local issues.

Please note: Cookies are essential for this survey (for more information on cookies, please click on the following link: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cookie_policy)

What is your name? ………………

What is your email address? ………………… This is optional, but if you enter your email address then you will be able to return to edit your response at any time until you submit it. You will also receive an acknowledgement email when you complete the consultation.

We will contact you to let you know when the results of the consultation are published and may use your details to update you on any future developments with the proposals.

Please provide us with your postcode: …………….. You do not have to provide your postcode, but it is useful for analysis purposes. All personal details will be kept confidential.

Are you (please tick all boxes that apply): A local resident A local business owner

Employed locally A visitor to the area A commuter to the area Not local but interested in buses Other (please specify) …………………

If responding on behalf of an organisation, business or campaign group, please provide us with a name: …………………. Please note: If you are responding on behalf of an organisation it should be in an official capacity. We reserve the right to verify this.

How did you find out about this consultation? Received an email from TfL Received a letter from TfL Read about it in the press Saw it on the TfL website Social media Word of mouth Other (please specify) …………………

What do you think about the quality of this consultation (for example, the information we have provided, any printed material you have received, any maps or plans, the website and questionnaire etc.) Very good Good Acceptable Poor Very poor

Do you have any further comments about the quality of the consultation material? ……………………….

Equality Monitoring

Equality Monitoring Please tell us about yourself in this section. All information will be kept confidential and used for analysis purposes only. We are asking these questions to ensure our consultations reach all sections of the community and to improve the effectiveness of the way we communicate with our customers. You do not have to provide any personal information if you don’t want to.

Gender: Male Female Trans female Trans male Gender neutral Prefer not to say

Ethnic Group: Asian or Asian British – Bangladeshi

Asian or Asian British – Chinese Asian or Asian British – Indian Asian or Asian British – Other Asian or Asian British – Pakistani Black or Black British – African Black or Black British – Caribbean Black or Black British – Other Mixed – Other Mixed – White and Asian Mixed – White and Black African Mixed – White and Caribbean Other Ethnic Group Other Ethnic Group – Arab Other Ethnic Group – Kurdish Other Ethnic Group – Latin American Other Ethnic Group – Turkish White – British White – Irish White – Other Prefer not to say

Age: Under 15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 66-70 71+ Prefer not to say

Sexual Orientation: Heterosexual Bisexual Gay man Lesbian Other Prefer not to say

Religious Faith: Buddhist Christian Hindu Muslim Sikh Jewish Other No religion

Prefer not to say

Are your day-to-day activities limited because of a health problem or disability which has lasted, or is expected to last, at least 12 months? (Please include problems related to old age) Yes, limited a lot Yes, limited a little No Prefer not to say

Appendix C: Consultation letter/leaflet

Copy of public letter

Copy of CRM Email

Are our emails displaying well on your device? If not, allow images or view online

Home Plan journey Status update About

Dear Ms Liang,

We are proposing to make changes to the junction of the A3 Tolworth Road and Kingston Road, to improve journey times in the area.

The proposed changes include:

 A new left turning lane to access the A3 and new developments from Kingston Road  Traffic lanes re-marked around the junction to allow for better lane discipline and more traffic to pass through the area  Installation of pedestrian countdown on pedestrian crossings  Re-surfaced footways between the A3 roundabout and Tolworth rail station  Pedestrians and cyclists would benefit from a new direct journey to Tolworth Rail station from Tolworth town centre

The existing road layout causes severe congestion at peak times. We predict our proposed changes would result in a time saving of 57 seconds in the morning peak and 21 seconds in the afternoon peak for each bus journey through the junction. The only exception to this is the K2 bus route which may be impacted with the traffic expected from the Lidl headquarters.

We would like to know what you think about our proposals. Please visit our website for more information on the proposals and share your views by Friday 29 November 2019.

Yours sincerely,

Consultation Team Transport for London

Email sign up Social Media Fares Maps

Copyright in the contents of this email and its attachments belongs to Transport for London. Any unauthorised usage will infringe that copyright. © Transport for London

These are our consultation email updates. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe.

Appendix D: Summary of Stakeholder replies

Kingston Green Party Cllr Sharron Sumner The Kingston Green Party objected to the following aspects of the proposals

 The creation of an additional, (fourth), northbound lane from the A240 Kingston Road to the A3 westbound. They asked why we and RB Kingston are proposing to make these journeys easier?

 The loss of the mature tree, outside the Hollywood Bowl. Also, the removal of the pedestrian subway.

They quote from the EQIA that the proposals for the shared pedestrian and cycle facility on Kingston Road. ‘risks conflict between pedestrians and cyclists’. They request a more sustainable solution.

They ask for the proposals to be rejected on the points that they have raised.

The councillor also raised concerns about not being engaged with prior to the consultation regarding the proposals.

Epsom and Ewell Council, Councillor Neil Dallen The councillor states that more priority must be given for sustainable transport and not just adding lanes for car usage. The Councillor also considers that the proposals go against government guidance and increases bus travel times.

Kingston Cycling Campaign – The campaign states that a better way to address the forecasted congestion is to provide more and better sustainable transport options in preference to simply providing for and accommodating more motor traffic. They consider that the scheme is contrary to the Mayor's Transport Strategy regarding air quality.

They suggest that what is needed is demand management, serious bus priority measures, clear and attractive walking and cycling routes.

They further state that the proposed measures do not address the gap in the cycle route provision on the west side of Kingston Road in their opinion. They suggest the scheme should be amended to provide a continuous cycle route on the side of Tolworth station.

They further suggest a change to the design so that the cycle track has priority at the junction Donald Woods Gardens.

They further consider that in their opinion the scheme does very little for bus services, with the main "benefit" being reduced journey times for motorists.

They consider that the design in fact makes it difficult for buses on Tolworth Rise North to enter the traffic flow from the changes we proposed.

London Cycling Campaign

They oppose the entire scheme and urge us to reconsider this scheme entirely.

They state that the scheme will not enable significantly more walking or cycling journeys in the area, they consider it will not entice significant numbers of those who currently ride in the road here to use the scheme.

They consider that the speed limit of 40mph will not encourage people to use the new shared space in the centre of the road.

They further consider that the proposed improved pedestrian crossing facilities” in the form of raised tables across side roads and accesses are not sufficient improvement for pedestrians in the area. They suggest that signalised crossings should ideally be direct and single stage, continuous footways should be considered, and a “new drop off” area at the Hollywood Bowl should not be provided.

They state that the Donald Woods Gardens side road junction design seems particularly unsuitable for walking and cycling. They suggest that this should be a continuous footway, with tight kerb radii and the cycle track should also be designed with priority over motor traffic.

The replacement of pedestrian subways with at-grade crossings is supported. But the crossing provision at the roundabout is partial and not sufficient in location or quality in their opinion.

They consider that “It is absolutely unacceptable” that at this, or nearly any, location in London so much space is being taken from pavements (e.g. outside Hollywood Bowl) to provide more space for motor traffic.

They consider that the existing bidirectional cycle tracks on both sides of Kingston Road running south of this scheme’s extents represent a massive missed opportunity in this scheme to improve cycle connectivity and provision in this area. They suggest that small tweaks to the scheme and southwards would enable major gains for cycling in the area.

They consider that the bus stop improvements on Tolworth Rise North do not appear to be an improvement. They state it will make it harder for buses to re-join traffic flow and narrows the pavement. They ask that this be reconsidered.

London Fire Brigade (LFB)

LFB have considered the proposals and have no objections to the proposed changes to the (A3) Tolworth Road - Kingston Road junction.

Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames, Kingston & Sutton Transport, Highways and Regulatory Services

They state that we should design something that gets the traffic flowing better but we should make sure the scheme prioritises above all the need to improve the experience for pedestrians, cyclists and bus passengers.

They consider that it looks like we are trying to solve issues without thinking about the future. They consider that the extra lane to the A3 is clearly to improve traffic flow and possibly air quality but doesn't think about improvements in sustainable modes for the future.

They consider that there is a lack of enforcement at the junction and ask if there Is an opportunity for yellow box junctions and cameras?

They ask if it Is necessary to retain the "cyclists dismount" by Tolworth station? They state motorists are permitted to drive into the carpark, why can't cyclists cycle into it or cycle across it?

They conclude with the fact that they consider this a missed opportunity to provide a bus priority scheme.

Sustrans

They state that the scheme fails to support the switch from private motorised vehicles to bus and active forms of travel so, is not in line with borough and London- wide transport objectives. They consider It is a missed opportunity to reduce the amount of traffic, congestion, and air pollution in the area, and fails to tackle the climate emergency.

They request that the proposals should be revised to include extensive bus lanes and bus gates, ensuring travel by bus is prioritised over private vehicles.

They are particularly concerned by the proposed additional traffic lane for access to the A3, which increases the capacity for motorised traffic without priority improvements for buses.

They strongly oppose the proposed closure of the existing pedestrian and cycle subway access to accommodate a new traffic lane.

They welcome the improvements for pedestrians and cyclists, including the new shared area for cyclists and pedestrians linking Tolworth Rail Station to Tolworth

Town Centre. However, they state that these measures must be enhanced to match best practice.

They suggest the new space for cyclists and pedestrians should be made wide enough to accommodate segregated provision for these user groups, especially given the large number of people accessing the station.

Furthermore, the introduction of countdown on pedestrian crossings will improve safety. However, they suggest staggered crossings should be replaced with straight- ahead, facilitating walking and cycling and a continuous footway and cycle track should be provided across Donald Woods Gardens, which is a cul-de-sac.

They go on to suggest that further consideration should be given to providing safe, high-quality cycle parking at the station, as well as trees and seating. They also request further consideration be given the continuity of cycling provision to the north and south of the scheme, in particular for journeys to the station.

Tolworth and Hook Rise Liberal Democrat’s They consider that the additional lane for traffic turning left from Kingston Road on to the A3 and Putting in new bus bay near Ewell Road will make journeys quicker.

They state that the improved pedestrian crossings with pedestrian countdown, closure of subway outside Hollywood Bowl as well as the subway ramp on south east corner of junction (Sunray Estate side) will make journeys slower, as well as, making people feel less safe or very unsafe.

They state that this is an unimpressive design considering the funding available. This will make no change in timing for traffic from Epsom once all the new developments are in place.

They state that those that have sight issues and the elderly prefer to use the underpasses. They claim that they feel safer but we don't appear to have taken that into account. They ask that TFL could do so much more than this.

Transport for London Youth Panel They support the proposed interventions including repainting road markings, expanding pedestrian space, providing new/improved crossings, and enhancing a bus stop.

They recognise the removal of a tree and ask that this be replaced/replanted in the area.

They suggest that the expanded median, and the wider pavements be used for additional planting, or cycle parking.

Appendix E: List of stakeholders consulted

1st Tolworth (St. Mathews) Scout Group AA

Access in London

Action Disability Kensington & Chelsea

Action on Disability and Work UK Action on Hearing Loss

Advantage Day Nursery Age Concern London

Age UK Age UK London

Aldi

Alive in Space Landscape and Urban Design Studio

All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group Alliance Healthcare

Alzheimer's Society Ann Frye

Anxiety Alliance Anxiety UK

Asian Peoples Disabilities Alliance Aspen Veterinary Surgery

Aspire

Association of British Drivers

Association of Car Fleet Operators

Association of International & Express Couriers

Best Bike Training //Cycletastic bhs bikeability bikeXcite

Borough Cycling Officers Group Bowlrite

Brains Trust Brakes Group

British Cycling British Dyslexia Association

British Land British Medical Association

British Motorcycle Federation BT

Campaign for Better Transport Castle Hill Primary School

Chevaliers Cycle Club

Confederation of Passanger transport Connect

Coop Cycle Experience

Cycle Systems Cycle Training UK (CTUK)

Cyclelyn

Cycling Embassy of Great Britain cycling4all

Cyclists in the City Department for Transport

Design for London Disability Alliance

Disability Rights UK Disabled Go

Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee DPTAC

Driver & Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) EDF Energy

Ehlers Danlos Support UK ELB Partners

Epsom and Ewell Council

GLA Strategy Access Panel members Grand Avenue Primary School

Greater London Authority

Greater London Forum for Older People

Greater London Forum for the Elderly

Guide Dogs for the Blind Association

Guinness Care and Support Ltd Healthwatch Kingston

Hearing Dogs UK Hollywood Bowl

ICE –London Inclusion London

Kingston Adult Education Kingston Advocacy Group

Kingston Carers’ Network

Kingston Centre for Independent Living Kingston Clean Air Now

Kingston Cycling Campaign Kingston Junior Cycle Club

Kingston University London (Tolworth Sports Ground)

Kingston Wheelers Kingstonians FC

Knollmead Primary School Lambert Smith Hampton

Leonard Cheshire Disability Lidl

Linden Bridge School Living Streets

Living Streets Action Group Living Streets London

London Ambulance Service London Bike Hub

London Councils London Cycling Campaign

London European Partnership for Transport

London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority London First

London Older People's Strategy Group

London Omnibus Traction Society London Private Hire Board

London TravelWatch

London Visual Impairment Forum Metropolitan Police

Metropolitan Police Metropolitan Police Service

Meyer Homes MIND

MITIE Mobile Cycle Training Service

Motorcycle Action Group

Motorcycle Industry Association MS Society

National Autistic Society National Motorcycle Council

Network Rail Njinga Cycling

On Your Bike Cycle Training

Organisation of Blind Afro Caribbeans (OBAC)

Our Lady Immaculate Roman Catholic Church

Pan-London Dementia Alliance Parkinson's UK

Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety (PACTS) philip kemp cycle training Planning Design

Premier Inn (Tolworth)

Prevention Team (Healthy London Partnership) RATP Dev London

Riverview CofE Primary & Nursery School RNIB

Road Danger Reduction Forum Road Haulage Association

Roadpeace Rosclare Residential Home

Royal Borough Kingston upon Thames

Royal London Society for Blind People Royal Mail

Royal Mail Parcel Force Royal Parks

Royal Society of Blind Children

Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) Scope

SeLVIS Sense

SITA UK Sixty Plus

South West London and St George's Mental Health South West Railway

South Western Road Club Southborough High School

St George's Church St Matthew's Church

St Paul's C.O.E Primary School Sunray Surgery

Surbiton Town Sports Club

Surrey Wheels for all Disability Cycling Club Sustrans

Thames water The Advocacy Project

The Association of Guide Dogs for the Blind

The British Dyslexia Association

The British Motorcyclists' Federation The Campaign For Courtesy

The Corner House Tolworth Ambulance Station

Tolworth Girls' School & Sixth Form Tolworth Goals

Tolworth Gymnastics Club Tolworth Infant School

Tolworth Junior School Tolworth Motor Company

Tolworth Towers (CNM Estates) Transport Focus

Transport for All Travelodge (Tolworth)

UK Power Networks

Valuing People (TfL's learning disability group) Vision 2020

Walk London West London Alliance

Wheels for Wellbeing White Spider Climbing

Whizz-Kidz

Appendix F: Response to issues raised

Issue Raised Our response to issue These measures are for The proposals are an opportunity to improve existing and motorists only and do not predicted traffic congestion. Once completed the improve things for proposals would provide new cycling facilities and cyclists, pedestrians or improve access for pedestrians. public transport Bus journey times through the area are predicted to lengthen by 16-17 mins due to the increased movements from local developments. The scheme mitigates the impact of the development and has brought overall benefits to journey times for buses in both the AM and PM peaks. Compared to the base situation as on street before the development there is a 14-15mins improvement to bus journey times in the AM peak, and a 2-3 mins improvement in the PM peak.

Junction needs We are providing a new off-carriageway facility through segregated cycle the junction that will link with existing cycleways giving lanes/better cycling cyclists an improved journey to and from Tolworth town infrastructure centre.

Proposals will increase Our traffic modelling has predicted that the proposals congestion/journey times should not impact general traffic journey times and will make bus journeys quicker.

Proposals will not have a Air quality measurements will be made before and after positive effect on air construction to learn whether there has been an impact. quality We carry out environmental evaluations for all major schemes, including an assessment of changes in noise levels and air quality predicted as a result of the scheme to understand any changes in the area.

We are committed to work with the local authority to undertake robust monitoring of the scheme to identify any adverse traffic impact. This includes, modelling the impact of the air quality and to implement any mitigation if necessary.

Oppose closing subway The area in front of the entrance to the subway adjacent outside of Hollywood to Hollywood Bowl needs to be used to build the new bowl traffic lane of the scheme. This will make the subway inaccessible.

Improved pedestrian crossings on the roundabout will make the journey for all pedestrians more accessible.

Why isn't more being The junction has busy roads with lots of commercial done to make the vehicles, buses and private cars. The scheme will junction less car- improve existing congestion and expected traffic dominated? increases because of the new developments coming to the area.

More bus priority Bus journey times through the area will be improved by measures are needed to 16-17minutes in the AM peak and 2-5 minutes in PM ease congestion peak compared to existing journey times.

Improving traffic flow will The scheme has been developed with the additional just encourage more predicted traffic increase from the new consented traffic developments taken into consideration. Journey times in the future will be kept under review following the completion of works.

Concern that improved Improved lane markings would give clear direction and lane markings will not should encourage good driver behaviour. improve lane discipline

Shared space in the The new shared space linking Tolworth Town Centre middle of the road south with Tolworth Rail station will give an uninterrupted of the junction along journey for cyclists and pedestrians. The width of the Kingston Road is not shared space will give similar separation from traffic as inviting due to traffic experienced on pavements adjacent to the highway. speed or design.

The proposals go against The scheme aligns with the Mayor’s Transport Strategy Mayoral guidance and in supporting “Good Growth” and will apply a Healthy strategy on transport Streets approach to urban design.

The junction design at Vehicular turning movements in and out of Donald’s Donald Woods Gardens Wood Gardens are high, in contrast with cycle numbers fails to give priority to which are low with an average of 90 cyclists counted on people using the two-way the two-way cycle track over a 7am – 7pm compared to cycle track despite an average of 1200 vehicle movements. putting it on a raised To provide priority for pedestrians / cyclists through the crossing. side road would require a continuous footway however our criteria for such a provision is not satisfied at this location.

Cyclists should not have We have investigated how to provide a continuous cycle to dismount directly north lane in front of the Network Rail Station – linking the of the Tolworth station proposed toucan crossing and the off carriageway cycle entrance more should be lane. However, to provide safe a cycle facility for done with the scheme. everyone at this location we would need to obtain land from the Network Rail car park. This is not feasible at the moment. We are providing a new off-carriageway cycling facility that will link Tolworth Rail station with Tolworth Town centre that will give a continuous journey without the need to dismount.

Proposals go against TfL These proposals are fully aligned with our objectives and guidance meet the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in supporting “Good Growth” and sustainable travel.

Cycle provision does not The new off carriageway facility links Tolworth rail station link to other local cycle and Tolworth town centre via the existing off-carriageway lanes in the area shared space through the roundabout.

There will be a crossing adjacent to Tolworth Rail station that will link to the existing cycle way on the eastern side of the Kingston Road across Donald Wood Gardens.

Oppose removal of trees Our proposals include planting new trees, with the objective of achieving a total net gain of trees. Existing trees would only be removed as a last resort and if there was a very strong justification for doing so; for example, if it was necessary to the delivery of the scheme as a whole or, if it was in the interests of safety.

We will carry out trials on the extent of the root system in each area, which should enable us to remove fewer trees than we have predicted in the ‘worst case scenario’ presented in our consultation material.

In keeping with the recognised principles of ‘right place, right tree’, we will seek to plant trees that will achieve the largest final canopy cover that is possible for each location.

Concern about the It is anticipated that traffic congestion would increase impact of developments with new developments in the area. in the area - the scheme should be put on hold This scheme aims to address this predicted increase in until they are all complete traffic numbers around the junction.

Signal phasing needs to Traffic signal phasing on the roundabout and A240 will be reviewed be reviewed as part of the design process.

What will be the impact We are committed to working with Royal Kingston Upon on local residents/road Thames residents and other stakeholders throughout the users when the works building of the scheme. are taking place? It is likely that there will be periods of disruption to different road users through the construction phase, and TfL will plan to keep these to a minimum. We will work with local businesses to ensure minimum disruption so deliveries can still happen during the works.

If the new shared cycle The new off carriageway facility will extend south to path doesn't go far Tolworth Rail Station and a Toucan would allow a safe enough south, there will crossing over the northbound carriageway of Kingston be conflict with queuing Road (A240). traffic

Removal of parking bays Vehicles using the unregulated parking bays in front of will displace parked cars Dean Court will have opportunities to use local car parks. to other local roads, Enforcement on the Kingston Road will ensure that causing congestion vehicles do not obstruct traffic movement.

More trees/greenery Subject to ground conditions, our proposals include needed planting new trees, with the objective of achieving more trees in the area than when we started the works.

More needs to be done The remaining subways have a schedule of cleaning and to make the subways maintenance that will not be affected by the proposals. safer Have you considered The proposals are in response to the new consented impact of new developments addressing existing and expected traffic developments in the increases as well as the additional pedestrian and area? cycling journeys that will occur through the area.

Make the left turn from A dedicated lane would limit access to the new housing Kingston Rd onto A3(S) a developments. dedicated filter lane with Traffic modelling has shown that the scheme can be separate signals delivered without additional traffic signalling.

Traffic behaviour will be monitored after delivery to identify if additional measures should be considered.

Why does northbound The information we have on the junction shows that A240 need 4 lanes but traffic can be managed by improving access to the A3 southbound only 2 westbound carriageway as well as giving access to the lanes? new housing developments.

The demand for southbound traffic on the Kingston Road is not as high.

Why does one minor The proposals plan for future designs delivered by the road near station have a new housing scheme that will include a new bus route yellow box and the other exiting from Lansdowne Close. have keep clear markings? The yellow box at this junction will ensure that public transport journey times are maintained.

The consultation was not The consultation material was delivered to 1987 publicised widely enough addresses around the junction. An email was sent to 6255 people who have registered information with us. We also put up an exhibition board in the Tolworth Community library.