Consultation Report August 2016

Curtain Road / Rivington Street Central London Grid scheme

Contents

Executive summary ...... 1 1 Introduction ...... 2 2 The consultation ...... 4 3 Overview of consultation responses ...... 5 4 Conclusion and next steps ...... 15 Appendix A – Response to issues commonly raised ...... 16 Appendix B – Copy of the consultation letter ...... 20 Appendix C – Leaflet distribution area...... 22 Appendix D – Stakeholder email ...... 23 Appendix E – Stakeholders consulted ...... 24

Executive summary Between 1 February and 29 February 2016, we consulted the public and stakeholders on proposed improvements to cycling facilities at the junction of Curtain Road and Rivington Street. The proposed changes are part of the Central London Grid programme and would create a clearer, safer cycle route along Rivington Street, the route alignment for this section of the Grid.

We received a total of 32 responses to the consultation. Of the 28 respondents who answered the closed question concerning support, 23 supported or partially supported our proposals.

Responses included: comments about design features such the raised area, parking and pedestrian crossing; safety for cyclists and pedestrians; general support or opposition to the scheme; removing through motor traffic from local roads; and the proposed 20mph zone in a wider area.

Next steps After considering all responses, we intend to proceed with the scheme as set out in the consultation documents, subject to the formal Traffic Order process. We have made the following change to the design as the result of the consultation:

 Use a 60mm high kerb between the raised junction area and the footway to help visually impaired people distinguish between the carriageway and the footway

We plan to carry out construction later in 2016.

We will keep visitors and road users informed of our plans and progress, including writing to local residents, businesses and other stakeholders before starting works in their area. We already provide road traffic information to help people better plan their journeys and make informed choices about how, where and when they travel.

1 Introduction The proposed changes are part of the Central London Grid programme and would create a clearer, safer cycle route along Rivington Street, the route alignment for this section of the Grid.

1.1 Purpose of the Scheme

The proposed changes at this junction aim to improve safety and accessibility for cyclists and accommodate current cyclists and the predicted increase of cyclists along this route.

1.2 Descriptions of the proposals

The proposals for this junction included:

 Relocating the pedestrian crossing south of the junction on Curtain Road. Traffic would wait south of the junction and would not obstruct cyclists travelling east-west along the Rivington Street Grid route  Raised road surface at junction to encourage traffic approaching the junction to slow down  Footway build out and bollard on the south west corner of the junction  Six new cycle parking stands

The junction would also be resurfaced during construction.

1.3 Location map

2 The consultation

2.1 Consultation duration and structure

The consultation ran from 1 - 29 February 2016.

Information on the consultation, including details of the proposals consulted on, was available online at https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/curtain-road from 1 February 2016.

Respondents were asked about whether they supported the proposals (‘yes’, ‘partially’, ‘no’, ‘not sure’, ‘no opinion’). Respondents were also given an opportunity to comment on the proposals.

Respondents were also asked to submit their name, email address and postcode, whether they were responding on behalf of an organisation, and how they heard about the consultation. All questions were optional.

Other information, such as the respondent’s IP address and the date and time of responding, was recorded automatically. All data is held under conditions that conform to the requirements of the Data Protection Act 1998.

2.2 Consultation material, distribution and publicity

Consultation website The consultation web page at https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/curtain-road provided explanatory text and a design drawing of the proposals.

Non-web formats A consultation letter and drawing explaining our proposals were sent to 2,558 addresses near the scheme area. Printed plans, accompanying descriptions and response forms were available on request by telephone, email or writing to FREEPOST TFL CONSULTATIONS.

A copy of the letter is in Appendix B and a map of the distribution area can be found in Appendix C.

Stakeholder email We emailed around 300 stakeholder organisations to let them know about the consultation. The email contained a brief summary of the proposals and a link to the consultation website. Please see Appendix D for the email and Appendix E for the list of recipients.

3 Overview of consultation responses There were 32 responses to the consultation. The responses are analysed below.

3.1 Respondent type

22 responses were from members of the public and 10 responses from stakeholder groups. Responses from stakeholder groups and businesses are included in the overall analysis and also summarised in Section 3.6 Summary of stakeholder and business responses.

Figure 1: Consultation responses by respondent type

3.2 Support for the scheme

Q1. Do you support our proposals for Curtain Road / Rivington Street?

Of the total 32 respondents to the consultation, 28 answered Q1. Four respondents did not answer this question. Of those who answered the question, 19 supported the scheme, 4 partially supported the scheme, 1 was not sure, 3 did not support the scheme and 1 had no opinion. Three email responses from Question 2 expressed clear support or opposition to the scheme and were analysed as a response to Question 1.

Figure 2: Support for scheme

3.3 Comments on the proposals

Q2. Please give us any comments you have on our proposals for the junction of Curtain Road and Rivington Street.

Of the 32 respondents to the consultation, 26 respondents provided comments to Q2. “Please give us any comments you have on our proposals for the junction of Curtain Road and Rivington Street.”

Junction design

11 respondents included comments or suggestions about proposed changes to the road layout at the junction. 2 responses included more than one comment about junction proposals.

Raised road surface at junction

 2 respondents supported raising the junction. Reasons given included slowing traffic  2 respondents including the RNIB opposed raising the junction. Reasons given included pedestrian safety and distinction between the carriageway and the footway for visually impaired road users  1 respondent suggested using tarmac for the raised area to create a better surface for cycling  The RNIB called for the use of high contrast surfacing and a 60mm high kerb (minimum) to alert visually impaired road users to the crossing area

Road signs and markings

 2 respondents suggested changes to road signs and road markings, including 1 suggestion to add double red lines

Parking

 2 respondents suggested removing parking on roads at or near the scheme area

Pedestrian crossing

 2 respondents supported moving the pedestrian crossing  1 respondent called for the pedestrian crossing to be made widened further  1 respondent called for the crossings at side roads to be raised to provide continuous crossings

Junction geometry

 1 respondent called for the turning radius at one corner of the junction to be reduced further than proposed

Impact on road safety

10 responses included comments about safety.

Cycling safety

 5 respondents said the scheme would improve cycling safety  2 respondents said the scheme would not improve cycling safety  1 respondents expressed concern about potential cyclist/pedestrian collisions on Rivington Street

Pedestrian safety

 2 respondents said the scheme would improve pedestrian safety  2 respondents said the scheme would not improve safety for visually impaired pedestrians  1 respondent said that the scheme would not improve pedestrian safety

Motor vehicle speeds

 2 respondents raised concerns about unsafe motor vehicle speeds in the scheme area

General support/opposition

There were 9 comments supporting or opposing the scheme:

 7 comments offered general support for the scheme  2 comments opposed the scheme on the grounds of cost

Impact on motor traffic

There were 7 responses that included comments about motor traffic. Three responses included more than one comment about traffic:

Traffic filtering

 2 comments suggested filtering or removing traffic from Curtain Road  2 comments suggested removing through traffic from Rivington Road

 1 comment suggested maintaining Rivington Road as a pedestrian zone only during the day  1 respondent suggested replacing one traffic lane on Curtain Road with a contra-flow cycle lane

20mph zone

 2 respondents supported the 20mph zone  1 respondent (Confederation of Passenger Transport) expressed concern about increased journey times caused by a lower speed limit

Congestion

 2 respondents mentioned traffic congestion at night, highlighting the high number of taxis using the scheme area

Traffic management

Other respondents called for measures to reduce vehicle speeds, changes to local traffic flows around the scheme area, and adding a taxi rank.

Cycle provision

5 responses included comments about cycle provision. Three responses contained more than one comment:

 2 comments suggested changing the cycle lane alignment  2 comments supported more cycle parking, including 1 suggestion to put cycle parking on the carriageway  2 comments expressed concern about cyclists’ behaviour or education  1 comment suggested providing more space for cycling  1 comment requested more segregation

3.4 About respondents

We asked consultation respondents a number of questions about their relationship to the area and how they travelled locally

Question 6: Are you (local resident, business owner etc.)?

We asked respondents to give information about whether they lived or worked locally or other ways in which they used the area. 22 respondents answered this question, and respondents could give more than one answer. 6 respondents said that they were local residents, 1 said they were a business owner, 7 said they were visitors to the area, 5 said they were commuters to the area, two said they were not local but interested in the scheme and three gave another response. 10 did not answer the question.

Figure 3. Relationship to the local area

Question 8: What types of transport do you normally use locally?

We asked users what kind of transport they normally used. There were 56 responses to the question and respondents could give more than one answer. 8 respondents said they used the tube, 4 said they took taxis, 8 were regular bus users, 17 were cyclists, 13 walked, 3 drove a private car, and one was a motorcyclist or scooter user. Two used other means of transport and 11 did not answer the question.

Figure 4. Response to Q8. What types of transport do you normally use locally?

Question 9: How often do you cycle?

We asked respondents how often they cycled. There were 20 responses to the question and respondents could only choose one answer. 16 respondents said they cycled on most days, 1 said they cycled once a week, 2 said they cycled 1-3 times a month and 1 less than once a month. 12 respondents did not answer the question.

Figure 5. Response to Q9. How often do you cycle?

3.5 About the consultation

We asked respondents two questions about the closed question about how they heard about the consultation. 22 respondents answered the question and respondents could only choose one answer. 5 respondents said that they heard by email and 1 via a letter, 11 reported being aware through the TfL website and 5 said they heard on social media. 10 respondents did not answer the question.

Figure 6. Response to Q10. How did you hear about this consultation?

Question 11: Please tell us what you think about the quality of this consultation

6 respondents gave a comment about the consultation. Two responses included more than one comment.

 3 respondents said the consultation was good or very good  3 respondents said the consultation was satisfactory (“OK”)  1 respondent commented that the responses should be considered  1 respondent said that including a location map would have been helpful

3.6 Summary of stakeholder and business responses

There were 10 responses from stakeholder organisations. These are summarised below.

Stakeholder Summary of response

Artwords Bookshop Supportive, particularly of moving the existing pedestrian crossing south of Rivington Street.

Confederation of Questioned the need to reduce the speed limit to Passenger Transport 20mph in the area. It suggested that this could (CPT) impact on journey times and traffic.

CTC London Supportive. It said the scheme was a useful improvement to the Rivington Street cycle route.

Hackney Council Supportive. Welcomed safety improvements. Officers

Living Streets Hackney Concerned that the footways on Curtain Road and Rivington Street do not have enough capacity to accommodate cycle stands. Suggested relocating cycle parking into the carriageway and further tightening the left turn radius from Curtain Road into Rivington Street by increasing the footway build-out. Suggested that this would allow a wider pedestrian crossing closer to desire lines.

London Cycling Partially supportive. Suggested implementing Campaign modal filters in the area, including on Curtain Road, to remove through motor traffic and provide benefits for pedestrians, cyclists and businesses.

London Fire Brigade No impact on London Fire Brigade.

Metropolitan Police Acknowledged scheme but did not comment.

Royal National Institute Expressed concern about raising the junction of of Blind People (RNIB) Curtain Road / Rivington Street because this could cause difficulty for visually impaired people. Suggested a kerb at least 60mm high and using high contrast surfacing to better demarcate the carriageway and footway.

Wheels for Wellbeing Supportive. No further comment.

4 Conclusion and next steps

We received a total of 32 responses to the consultation. Of the 28 respondents who answered the closed question concerning support, 23 supported or partially supported our proposals.

Responses about the scheme included comments about the scheme design (raised area, parking, pedestrian crossing), safety for cyclists and pedestrians, general support and opposition to the scheme, and comments about filtering or removing traffic from local roads and the proposed 20mph zone in a wider area.

Next steps

After considering all responses, we intend to proceed with the scheme as set out in the consultation documents, subject to the formal Traffic Order process. We have made the following change to the design as the result of the consultation:

 Use a 60mm high kerb between the raised junction area and the footway to help avoid difficulty for visually impaired people

We plan to carry out construction later in 2016.

We will keep visitors and road users informed of our plans and progress, including writing to local residents, businesses and other stakeholders before undertaking work in their area. We already provide road traffic information to help people better plan their journeys and make informed choices about how, where and when they travel.

Appendix A – Response to issues commonly raised

Junction design

A number of respondents made suggestions concerning the layout of the road. These included:

Concerns over raising the junction

Some respondents, including the RNIB, said that raising the crossing to footway level could cause difficulty to visually impaired people as a small difference in height can make it difficult to identify where the carriageway ends and the footway begins.

In response to the RNIB’s concerns, we have changed the design to include a kerb height of 60mm between the carriageway and the footway to help visually impaired people distinguish the raised crossing area from the kerb. The raised area will not have a coloured surfacing.

In the scheme design, the relocated pedestrian crossing will follow a standard layout with tactile paving and a dropped kerb to indicate the crossing position to visually impaired people. There will be tactile paving on the footways at the informal crossings at Rivington Street to indicate the crossing position to visually impaired road users. We will not create continuous footways, as the raised area and associated road markings will clearly indicate to the traffic to slow down.

Double red line restriction near junction

One respondent suggested adding double red lines near the junction. We are proposing to implement double red lines on Curtain Road to replace the existing zig-zag markings at the current crossing. New zig-zag markings will be provided on the approach and exit of the crossing and drivers are not legally allowed to stop within the crossing limits or along the zig zag area.

Removing kerb build-out and parking to accommodate cycle lane

One respondent suggested removing the kerb build-out and parking to increase space for cycling. The kerb build-out aims to reduce the speed of turning vehicles, therefore improving safety for vulnerable road users in particular. The focus of this scheme is to improve cycling provision for cyclists travelling along Rivington Street and across Curtain Road in line with the TfL cycle design guidelines. The design attempts to balance the needs of all road users proportionately.

Pedestrian crossing

Some respondents suggested a different position for the pedestrian crossing. The Rivington Street / Curtain Road junction is heavily used by pedestrians, particularly at night. We are providing the pedestrian crossing as close as possible to the junction on desire lines so that pedestrians on Rivington Street can cross using the most direct route.

Use asphalt for raised junction area

One respondent suggested using asphalt for the raised area to provide a better surface for cycling as granite setts or bricks can become damaged and leave a poor surface for cycling. The raised table will be built from asphalt as this provides a smooth surface for cyclists and requires less maintenance.

Impact on road safety

Some respondents raised concerns over vehicular speed/safety at this junction. The raised table and signage are designed to encourage all traffic to slow down at the junction.

Junction design doesn't improve safety (alignment for cycles)

Some respondents called for the route along Rivington Street to be made more direct. We consider that the route along Rivington Street is reasonably direct. Working within the confines of London’s existing road layout can be challenging and Rivington Street is slightly offset at this junction. However, it is outside the scope of this scheme to realign the junction outside the existing highway boundary, and we do not believe such a measure would offer good value for money. As traffic on Curtain Road will now be held to the south of the crossing by traffic signals, we consider there will be sufficient space and opportunity for cyclists travelling in either direction to cross the junction safely.

We are satisfied that the improved level of provision in this scheme is appropriate in light of the further road layout changes in this location planned as part of the Shoreditch Triangle scheme.

Collisions at this junction

Some respondents asked for collision figures for this junction. Over the three-year period ending 31 October 2015, two collisions have occurred at this junction, one involving a pedestrian and the other a cyclist.

Cyclist behaviour/education

Some respondents raised concerns over cyclist behaviour, saying they present a danger to pedestrians. We acknowledge these concerns, however our research shows that most cyclists ride responsibly, and are no more likely to disobey road rules than other road users.

We promote adherence to the Highway Code by all road users and encourage responsible cycling and mutual respect between cyclists and other road users. We work to eliminate offences such as jumping red lights, cycling on the pavement and cycling at night without lights. We do this using police enforcement and education programmes, as well as thorough marketing and engagement campaigns.

We recognise that some pavement cyclists break the law to avoid the dangers of motor traffic. However, we anticipate that providing dedicated and safe space for cyclists will discourage people from riding on pavements. Providing dedicated space for cyclists can also help other road users by letting them know where to expect high volumes of cyclists.

Impact on motor traffic

Traffic filtering

Changing traffic flows on Curtain Road

Some respondents suggested changes to the traffic flows on Curtain Road. Potential changes such as removing traffic from Curtain Road or providing a contra-flow cycle lane were considered as part of this scheme. However, the purpose of the scheme is to improve connectivity for east-west cycling along Rivington Street. Changing traffic flows on Curtain Road would have a significant impact on the wider road network and is considered outside of the scope of this scheme.

Pedestrianisation of Rivington Street

Hackney Council is the highway authority for Rivington Street. We have shared the results of this consultation with the Borough for their consideration.

20mph zone

The proposed 20mph zone is intended to: reduce the number of collisions that result in death or serious injury; enhance the place function of these roads; and encourage active travel by promoting walking and cycling. Curtain Road was

18 selected as a pilot site for a 20mph speed limit in March 2015, with the trial to last 18 months, beginning in December 2016. Traffic speeds and traffic flow data will be monitored to assess whether to make the reduced speed limits permanent. We will inform local residents and businesses of the details of the trial before it launches.

Congestion (including taxis on Curtain Road)

The purpose of this scheme is to improve the cycling provision along Rivington Street at the junction with Curtain Road. As the scheme relocates an existing stop line on Curtain Road, any impact on traffic capacity is likely to be minimal. It is not considered that the proposed changes will be affected by the number of taxis using the local area.

Appendix B – Copy of the consultation letter

Appendix C – Leaflet distribution area

Appendix D – Stakeholder email

Dear Stakeholder,

We are asking for your views on proposed improvements to cycle facilities at the junction of Curtain Road, part of the Transport for London Road Network, and Rivington Street.

The proposed changes are part of the Central London Grid programme and would create a clearer, safer cycle route along Rivington Street, the route alignment for this section of the Grid.

The proposed changes include:

 Six new cycle parking stands  Raised road surface at junction  Pedestrian crossing relocated south of the junction on Curtain Road  Footway build out and bollard on the south west corner of the junction

For further information, to view a drawing of the scheme and to give us your views, please visit our website on tfl.gov.uk/cycling/curtain-road

The consultation will close on Monday 29 February 2016.

Yours faithfully

Matthew Moore, Consultation Team, Transport for London.

Appendix E – Stakeholders consulted

3663 First for Foodservice CABE - Design Council Abellio West London Ltd t/a Abellio Camden Council Surrey, Camden mobility forum Action for Blind People Camden Town Unlimited Action on Hearing Loss (RNID) Campaign for Better Transport Age UK London Campbell's Alive in Space Landscape and Urban Capital City School Sport Partnership Design Studio Carousel Buses Ltd Anderson Travel Ltd, CBI-London Angel BID Centaur Overland Travel Ltd, APC-Overnight Central London Cab Trade Section Argall BID Central London CTC Arriva Kent Thameside/Kent & Sussex, Central London Forward Arriva Guildford & W Sussex, Central London Freight Quality Arriva Partnership Association of British Drivers Central London NHS Trust Association of Town Centre Centre for Accessible Environments Management Chalkwell Garage & Coach Hire Ltd, ATCoaches t/a Abbey Travel, Chartered Institute of Logistics and Baker Street Quarter Transport Barking and Dagenham City Bikes (Vauxhall Walk) Bayswater BID City link Best Bike Training //Cycletastic City of London Better Bankside City of London Access Forum Bexley Accessible Transport Scheme, City of London Police Bexley Council City of Westminster Bexleyheath BID Cobra Corporate Servics Ltd, bhs bikeability Community Transport Association bidvest logistics Confederation of Passenger Transport bikeworks Covent Garden Market Authority bikeXcite Cross River Partnership Blue Triangle Buses Ltd, Coaches Excetera, Borough Cycling Officers Group Croydon mobility forum Breakspears Road Project CT Plus Ltd t/a Hackney Community Brentwood Community Transport, Transport, Brewery Logistics Group CTC British Cycling Cycle Confident British Land Cycle Experience British Medical Association Cycle Newham British Motorcycle Federation Cycle Systems British Retail Association Cycle Training East British School of Cycling Cycle Training UK (CTUK) Bucks Cycle Training Cycling Embassy of Great Britain Business B Ltd t/a The Expeditional, Cycling Tuition Buzzlines, cycling4all

Cyclists in the City Institute of Advanced Motorists Department for Transport Institution of Civil Engineers DHL inStreatham Clarkes of London, Islington Council E11 BID (Leytonstone) Islington mobility forum Ealing Broadway BID Snowdrop Coaches Ealing Council Bikeability East and South East London Thames The Little Bus Company, Gateway Transport Partnership John Lewis Partnership Polestar Travel, K&C mobility forum Edgware Road Partnership Kimpton Industrial Park (Sutton) Enfield Council Kingston First English Heritage Kingston mobility forum Ensign Bus Company Ltd, Laing o'Rourke Evolution Cycle Training Lambeth Cyclists Express Network Forum Leonard Cheshire Disability Federation of Small Businesses Lewisham Council First Beeline Buses Ltd, Licensed Private Hire Car Association Fitzrovia Partnership (LPHCA) Freight Transport Association Line Line Coaches (TGM), Friends of the Earth Living Streets Future Inclusion Local Government Ombudsman Garratt Business Park (Earlsfield) London ambulance Service Gatwick Flyer Ltd, London Bike Hub Go-Coach Hire Ltd London Borough of Hackney Golden Tours (Transport) Ltd, London Cab Drivers' Club Ltd Greater London Authority London Central Cab Section Greater London Forum for Older London Chamber of Commerce and People Industry (LCCI) Green Urban Transport Ltd, London Climate Change Partnership Guide Dogs London Councils Hainault Business Park London Cycling Campaign HammersmithLondon London Duck Tours Ltd Haringey mobility forum London European Partnership for Health Poverty Action Transport Heart of London Business Alliance London Fire Brigade Hermes Europe London First Hillingdon Council London General Hillingdon mobility forum London Private Hire Board Hounslow mobility forum London Riverside (Rainham) HR Richmond Ltd t/a Quality Line, London Strategic Health Authority IBM London Suburban Taxi Drivers' Ilford Town BID Coalition Inclusion London London Taxi Drivers' Club Independent Disability Advisory Group London Tourist Coach Operators Independent Shoreditch Association (LTCOA) Inmidtown London TravelWatch London United Busways Ltd, Institute for Sustainability 25

London Visual Impairment Forum Road Haulage Association LoveWimbledon BID Roadpeace Marshalls Coaches Royal Borough of Kingston upon Merton Council Thames Metrobus Ltd, Royal Institute of British Architects Metroline Ltd Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors Metropolitan Police Service Royal London Society for Blind People Mobile Cycle Training Service Royal Mail Mode Transport Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) Motorcycle Action Group (MAG) Sainsbury's Supermarkets Mullany's Coaches, Red Eagle National Autistic Society SCOPE National Express Ltd South Bucks CycleTraining National Motorcycle Council South East London PCT New Addington BID South Herts Plus Cycle Training New West End Company (NWEC) South London Business Forum NHS London South London Partnership Northbank Guild Southbank Employers Group Ocean Youth Connexions Southdown PSV Ltd, Olympus Bus & Coach Company t/a Southgate & Finchley Coaches Ltd Olympian Coaches, Space syntax On Your Bike Cycle Training Spokes Cycling Instruction Orpington 1st Stratford Renaissance Partnership Oxford Tube Successful Sutton Parcel Force Sullivan Bus and Coach Ltd Parliamentary Advisory Council for Sunwin Service Group Transport Safety (PACTS) Superdrug Passenger Focus Sustrans philip kemp cycle training Sutton mobility forum Planning Design Taxi Rank & Interchange Manager Porcellio Ltd t/a Meridian Duck Tours, Team London Bridge Premium Coaches Ltd, Technicolour Tyre Company Private Hire Board Terravision Transport Ltd / Stansted Purple Parking Ltd, Transport Ltd, Puzzle Focus Ltd TGM Group Ltd Queen Mary University of London Thamesmead Business Services R Hearn t/a Hearn's Coaches, The Automobile Association RAC The Big Bus Company Ltd, Red Rose Travel The British Motorcyclists' Federation Redbridge Cycling Centre The Canal & River Trust Redwing Coaches (Pullmanor Ltd), The City of Oxford Motor Services Ltd, Reliance Travel, The Ghost Bus Tours Ltd Reynolds Diplomat Coaches The Kings Ferry Ltd, Richmond Council The Licensed Taxi Drivers' Association RNIB The Original London Sightseeing Tour RNID (Royal National Institute for Deaf /London Pride Sightseeing Ltd, People) The Road Haulage Assoc. Ltd. Road Danger Reduction Forum The Royal Parks 26

The Southwark Cyclists Vauxhall One BID Thomas's London Day Schools Victoria BID (Transport) Ltd Vision Impairment Forum Time for Twickenham Walk London TNT Wandsworth mobility forum Tower Hamlets mobility forum Waterloo Quarter Tower Transit Operations Ltd, Westminster Council Trailblazers, Muscular Dystrophy UK Westminster Cyclists Transport for All Wheels for Wellbeing Tyssen Community School Cycle Whizz-Kidz Training Willow Lane Trading Estate (Merton) UK Power Networks Wilsons Cycles University College London Wincanton University of Westminster www.cyclinginstructor.com uno, Yodel UPS Young Lewisham and Greenwich Urban Movement Cyclists Vandome Cycles