a3_11 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Appeals against ‘inadequate’ consultation London Assembly petitions
In October 2003, Assembly members presented six separate petitions to the Mayor complaining about lack of consultation in relation to:
z Cross River Transit
Brian Coleman ‘We, the undersigned, object to this proposal because the tram will run close to three schools, disrupt the Chalton Street Market, disrupt the summer festival and be a nonsense in residential areas.’ z West London Tram
Richard Barnes ‘We, the undersigned residents of Ealing, are opposed to the diversion of traffic onto residential streets which result from any closure of the Uxbridge Road to clear space for the West London Transit scheme.’ z Bus services (G1, 361, 272)
Elizabeth Howlett ‘We, the undersigned, request the Mayor of London to address the following ongoing problems regarding the G1 bus route in Broomwood Road, London SW11:
1. The size of bus is too large for safe operation in a residential road with restricted width, resulting in congestion and damage to parked cars. We request a return to the original ‘hopper’ style bus with strict adherence of the 20mph speed limit
2. The new style bus is very noisy, contrary to the promise from London Buses, of a bus with a quieter engine. This, coupled with the early and late hours of the bus, not justified by passenger numbers, causes unnecessary sleep disturbance to residents.’
Bob Neill ‘I, the undersigned, call for a bus service or bus services in the Elmers End area to 1) connect Elmers End directly to Eden Park/Village Way/ Beckenham/Bromley; 2) connect Elmers End with Crystal Palace along a direct route on the A214. We call for a trial run for this route or routes, which are similar to that formerly run by the 361, serving a substantial population of elderly people in sheltered housing and private homes in Elmers End and Eden Park and connecting them to doctors surgeries,pharmacies, hospitals, and Beckenham and Bromley shops.’
Angie Bray ‘We, the undersigned, wish this petition to register our dismay and anger over the way in which Transport for London is forcing the new 272 bus route down Emlyn and Larden Roads which are wholly unsuitable, against the expressed wishes of the residents. Transport for London has consistently ignored our views and failed to answer our questions about the research undertaken into the route and its financial viability. Meanwhile, it is also ignoring the wishes of many more residents nearby who want the new 272 bus route to run along Goldhawk and Askew Roads to supplement the poor bus service there.’
z Congestion charging
Valerie Shawcross ‘We, the undersigned, call on the Mayor of London to: hold a public inquiry into the congestion charging scheme in Lambeth; carry out an environmental pollution impact assessment and a local business impact assessment; move the proposed zone boundary to the North of the Thames in Westminster; enforce the nighttime lorry ban in Kennington Lane; install speed cameras and measures to enforce the speed limit and calm the traffic on Kennington’s major roads; lift the red route parking restrictions on Saturdays and install a ‘tidal flow’ on weekdays to aid small business deliveries and customer parking at local shops.’
Next case study >> 12: A2 safety measures
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_11.htm 07/05/2009 a3_12 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Communicating after implementation A2 safety measures
TfL received numerous emails from irate drivers in late 2001/early 2002 about safety measures introduced on the A2 in Bexley, who felt they had neither been consulted nor told why the changes had been introduced and that the scheme had been dreamt up by people with no experience of the area who were unaware of what was happening once the scheme had gone live. These sort of perceptions need to be addressed. Next case study >> 13: Romford school bus stop
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_12.htm 07/05/2009 a3_13 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Communicating after implementation Romford school bus stop
In November 2002 TfL introduced changes to a bus route in Romford. The bus route served a local school and the buses used the car park to drop children off. The changes moved the drop-off point to a nearby bus stop that meant pupils had to cross a busy road to reach the school. The Headmaster claimed that insufficient consultation had been done. London Buses reinstated the original arrangement and apologised to the school and concerned parents for the error. This quick action to put things right was much appreciated.
Next case study >> 15: Traffic order
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_13.htm 07/05/2009 a3_14 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Common law principles P10 bus route
The Queen v London Transport Buses Ex Parte Polubinski and Others
Application for Judicial Review, 16 January 1998
The Applicants were residents of an estate in North London. The Respondent, London Transport Buses (LTB) had re-routed one of its services through the estate. The Applicants applied for judicial review of the decision to re-route the bus.
LTB successfully opposed the application for judicial review and satisfied the Court that the consultation process was carried out correctly. However, there are lessons to be learned from the Judgement as the Judge found that various letters sent by LTB personnel were somewhat misleading or confusing. Specifically some of the wording in LTB’s letters gave the impression that LTB was not acting correctly in that it had made up its mind to introduce a new route irrespective on the outcome of consultation. Further, a letter dated 3 June appeared to contradict a letter dated 2 June by suggesting that a decision was about to be made when the earlier letter to a different individual indicated that a decision had already been made. When a number of letters are produced for scrutiny by a judge, adverse inferences may be drawn very easily. In this case the Judge did draw such inferences and as a result did not award costs in the Respondents favour.
Next case study >> 15: Traffic order
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_14.htm 07/05/2009 a3_15 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Common law principles Traffic order
R (on the application of Wainwright) v Richmond Upon Thames London BC [2001] ALL ER 151
The appellant local authority approved a proposal for a toucan crossing and associated works under sections 6 and 23 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. Section 23 required the local traffic authority to give public notice of its proposal. All parties accepted that the council’s duty to consult arose from representations it had made that it would consult in respect of this particular proposal (legitimate expectation).
The system adopted by the council to notify and consult the public contained four main elements; press notices, site notices, individual notification and reports to interested groups. The judge in the first court concluded that the consultation process was flawed in that the authority had sent out an insufficient number of mailings to all of the residents, site notices were posted after the deadline for comments, the location was not adequately identified in newspaper advertisements and one of the advertisements did not specifically invite comments or representations from interested persons. The application for judicial review was allowed and the decision to approve the crossing was quashed. The council appealed.
The Court of Appeal concluded that the only respect in which the council could be said to be in breach of its duty to notify and consult was in failing to organise and carry out an adequate mailing of local residents in the area. However, it allowed the appeal as even if the council had complied fully with its duty it was highly unlikely that it would have reached a different decision.
Despite the Court of Appeal overturning the earlier decision, the case highlights the importance of carrying out adequate notification and consultation processes. In particular useful points can be identified in respect of mailings. The Court of Appeal stated that although there may be difficulties in identifying how many residents there are in a house, it is not asking too much for an authority to instruct the person who is carrying out the mailing to ensure that one leaflet is delivered for each flat.
Next case study >> 16: Crossrail line 1
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_15.htm 07/05/2009 a3_16 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Presenting your proposal Crossrail line 1 [click this link to view the Crossrail line 1: stakeholder consultation, May 2002 as an Acrobat (PDF) file]
A good example of a consultation document on a major scheme was Crossrail line 1: stakeholder consultation published in May 2002.[The consultation document is available here as an Acrobat (PDF) file.] This 24-page report, illustrated with numerous maps, sets out clearly the objectives of the project and takes the reader through the preliminary sifting process and the reasons for rejecting particular approaches. It then provides details of the options on the short list, looking at key areas served; key interchanges; impact on other services; engineering implications and benefits. Finally, it sets out the basis on which decisions will be taken and asks for comments. carrying out the mailing to ensure that one leaflet is delivered for each flat.
Extracts from ‘Crossrail line 1: stakeholder consultation’ report, May 2002 Next case study >> 17: Private hire driver licensing
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_16.htm 07/05/2009 a3_17 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Presenting your proposal Private hire driver licensing
The consultation paper on private hire driver licensing, issued in June 2001, contains a full list of those to whom the consultation had been sent, and a statement that respondents should expect that the contents of their responses may be made public.
Next case study >> 18: Bus Priority Action Plan 2004–2011
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_17.htm 07/05/2009 a3_18 Page 1 of 2
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Presenting your proposal Bus Priority Action Plan 2004–2011
The Bus Priority Action Plan 2004–2011 consultation draft, issued in October 2002, contains an executive summary and makes good use of photos to bring the document to life and help the reader to visualise innovative street design options.[A sample page of this document is available here as an Acrobat (PDF) file.]
The cover from the ‘Bus Priority Action Plan 20014–2011, Consultation Draft’, October 2002
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_18.htm 07/05/2009 a3_18 Page 2 of 2
Extract from the Bus Priority Action Plan
Next case study >> 19: Thames Gateway Bridge
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_18.htm 07/05/2009 a3_19 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Presenting your proposal Thames Gateway Bridge
The Thames Gateway Bridge Project Team carried out detailed qualitative and quantitative market research in the run-up to its public and stakeholder consultation. This included public awareness of the bridge, both spontaneous and prompted and attitudes towards it— its benefits, disadvantages and impacts. Ten group discussions were held in Barking (2), New Charlton, Abbey Wood, Thamesmead (3), Dagenham, Oxleas Wood and Rainham during September/ October 2002. These were particularly valuable in raising questions which the public wanted answered, which helped to inform the design of the consultation process.
Next case study >> 20: London Underground station upgrade projects at Camden Town and Tottenham Court Road
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_19.htm 07/05/2009 a3_20 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Addressing and delivering your letters London Underground station upgrade projects at Camden Town and Tottenham Court Road
London Underground consulted on proposals to upgrade Tottenham Court Road station from February 2000 to July 2000, and Camden Town from December 2000 to April 2001.
In both cases, they used the electoral roll to put together a mailing list of local residents living within a 250m radius of the station. They also sent a researcher to walk the streets within a 250m radius of the station, with a clipboard, noting down the names of each business and speaking to staff and managers—where necessary on office intercoms—to establish contact names. The consultation manager then wrote a mailmerged personal letter to the named contact: a letter ‘from a person to a person’, enclosing a consultation leaflet.
Next case study >> 21: A406 Bounds Green
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_20.htm 07/05/2009 a3_21 Page 1 of 2
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Consultation leaflets: involving local people A406 Bounds Green
Plans to address traffic and environmental problems in this part of the North Circular go back over 40 years. TfL Street Management informed residents that the Mayor considered the Government’s former scheme to be neither sustainable nor affordable. A meeting of local groups and politicians was held to explain the thinking behind the proposals and to discuss how best to engage the local community.
A meeting was held in Bowes Road Primary School in Bounds Green in May 2002, at the initiative of the Deputy Mayor and local GLA Assembly member Nicky Gavron. Attendees included representatives from several residents’ associations, local businesses and community groups, London Borough of Enfield, the local MP and staff from TfL Street Management and London Buses.
A follow-up meeting was held at TfL’s headquarters. The effects of traffic congestion on cars and buses was discussed, as well as concerns about heavy lorries, pollution and road accidents in the area. TfL Street Management managers explained the proposals with the aid of detailed maps.
A discussion followed regarding the information people required during the consultation. The conclusions were:
z the full implications of any proposal in terms of traffic, crossings, buses etc. must be made clear
z TfL Street Management should be honest about costs and benefits, winners and losers
z the number of houses required for the scheme must be specified and the use made of receipts from their sale must be clarified
z consultation must include any proposed controlled parking schemes (CPZs) and use of CPZ revenues
A draft consultation leaflet was discussed, and the following changes made:
z main wording on cover changed from ‘A406 North Circular Road: public exhibition’ to the more specific ‘A406 Bounds Green to Green Lanes: safety and environmental proposals’
z words ‘public exhibition’ moved below the map on the front cover
z map (on front cover) changed to cover a smaller geographical area, clearly identifying exhibition venue on map
z • exhibition dates listed on front cover
z small changes to terminology in map on inside pages of the leaflet
z Changes to description of proposals—adding ‘returning property to sustainable use’, bus improvements not just limited to frequency, reference to new surface pedestrian crossings
z buses passing the exhibition venue to be listed
z translation of the leaflet was advised: following advice from the local council, the leaflet was translated into five languages (Bengali, French, Greek, Gujarati and Turkish.)
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_21.htm 07/05/2009 a3_21 Page 2 of 2
z translators were available at the exhibition to answer technical questions, not covered by the translation of the leaflet
z the plan to hold an exhibition at Enfield Civic Centre was cancelled, since this was widely regarded as unbeneficial as it was situated too far away. Unstaffed displays were added at Arnos Grove tube station, Alexandra Park Library, Palmers Green Library and Tesco at Colney Hatch Lane, to stimulate interest throughout the catchment area.
Residents proposed a widening of the catchment area for publicity and offered to help with the distribution of leaflets. They advised against seeking publicity in a particular local paper which, although widely circulated, ‘goes straight in the bin.’
Next case study >> 22: Cross River Tram
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_21.htm 07/05/2009 a3_22 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Exhibitions, road shows and open days: choosing a venue Cross River Tram
One of the best attended exhibitions for consultation on the principle of the Cross River Transit took place in the foyer of the Brixton Leisure Centre.
It was originally allocated to a downstairs room, but our exhibition staff persuaded venue staff to allow them to use a lobby area through which 100% of leisure centre users had to pass. Consequently, up to 100 people an hour took away leaflets about the scheme, with many of them spending time looking at the display and talking to staff.
Next case study >> 23: School liaison programme
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_22.htm 07/05/2009 a3_22 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
When to use community meetings School liaison programme
LT Museum communicates with approximately 20,000 children each year, through a combination of station tours and school visits. (London Buses also has an extensive programme of school visits).
Station tours aim to raise understanding and awareness of who does what. Typically they involve up to 35 children with adults. School visits make use of powerpoint video presentations, targeting up to 240 children at a time over a one hour to 90 minute school visit. Schools can opt for a package of visits over time: they are not limited to a one-off.
There is immediate feedback from children and adults, and this appears to lead to improved awareness and satisfaction on the day. The best feedback tends to come from older children (A level and GCSE students) and adults, although occasionally a new point is raised by a primary school child. For example, an A level physics group engaged in a high level safety debate at Moorgate. However, the messages are not captured and fed into the businesses in any systematic fashion: a major missed opportunity which should be addressed.
The tours and visits are supported by a citizenship resource pack, about half of which is made up of words, the other half photographs.
Next case study >> 24: West London Tram
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_23.htm 07/05/2009 a3_24 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Local consultation groups (LCGs) West London Tram
In February 2003, TfL’s West London Tram team established a number of local consultation groups in LB Ealing to engage key stakeholder groups in the development of the detailed scheme prior to depositing the draft Transport & Works Act (TWA) with the Secretary of State. Similar groups may be established in Hillingdon and Hammersmith & Fulham, if there is a demand for them.
LCGs comprise a comprehensive mix of stakeholder interests, including resident groups, business groups, age specific groups and different transport modal groups.
The main aim of the LCGs is to involve local people in the detailed design of the tram proposal, giving them an opportunity to work through their concerns and ideas for improvements with the WLT project team; prior to the deposit of the TWA Order.
Within Ealing, 5 LCGs have been set up, one for each Town Centre area (Acton, Ealing, West Ealing, Hanwell and Southall). The aim is to have no more than 30 people in each group.
The Groups will meet around 4 times in total, with 4–6 weeks in between each meeting to allow the WLT project team to respond to the suggestions emanating out of the group discussions.
It is hoped that the LCGs will help to draw out a number of the local stakeholder concerns (many of which can hopefully be resolved prior to the depositing of the TWA Order), prior to the more formal consultation stage which will accompany the depositing of the TWA Order.
Next case study >> 25: London Buses challenge workshop
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_24.htm 07/05/2009 a3_25 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Stakeholder events: defining objectives London Buses challenge workshop
London Buses held a ‘challenge workshop’ in July 2002 for boroughs and other key stakeholder groups as part of its best value review of statutory consultation on bus services changes. Written objectives were set for the workshop. These were to:
z gain a common understanding of London Buses’ objectives and principles for statutory consultation
z gain an understanding of the work performed as part of the best value review
z generate input on the opportunities for improvement for statutory consulted performed by London Buses
z gain consensus on the way forward for improving current statutory consultation performed by London Buses.
Next case study >> 26: London City Airport Extension
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_25.htm 07/05/2009 a3_26 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Site visits London City Airport Extension
During the early stages of the engineering feasibility and outline design it was clear that gardens of approximately 20 houses along the route, close to the airport, would be affected temporarily. So a more personalised consultation process was implemented such as local public meetings on community-wide issues in relation to the project. During this process some very specific concerns arose regarding how the viaduct would be constructed, what the new viaduct would look like, how close the viaduct would be in proximity to the gardens and what environmental mitigation measures would look like.
DLRL felt that where one particular group has a set of concerns that don’t affect the community as a whole, it’s wise to deal with side, but sensitive issues separately.
Fortunately, at the same time of the consultation process for the London City Airport Extension taking place, the Lewisham Extension was being constructed. In order to address the specific concerns in the most accurate way, DLRL arranged a site visit for local residents to see for themselves the construction of the Lewisham Extension and what a new piece of DLR infrastructure would look like. DLRL wrote to the 20 households to invite the occupiers on the visit: approximately 75% accepted the invitation (a pub lunch was offered as an additional incentive). Most residents were elderly and understandably apprehensive about DLR’s proposals. The site visit was arranged for a week day morning. It was arranged to ensure that two local residents’ representatives also attended who could provide information back to those who could not/did not wish to attend.
A minibus was arranged to transport the residents to the Lewisham Extension, and it picked them up from the end of their street. A specific tour guide (briefed by the DLR project team beforehand regarding what type of people to expect and their particular interests) from the Concession company (CGL Rail) constructing the Lewisham Extension was hired for the morning to talk through the various aspects of the Lewisham Extension construction and was on hand to answer any questions that the residents may have had. The DLR project team (four members of staff) also attended. Specific attention was paid to how close the railway was being constructed to Lewisham College (where if standing on the viaduct you can touch the college building!) and the noise and vibration mitigation measures being implemented. Any questions that could not be answered on the day were written down and the project team undertook to respond to them.
(Once trains were running on the Lewisham Extension DLRL took representatives of a company located adjacent to the proposed route of the London City Airport Extension to Lewisham College and stood in the building to demonstrate that the environmental affects of the extension were negligible. This comforted the representatives as they were concerned that the route of London City Airport passing outside one of their buildings which contained sensitive equipment could be environmentally affected).
The site visit with the local residents was successful for a number of reasons:
z a stronger relationship was built between the residents and the DLR project team
z the residents became less suspicious of DLRL’s proposals
z being able to show how noise mitigation measures work, for example really helped alleviate some concerns for some of the residents and reduced the scope for them to object to the scheme.
z some of the residents had never seen what the DLR looks like (even though they live in close proximity to the Beckton Extension and were positively surprised by what they saw. This gave everyone an idea of the height, the structural materials and the layout of the new stations.
Photographs were taken to record that local residents had been on a site visit, one of which was subsequently used in a consultation leaflet.
Out of the 81 original objectors to the Transport and Works Order submitted in March 2000, only four came to the Public Inquiry later that year, none of which were local residents.
Next case study >> 27: Thames Gateway Bridge
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_26.htm 07/05/2009 a3_27 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Maps Thames Gateway Bridge [See ‘Visual materials: Maps and aerial photographs’ in Appendix 2.6]
Research carried out prior to consultation on the Thames Gateway Bridge indicates that not everyone can read maps. At least three out of the seven participants in the focus group held in Beckton were unable to read the maps or relate them to the local area. They had little sense of exactly where they were located in relation to the road network.
Next case study >> 28: Thames Gateway Bridge
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_27.htm 07/05/2009 a3_28 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Aerial photos Thames Gateway Bridge [See ‘Visual materials: Maps and aerial photographs’ in Appendix 2.6]
During research carried out prior to the consultations on the Thames Gateway Bridge, residents of Beckton were shown aerial photographs of their area. They did not find these particularly helpful, until specific locations were pointed out to them.
Next case study >> 29: Trafalgar Square and Shoreditch Triangle
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_28.htm 07/05/2009 a3_29 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Artists’ impressions [See ‘Visual materials: Artists’ impressions’ in Appendix 2.6] Shoreditch Traingle (top) and SuperCam (below)
This leaflet used an ink sketch. Artists impressions can take many forms—pencil drawings, pen and ink sketches or watercolour paintings to name a few; the medium depends on the type of image and detail required.
Next case study >> 30: Kings Cross/Camden Town stations
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_29.htm 07/05/2009 a3_30 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Physical 3D models Kings Cross/Camden Town stations
Physical 3D model of the proposed new Camden Town underground station designed and created by architects, Jestico + Whiles
Next case study >> 31: Camden Town
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_30.htm 07/05/2009 a3_31 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Computer simulated walk-through Camden Town [The ‘Camden’ animation can only be viewed on the CD.]
Walk-through animations provide an added, dynamic dimension, to computer-generated 3D visuals. Done properly, they can help the viewer understand the entire physical structure—something that a series of still images would not do so successfully.
Stills reproduced from 3D models and animation files. designed and created by architects, Jestico + Whiles
Next case study >> 32: Camden, Kings Cross, Hammersmith
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_31.htm 07/05/2009 a3_32 Page 1 of 2
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Static 3D Computer Simulation Camden, Kings Cross, Hammersmith
These examples show an effective use of a 3D computer model to demonstrate the visual appearance of a proposed development.
The images can either be shown in isolation (Camden) or montaged into an existing streetscape (Hammersmith).
Static 3D computer model of the proposed new Camden Town underground station designed and created by architects, Jestico + Whiles
Static 3D computer model of a proposal for Hammersmith bus station designed and created by architects, Jestico + Whiles
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_32.htm 07/05/2009 a3_32 Page 2 of 2
Static 3D computer section showing accessibility in the proposed new Camden Town underground station designed and created by architects, Jestico + Whiles
Next case study >> 33: Planning for Real (Stockport)
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_32.htm 07/05/2009 a3_33 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Using physical models Planning for Real (Stockport)
A home zones consultation in Stockport applied planning for real principles on a larger scale, closing a street, introducing fake built-out kerbs and importing fake grass and trees in tubs. Models and photo-montages had been used at an earlier stage. This proved to be a successful way of communicating the proposal, but was resource intensive in its use of people.
Next case study >> 34: Crossrail
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_33.htm 07/05/2009 a3_34 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Using physical models Crossrail Consultation on the design of Crossrail vehicles in the early 1990s included a mock-up of a complete railcar which spent a week at Liverpool Street station and a week at Paddington station. This encouraged the public to participate: they could see what it would look like and also get on and walk around it and talk to staff. This was supplemented by written materials. Responses were via questionnaire.
In addition to the consultation on vehicles, there was also consultation on Crossrail stations and on the portal areas (where the lines emerge from under the ground) using 3D models. These helped to explain the spatial relationships between the platform, ticket hall and the outside environment, which would otherwise be particularly difficult to demonstrate, especially in respect of underground stations. The public were able to relate more easily to these models than to drawings, plans and maps.
Next case study >> 35: SuperCam
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_34.htm 07/05/2009 a3_35 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Using physical models SuperCam A recent consultation on the Cambridge-St.Ives guided bus obtained a mock-up/prototype from a French manufacturer of the front section of a carriage (not the full 18 metres). Because it looks like a tram it conveyed that message more effectively than any words or even photos. It was particularly effective at bringing in passing people and attracting media interest. There were various issues concerning its transport and storage that had to be addressed, and the additional numbers of people attracted to the exhibition meant the organisers needed to bring in additional people to staff it.
Full-size prototype of the front section of a carriage provided by the manufacturer.
Next case study >> 36: DLR ticket machines
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_35.htm 07/05/2009 a3_36 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Using physical models DLR ticket machines
DLR used prototypes to consult on new ticket machines at Tower Gateway before they were installed more widely. An initial one day trial took place and 47 members of the public provided comments, followed by a further trial with a member of staff on the station concourse. A number of significant problems were identified which DLR were able to address, including: ‘could not find child tickets’, ‘confused with combined child and adult ticket selection’, ‘did not understand zones’ and poor visibility in sunlight. Next case study >> 37: Supercam game
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_36.htm 07/05/2009 a3_37 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Multimedia presentations Supercam game The Cambridge-St.Ives guided bus consultation made use of a SuperCam game to attract kids, with the Supercam being chased through a maze and eaten by cars – it encourages kids to side with public transport rather than cars.[The ‘SuperCam’ game can only be viewed on the CD.] The leaflet advertising the scheme also included a kit enabling the reader to construct their own tram-on-wheels.
Screen-shot of the SuperCam ‘pacman-style’ game
Next case study >> 38: Imaginary press examples
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_37.htm 07/05/2009 a3_38 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Using the media Imaginary press examples Imaginary example #1
Suppose you were about to consult on the siting of a major new airport, and suppose that it had been agreed as a matter of policy by the government of the day that we needed a new airport in the south east of England.
Early research shows that without this new facility, London will become a less attractive inward investment target and that corporate headquarters will start to relocate in droves to other parts of Europe by early in the next decade.
You have been involved with this project since the beginning and by the time the project reached the consultation phase, you reasonably expect the press to give you ‘straight’ coverage of the fact that you were about to go out to consultation. Surely it would be a ‘good news’ story that could only enhance the reputation of your organisation and of the venture?
The reality is very different. The story might barely mention the fact that you were about to do a major consultation and instead focus on the ways in which the proposed scheme was already unpopular – on the environmental lobby’s argument with the need for it, on local residents’ fears about noise and pollution levels.
The story might go further by casting doubt upon your organisation’s ability or willingness to carry out a sufficiently thorough consultation.
This is an extremely likely scenario, since news focuses much more on the lives and experiences of real people than on the reporting of straight ‘facts.’
The BBC has a real ‘public service broadcasting’ ethos. When we brief a BBC correspondent, we do it knowing that they are always looking beyond the information that is being given to them. They will:
Question what is being left out
z consider how this information fits with something contradictory that they have heard elsewhere
z wonder what the public think
They’ll find out – by asking the public direct. This devil’s advocacy is not there to give organisations a hard time; it is just about fulfilling the BBC’s duty to its consumers – license-paying viewers and listeners.
You don’t need to worry about drafting a press release, but you do need to think about the basic information that you are trying to convey.
Imaginary example #2
We want to build a new tramline that goes from Wimbledon to Neasden. We intend to build phase 1 in 2006-8 and phase 2 in 2008-10. The completed tramline will serve an estimated 70,000 people a day in year 1, rising to 120,000 in year 3. There is a strong economic, social and environmental case for the line, but we intend to consult local residents, frontages and businesses on the exact alignment.
The press office will take this information, sit down with you and fill in any gaps in their understanding of what you are trying to do, and then turn this information into a brief.
Next case study >> 39: Connex
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_38.htm 07/05/2009 a3_39 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Webchats Connex
Specific subjects are chosen for each webchat, eg. fare evasion, safety & security. Connex always field a director and at least one other person, depending on the subject selected, sometimes from a partner organisation, e.g. British Transport Police, Network Rail. This provides the right balance of authority and specific expertise. It is essential to have at least two people to keep the dialogue flowing. It is important that they are both in the same room, so they can quickly agree who is going to answer which question.
Webchats are held on a monthly basis. Each one last about 90 minutes. They have in the past tried holding them during the daytime and early evening, but have found late evening better.
Between 80-100 people log on for each webchat. It is difficult to know precisely who is taking part. The level of knowledge of participants suggests that some are staff, while others are members of user groups.
Hundreds of questions are sent through, but only a small proportion (of more general, less parochial interest) are selected. A transcript is placed on the website afterwards, but questions not answered during the 90 minutes remain unanswered: any commitment to answer all questions raised would make the exercise unmanageable.
The webchats are advertised through posters in stations and a notice on the website and in their magazine. They have 189 stations, but posters are put up selectively.
The webchat is a relatively cheap option. Posters are designed and printed in-house and they use their own poster sites, so there is no need to pay for space. No briefing is required.
The webchats have been a very useful way of allowing customers to let off steam and have helped the credibility of the company. Discussion has put train design on the map although, as with bikes on trains, there is little they can do in the short-term. Overall, they have yielded less useful data than the face-to-face meetings.
Next case study >> 40: Road safety quiz
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_39.htm 07/05/2009 a3_40 Page 1 of 2
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Games Road safety quiz
TfL has also produced a simple computer game on road safety [The ‘Roadbot’ game can only be viewed on the CD.]. Available in CD format, it seeks to engage and educate children using a quiz format. The link will take you to a fully operational version of the game. This will allow you to test your knowledge of road safety through the manipulation of robot characters in a simulated environment. Points are scored for good use of road safety and lost for dangerous maneouvers. Treated with a touch of houmor, serious issues are presented in a fun way encouraging children to learn through play.
Screen-shots of the ‘Roadbots’ game
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_40.htm 07/05/2009 a3_40 Page 2 of 2
Next case study >> 41: Transport board game, art, videos (Greater Manchester)
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_40.htm 07/05/2009 a3_41 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Games and art Transport board game, art, videos (Greater Manchester)
A project in Greater Manchester that successfully engaged young people aged 10-15 in highlighting and promoting sustainable modes of transport. The work was done in youth clubs, and was more popular as a result: students volunteered rather than being coerced.
The first stage was a board game (similar in concept to snakes and ladders), the goal of which was to arrive first at college, friends’ homes etc. Participants were given a pot of money and invited to make transport choices. They picked up cards that asked them to make judgements and consider options including switching modes. There were penalties for driving without insurance or a licence. An interchange cost was introduced. The game was played for 35-40 minutes. More work is needed to design in appropriate complexities. Other than being fun for 13-14 year olds, the game got the young people warmed- up/engaged and thinking about transport choices at an early stage of the process.
Further stages involved art and videos. The final stage brought them together with PTE, operators and bus drivers with an independent facilitator at a workshop.
Next case study >> 4: Supporting information
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_41.htm 07/05/2009 a3_42 Page 1 of 2
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Games Multi-modal study (East Midlands)
This example was used as part of a consultation exercise for a multi-modal study in the East Midlands. The consultation presented 5 proposals with three levels of implementation (full, medium and none) each having differing cost and environmental benefits. The final proposals had to be cost effective and consultees were required to select the level of implementation for each proposal based on its perceived cost benefit.
To assist in consultee’s understanding of the cost/ benefit relationships of the options an interactive game [The ‘Multi-modal’ game can only be viewed on the CD.] was set-up. A photograph of the local area was displayed greyed out, the objective was to remove as much of the grey as possible by selecting the best cost/benefit combination of the presented options. Five options each with three levels of implementation and capital cost were shown.
Users had to choose one implementation level for each option thereby removing part of the grey and spending some of the available money. Choices could then be revised if too much money was spent or not enough grey cleared.
A result box appeared at the end congratulating the user on a good selection or advising on ways to improve poor choices.
Screen-shots of M1 Multi-modal Study game
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_42.htm 07/05/2009 a3_42 Page 2 of 2
Next case study >> 43: Painting competitions in local schools
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_42.htm 07/05/2009 a3_43 Page 1 of 1
Consultation Toolkit
Appendix 3: Case Studies
Art Painting competitions in local schools
Topics can cover related themes such as the design of a scheme logo, the environmental benefits of the proposals, how a new tram would look and so on.
An information pack is produced with an overview of technology, pictures of vehicles and information on the perceived environmental benefits. Local schools are contacted with sufficient time allowed (at least three months on average) to include the project in the normal school day. A member of the team then visits schools agreeing to participate with a brief for the competition. Further details or other sources of information can be provided if necessary.
It takes a lot of time and money to produce an information pack of the necessary standard. It requires expert input from a teaching consultant familiar with the current needs and environment of schools at the target age group. In many inner London schools, an information pack will be of limited use for the many children for whom English is a second language unless it can be translated.
Pupils submit their entries.
Local artists or art institutes can assist in providing judges and help promote local community involvement.
Winning entries are announced and selected entries are exhibited at public exhibitions. Local press should also be contacted and award ceremony may be covered in local media as positive source of PR.
Next appendix >> 4: Supporting information
http://source.tfl/utils/consultation-toolkit/a3_43.htm 07/05/2009