DOCSLIB.ORG

Proposed Changes to Parking Restrictions Between 49A and 63 Kew Road Consultation Summary February 2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Proposed Changes to Parking Restrictions Between 49A and 63 Kew Road Consultation Summary February 2017 Proposed changes to parking restrictions between 49A and 63 Kew Road Consultation Summary February 2017 [Type text] Consultation Summary Background Between 5 September 2016 and 17 October 2016, we consulted on proposals to change the parking arrangements in front of 49A-63 Kew Road in the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames. Currently, a single red line allows vehicles to park here any time except Monday – Saturday 7am-7pm. However, it has been observed that vehicles parked on the road in front of 49A-63 Kew Road can make it significantly more difficult for general traffic, including buses, to progress towards Richmond Circus. Access for right turning vehicles from Church Road onto the northbound Kew Road can also be impeded if this section of the road is being used for parking. The introduction of a ‘no parking at any time’ restriction would prevent any parking at all on the immediate approach to the roundabout. This would help to reduce the delays that the current parking area is contributing to. It would also help to regulate traffic flow towards the junction with Richmond Circus, bringing greater consistency to the area across both peak and off-peak periods. The full details of our consultation can still be found on our website: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/kew-road. At the start of the consultation period we wrote to all of the properties along this section of Kew Road. We carried out follow-up visits to several businesses to ensure that they were aware of the consultation. We also wrote to a database of stakeholder organisations and elected representatives, including transport bodies and local politicians. Results of the consultation We received 23 responses to the consultation and of these, 20 answered a question on whether they supported or opposed these proposals. All 20 answered by stating either that they supported the proposals or partially supported them. Seventeen respondents provided comments on the proposals. Of these, 11 people expressed support for the scheme, often on the basis that it would help to reduce congestion in the area. There were two suggestions that parking restrictions should be extended in this area, and another request for a similar scheme at Kew Gardens. Two respondents asked that more road space should be allocated to cycling lanes and facilities. It was suggested by one person that the traffic lights at the Church Road junction should be synchronised with those at Richmond Circus so that they helped to reduce the likelihood of congestion and cars blocking the yellow box junction. Another respondent asked that road signs be installed at the Church Road junction so it was clearer that vehicles could use both lanes on Kew Road rather than only the left lane. One respondent expressed concern that businesses on this section of Kew Road might rely on the existing loading arrangements. Another felt that the restriction would add to the pressure on other parking spaces in this area, and that local residents who pay for their parking privileges would be disadvantaged. It was suggested that the proposed parking restriction was unnecessary outside of peak traffic hours. One respondent was concerned that the proposals may lead to increased traffic speeds. Stakeholder responses We received two responses from stakeholder organisations: The Metropolitan Police Service explained that they had no objections to the proposals The London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority explained that they had visited the site and were satisfied that the proposed changes would have no effect on the London Fire Brigade Next steps Having reviewed the responses to the consultation, we have decided to proceed with the changes described in our consultation material. We intend to create the necessary Traffic Regulation Order to enable the changes, which will involve advertising the intention to make the Order and inviting objections. Subject to the outcomes of that process and other factors, we intend to implement the changes in summer 2017. Response to issues raised Extend the parking restrictions in the area and provide a similar scheme at Kew Gardens: The proposed amendments are for the length of the Transport for London Red Route Return on the southern arm of Kew Road, off of Richmond Circus. The restrictions further along Kew Road come under the authority of the London Borough of Richmond-upon-Thames, who would be responsible for any changes there. Kew Gardens is located on the northern arm of Kew Road, which is also controlled by LB Richmond. We have passed these comments on to the Borough. More road space should be allocated to cycle lanes and facilities: The alteration of the parking restrictions to ‘No Stopping At Any Time’ will prevent vehicles from parking in the nearside lane, which should help to create more space on the nearside lane for cyclists progressing towards Richmond Circus. Synchronise signals at Church Road junction with those at Richmond Circus to reduce likelihood of congestion and blocking of the yellow box junction: The two sets of traffic signals are already synchronised to provide the most efficient possible traffic flows. We regularly review the performance of signalised junctions on the TLRN and make whatever adjustments we think are desirable and achievable. Install road signs at Church Road junction to make it clearer that vehicles can use both lanes on Kew Road rather than only the left lane: A road sign of this type would need to be installed at the beginning of the lane markings on Kew Road, where it would likely obscure the existing roundabout direction sign on the approach to Richmond Circus. However, we will continue to monitor the location to ensure that with the implementation of the ‘At Any Time’ parking restrictions better lane discipline occurs and congestion is reduced. Businesses may rely on existing loading arrangements: When developing our proposals, we established that there are alternative loading arrangements close to the junction of Clarence Street with Kew Road. Our assessment is that the alternative loading space is sufficiently close to the businesses that would currently use the loading bay on Kew Road. This change will increase demand for other parking spaces in area: The change we intend to make to parking restrictions will remove at most four or five potential parking places, during off-peak periods only. We understand that any loss of parking spaces in an area can be problematic, but we are confident that the advantages that the change will bring about, especially for bus passengers, makes this a worthwhile course of action. Appendix A: The consultation notification letter and drawing of the scheme Consultation Team Transport for London 10th Floor, Zone G4, Palestra 197 Blackfriars Road London SE1 8NJ [email protected] 5 September 2016 Dear Sir/Madam Proposed changes to parking restrictions between 49A and 63 Kew Road We are proposing to make changes to the parking arrangements on a section of the A307 Kew Road. The existing single red line restriction would be changed to a double red ‘any time’ restriction between 49A Kew Road - close to the junction with Clarence Street - and 63 Kew Road, where it would join up with the existing double red lines. The purpose of the proposed change is to relieve traffic congestion and improve bus journey time reliability on the approach to the Richmond Circus one way system. Currently, a single red line allows vehicles to park here any time except Monday – Saturday 7am-7pm. However, it has been observed that vehicles parked on the road in front of 49A-63 Kew Road can make it significantly more difficult for general traffic, including buses, to progress towards Richmond Circus. Access for right turning vehicles from Church Road onto the northbound Kew Road can also be impeded if this section of the road is being used for parking. The introduction of a ‘no parking at any time’ restriction would help to reduce the delays that the parking area is contributing to. It would also help to regulate traffic flow towards the junction with Richmond Circus, bringing greater consistency to the area across both peak and off-peak periods. Residents and business owners that currently park on the single red lines in front of 49A-63 Kew Road would need to use alternative parking places. For short term loading stops this is most likely to mean parking on Clarence Street, which can be accessed from Twickenham Road and Parkshot. A drawing of the proposed change is attached to this letter. How to comment on the proposals Website – For further information or to let us know your views please visit our website: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/kew-road Email – Send to [email protected] When responding by email, please add ‘Roads- Kew Road’ in the subject line. Letter – You can also write to us at FREEPOST TFL CONSULTATIONS. The consultation will close on 17 October 2016. Subject to the outcomes of this consultation, we would aim to make this change in spring 2017. Yours faithfully Matthew Hedges Consultation Team, Transport for London [Type text] Appendix B: List of key stakeholders London TravelWatch Elected representatives Zac Goldsmith MP Richmond Park and North Kingston Valerie Shawcross AM GLA Tony Arbour AM GLA Caroline Pidgeon AM GLA Andrew Boff AM GLA Tom Copley AM GLA Fiona Twycross AM GLA Shaun Bailey AM GLA Kemi Badenoch AM GLA Sian Berry AM GLA David Kurten AM GLA Caroline Russell AM GLA Peter Whittle AM GLA Councillor Peter Buckwell South Richmond ward Councillor Pamela Fleming South Richmond ward Councillor Thomas O’Malley South Richmond ward Other stakeholders Barnes Community Association Greater London Authority Strawberry Hill Neighbourhood Association Twickenham Park Residents' Association House of Commons Raynes Park & West Barnes Residents' Association Metropolitan Police London Borough of Richmond-Upon Thames RNIB London Cycling Campaign (Richmond) Richmond Safer Transport Team London TravelWatch London Borough of Richmond upon Thames London Ambulance Service Metropolitan Police Service Heatham Alliance community network [Type text] Disability Rights UK Manor Grove Residents Association.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Park Life: Ensuring Green Spaces Remain a Hit with Londoners
    EMBARGOED UNTIL WEDNESDAY 5 JULY 1017, 5AM Park life: ensuring green spaces remain a hit with Londoners Environment Committee July 2017 EMBARGOED UNTIL WEDNESDAY 5 JULY 1017, 5AM Holding the Mayor to account and investigating issues that matter to Londoners EMBARGOED UNTIL WEDNESDAY 5 JULY 1017, 5AM Environment Committee Members Leonie Cooper AM Tony Arbour AM (Chair) Conservative Labour Caroline Russell AM Joanne McCartney (Deputy Chair) AM Green Labour Jennette Arnold OBE David Kurten AM AM UKIP Labour Shaun Bailey AM Conservative The Environment Committee examines all aspects of the capital’s environment by reviewing the Mayor’s strategies on air quality, water, waste, climate change and energy. Contact Grace Loseby, Assistant Scrutiny Mary Dolan, External Relations Manager Officer Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Telephone: 020 7983 4299 Telephone: 020 7983 4603 Follow us: @LondonAssembly #AssemblyEnv facebook.com/london.assembly EMBARGOED UNTIL WEDNESDAY 5 JULY 1017, 5AM Contents Foreword ........................................................................... 4 Recommendations ............................................................. 7 1. Introduction ............................................................... 9 2. London’s green spaces ............................................. 11 3. Funding for London’s green spaces ......................... 17 4. Alternative delivery methods .................................. 23 5. Towards a greener London ...................................... 28
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 London Mayoral Disability Hustings
    2016 London Mayoral Disability Hustings Text Transcript – 14-04-2016 ANNA: Hi. Welcome to our Hustings here today. I'm Anna; I'm from Leonard Cheshire Disability, thank you all for coming and travelling all this way, thank you for the candidates for coming as well. We are ready to start, so Peter White who is here our chair is going to introduce us. [Applause] In order to turn the microphones on, just press the red button on the microphones. PETER: Can everybody hear at the back OK. SADIQ: Is that working? PETER: Excellent. So my first job as a blind person was to identify the letter red! [Applause] which I was unable to do! Anyway ladies and gentlemen, I'm really impressed at how many people we have here and I think that is an indication of how necessary this kind of operation that we're doing today is. How important it is. I'm Peter White, all I have to say about myself is I have done quite a lot of broadcasting on disability issues and we're going to get through as much as we can today. I know a lot of people have points they want to make so my main job will be to keep things moving. So, a warm welcome, as I say, to what London means to us. A special Hustings, designed to ensure that the many questions which disabled Londoners have about the way their city is run can be put directly to the candidates for Mayor of London. There is a genuine concern that these issues aren't often given the time they need to be explained, that often her misunderstood, skipped over, briefly, or just ignored.
    [Show full text]
  • London Assembly London Voters Elect Both an Assembly Member for Each Constituency and Also ‘Top-Up’ Members for the Whole City Constituency Members
    London Assembly London voters elect both an assembly member for each constituency and also ‘top-up’ members for the whole city Constituency members Total of 25 seats Liberal Party Votes Turnout Labour Conservatives Democrats Greens UKIP BNP Barnet and Camden Net loss Net loss 1 2 2 2 1 Brian Coleman Conservative 70,659 46.33% Net gain Net gain Net gain Bexley and Bromley James Cleverly Conservative 105,162 49.13% Total Total Total Total Total Total Brent and Harrow 8 11 3 2 0 1 Navin Shah Labour 57,760 42.17% City and East 14 seats Containing boroughs: in directly elected Barking & Dagenham,Newham, Tower Hamlets, City of London constituencies 33.26% John Biggs Labour 63,635 39.79% % vote for winner Enfield & 40.48% Haringey Croydon and Sutton Barnet & Steve O'Connel Conservative 76,477 45.16% Camden Ealing and Hillingdon 37.29% Richard Barnes Conservative 74,710 41.53% Brent & 47.67% Harrow Havering Enfield and Haringey 42.90% & Redbridge North East Joanne McCartney Labour 52,665 42.9% 43.15% 33.97% Ealing & City & East Greenwich and Lewisham Hillingdon 53.41% Len Duvall Labour 53,174 42.29% West Havering and Redbridge Central 36.21% Roger Evans Conservative 78,493 44.58% 37.16% Greenwich Lambeth and Southwark Lambeth & 40.82% & Lewisham Val Shawcross Labour 60,601 41.27% South West 44.85% Southwark Merton & Merton and Wandsworth Wandsworth Richard Tracey Conservative 75,103 46.18% 52.60% North East Bexley & Containing boroughs: Bromley Waltham Forest, Hackney, Islington 44.08% Jeanette Arnold Labour 73,551 37.95% Croydon & Sutton South West Containing boroughs Hounslow, Richmond upon Thames, Kingston upon Thames Tony Arbour Conservative 76,913 45,39% London-wide members West Central Containing boroughs: BNP Westminster, Kensington & Chelsea, Hammersmith & Fulham Kit Malthouse Conservative 86.651 43.15% Andrew Victoria Gareth Nicky Murad Mike Dee Caroline Jenny Darren Richard Boff Borwick Bacon Gavron Qureshi Tuffrey Doocey Pidgeon Jones Johnson Barnbrook.
    [Show full text]
  • (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Council, 03/10/2018 19:30
    Public Document Pack Lewisham Council Members Members of the committee, listed below, are summoned to attend the meeting to be held on Wednesday, 3 October 2018. Ian Thomas, Chief Executive September 25 2018 Mayor Damien Egan Councillor Obajimi Adefiranye Councillor Abdeslam Amrani Councillor Tauseef Anwar Councillor Chris Barnham Councillor Paul Bell Councillor Peter Bernards Councillor Chris Best Councillor Kevin Bonavia Councillor Andre Bourne Councillor Bill Brown Councillor Juliet Campbell Members of the public are welcome to attend committee meetings. However, occasionally, committees may have to consider some business in private. Copies of agendas, minutes and reports are available on request in Braille, in large print, on audio tape, on computer disk or in other languages. Councillor Suzannah Clarke Councillor Patrick Codd Councillor Tom Copley Councillor Liam Curran Councillor Janet Daby Councillor Brenda Dacres Councillor Sophie Davis Councillor Amanda De Ryk Councillor Joe Dromey Councillor Colin Elliott Councillor Alex Feis-Bryce Councillor Aisling Gallagher Councillor Leo Gibbons Councillor Alan Hall Councillor Carl Handley Councillor Octavia Holland Councillor Sue Hordijenko Councillor Coral Howard Councillor Mark Ingleby Councillor Liz Johnston-Franklin Councillor Caroline Kalu Councillor Silvana Kelleher Councillor Louise Krupski Councillor Jim Mallory Councillor Paul Maslin Councillor Sophie McGeevor Members of the public are welcome to attend committee meetings. However, occasionally, committees may have to consider
    [Show full text]
  • Routes 289 and 455 Consultation Report July 2017
    Consultation on proposed changes to bus routes 289 and 455 Consultation Report July 2017 Contents Executive summary ..................................................................................................... 4 Summary of issues raised during consultation ......................................................... 4 Next steps ................................................................................................................ 4 1. About the proposals ............................................................................................ 5 1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Purpose .......................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Detailed description ........................................................................................ 5 2. About the consultation ........................................................................................ 7 2.1 Purpose .......................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Potential outcomes ......................................................................................... 7 2.4 Who we consulted .......................................................................................... 7 2.5 Dates and duration ......................................................................................... 7 2.6 What we asked ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Earlier Parks Charles I's New Park
    The Creation of Richmond Park by The Monarchy and early years © he Richmond Park of today is the fifth royal park associated with belonging to the Crown (including of course had rights in Petersham Lodge (at “New Park” at the presence of the royal family in Richmond (or Shene as it used the old New Park of Shene), but also the Commons. In 1632 he the foot of what is now Petersham in 1708, to be called). buying an extra 33 acres from the local had a surveyor, Nicholas Star and Garter Hill), the engraved by J. Kip for Britannia Illustrata T inhabitants, he created Park no 4 – Lane, prepare a map of former Petersham manor from a drawing by The Earlier Parks today the “Old Deer Park” and much the lands he was thinking house. Carlile’s wife Joan Lawrence Knyff. “Henry VIII’s Mound” At the time of the Domesday survey (1085) Shene was part of the former of the southern part of Kew Gardens. to enclose, showing their was a talented painter, can be seen on the left Anglo-Saxon royal township of Kingston. King Henry I in the early The park was completed by 1606, with ownership. The map who produced a view of a and Hatch Court, the forerunner of Sudbrook twelfth century separated Shene and Kew to form a separate “manor of a hunting lodge shows that the King hunting party in the new James I of England and Park, at the top right Shene”, which he granted to a Norman supporter. The manor house was built in the centre of VI of Scotland, David had no claim to at least Richmond Park.
    [Show full text]
  • To LADY BROWNE, Ca Monday 1 October 1781 to LADY BROWNE
    To LADY BROWNE CA 19 JULY 1781 203 please, you may say, as I really have got more pain in my shoulder by the door of Mrs French's1 room being open upon it last night. [PS.] I had just written this and was going to send; your Ladyship will see that I cannot have the honour of waiting on you this eve­ ning. To LADY BROWNE, ca Monday 1 October 1781 Printed from the MS now WSL. First printed, Toynbee xv. 440. The MS was owned by Denham and Co. in 1902; owned by J. Pearson and Co., 1905; not further traced until sold by Heffer in March 1940 to WSL, inserted in a MS copy of The Mysterious Mother. Dated conjecturally by HW's handwriting and his letter to Lady Ossory of 7 Oct. 1781 in which he tells how Lady Browne and he were robbed on their way to Twickenham Park and mentions Lady Margaret Compton as being present. [Strawberry Hill], Monday. AS THE Pococks1 will not be at home this evening, Madam, and X~\ Lady Margaret goes to Twickenham Park, you would like perhaps to go thither too, and I should be too many; I will there­ fore defer waiting on your Ladyship tonight, and go with you to the Pococks or to the Duchess of Montrose tomorrow, which you please, if you are not engaged; but send me word what you choose of all. To LADY BROWNE, ? October 1781 Extract, printed from Puttick and Simpson's catalogue of autographs, 24 Dec. 1857, lot 34- The MS was sold to Knox; not further traced.
    [Show full text]
  • Name City Comment Twick Riverside Park Teamtwickenham This Is What Residents Have Been Asking for for Many Years. Richard Brown
    Name City Comment Twick Riverside Park TeamTwickenham This is what residents have been asking for for many years. Richard Brown Twickenham The riverside should be for enjoying, not for parking. Shirley Freeth Newhaven This would enable more people to enjoy this beautiful area. Daniel Emmanuel Doncaster We residents must support, 3 emily saunders Twickenham Agreed - no carpark on our riverside. Within the entire riverside development there is no reason where the cars cannot Linda Kerr Chilton Webe place need in to a keep non-obstructing the riverside position beautiful. in relationA carpark to is the an rivereyesore. (People could cycle instead!) Katherine Conlon Teddington I'm signing because this is so much better than the Council plan. Brigitte Pickersgill Twickenham Twickenham deserves it and a lido would also attract families to this beautiful riverfront. NO SURFACE CARPARK Paul Kershaw Twickenham Your plans are an opportunity wasted. So much more can be done and this is just one example Brian Spencer Twickenham This is a far more pleasant and attractive development than all other proposals. It will add great value to Twickenham. Alexandra Fulcher Isleworth I've grown up in Twickenham and there needs to be more green spaces. Peter clarke Twickenham I feel it is important to preserve the beauty around our historical river Gary [email protected] This is a once in a lifetime opportunity. Remove all car parking from the riverside to make it a genuine destination. Sarah mackenzie Twickenham This is a once only opportunity to realise Twickenhams amazing potential, and leaving a car park on the most beautiful stretch of riverside is frankly crazy JUstine elliott Twickenham Park not carl park June Eyles Potters Bar I spend a lot of time in Twickenham as my family live there.
    [Show full text]
  • First Agenda Autumn Conference 2020
    First Agenda Autumn Conference 2020 1 Table of Contents Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................... 2 Section A .................................................................................................................................... 5 A1 Amendments to Standing Orders for the Conduct of Conference to enable an online and telephone Extraordinary Conference to be held in Autumn 2020 ................................. 5 A2 Enabling Motion for an Extraordinary Autumn Conference 2020 to be held online ....... 7 Section B .................................................................................................................................... 8 B1 Food and Agriculture Voting Paper .................................................................................. 8 Section C................................................................................................................................... 15 C1 Adopt the Principle of Rationing to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions Arising from Travel, Amending the Climate Emergency and the Transport Chapters of PSS .................. 15 C2 The 2019 General Election Manifesto and Climate Change Mitigation ......................... 17 C3 Animal Rights: Fireworks; limit use and quiet ................................................................ 19 C4 Updating the philosophical basis to reflect doughnut economics ................................. 20 C5 Car and vans to go zero carbon by
    [Show full text]
  • 5. APPENDIX 3 Letter Attachment 210720
    Transcript of Conservative G roup (London Borough of Havering) meeting held at Havering Town Hall on 03 February 2020 Speakers (in order of first speaking) - All Conservative councillors Cllr Damian White (DW) Cllr Joshua Chapman (JC) Cllr Robert Benham (RobB) Cllr Bob Perry (BP) Cllr Timothy Ryan (TR) Cllr Roger Ramsey (RR) Cllr Ray Best (RayB) Cllr Christine Vickery (CV) Other persons mentioned in audio (in order of first mention ) Andrew Blake-Herbert (Chief Executive, London Borough of Havering) (AB-H) Andrew Rosindell MP (Conservative MP for Romford) (AR) Cllr Darren Wise (North Havering Residents Group) (DWise) Cllr Brian Eagling (North Havering Residents Group) (BE) Julia Lopez MP (Conservative MP for Hornchurch and Upminster) (JL) Andrew Boff (Conservative Party - London Assembly Assembly Member) (ABoff) T ime on audio (mm:ss) (Paragraph breaks in text are for easier reading purposes only) Audio starts. 00:00 - 02:53 DW - "One is with the 52 councillors....(00:03 - 00:05 Inaudible) ......basically the parameters that we need. And all need to be different aspects of the Boundary Commission’s technical guidance. Instead of submitting those four to the Full Council when we decide which ones we want subject, er, us doing the amendments, Andrew (AB-H) has now agreed that we can have a Governance Committee meeting to, um, discuss the four options, pick which one we like, make any amend, recommendations and changes to it and that then goes on to Full Council as an administration amendment or a motion, so the previous one gives the officers..... (00:39 - 00:47 mostly inaudible) ......the option of going forward.
    [Show full text]
  • A School of Choices
    Friday 23rd April 2021 @hounslowherald @hounslowherald hounslowherald.co.uk Got a story? call: 020 3623 0567 [email protected] Falcons Pre-Preparatory School Where the Right Start Matters Register now Please contact [email protected] 2 Burnaby Gardens, Chiswick, W4 3DT 020 8747 8393 | www.falconsboys.co.uk A SCHOOL OF CHOICES 12934-Falcons Pre-Preparatory School-Where the Right Start Matters Paper Wrap V3.indd 2 10/03/2021 14:22 Friday 23rd April 2021 @hounslowherald @hounslowherald Falcons Nursery Chiswick hounslowherald.co.uk Got a story? call: 020 3623 0567 Part of Falcons Pre-Preparatory School [email protected] Now taking registrations T: 020 8995 9538 E: [email protected] NEWS Investigation launched after man dies following police chase in Will climate change Hounslow commitments put a stop to Heathrow expansion? Page 20 London According to anti- NEWS More bus strikes set to disrupt expansion campaigners, local travel plans for Heathrow’s third runway are hanging in the balance following the government’s revelation this week that it would be including New co-educational emissions from aviation in the UK’s sixth carbon Nursery (ages 2-4) budget which has a Page 09 legally binding target to cut emissions by 78% by NEWS Pop up blood donation centre Limited places for 2035 - following advice to open in Hounslow as part of from the Climate Change Covid-19 study September still available Committee (CCC). Áine McGinty [email protected] Morning or full day options ne group, the No 3rd Run- way Coalition, has said that this declaration means Heathrow expansion is Onow ‘near impossible to deliver’.
    [Show full text]
  • A Vote for Confidence?
    DR Elections Review Working Group Vote of Confidence? Lessons Learned from the 2010 General and Local Elections February 2011 Elections Review Working Group Vote of Confidence? Lessons Learned from the 2010 General and Local Elections February 2011 Copyright Greater London Authority February 2011 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen‟s Walk More London London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk enquiries 020 7983 4100 minicom 020 7983 4458 ISBN This publication is printed on recycled paper Elections Review Working Group Members Andrew Boff (Chairman) Conservative Jennette Arnold Labour Len Duvall Labour Darren Johnson Green Steve O‟Connell Conservative Caroline Pidgeon Liberal Democrat Contents Foreword 7 Executive Summary 8 1 Introduction 10 2 Issues to be reviewed 12 3 Queues and people being unable to vote 15 4 Administrative challenges: Voter registration and postal votes 26 5 The Count 33 6 Learning lessons from the May 2010 elections in London 35 Appendix 2 Individual Registration 39 Appendix 3 Orders and translations 40 6 Foreword We pride ourselves that democracy is in this country's DNA. There is a danger that that pride can lead to complacency. The elections in May 2010 were a reminder that we should constantly review the mechanisms that are in place to enable the citizen's right to vote. The 2010 elections will be remembered for the crowds outside the polling stations. In Hackney and Islington, those crowds were waiting patiently to vote but hundreds were unable to exercise that fundamental right when the polls closed. In other parts of London, those crowds were last minute canvassers, trying to cajole voters into supporting, or not supporting, particular candidates .
    [Show full text]