Consultation on A21 Bromley Common / Hastings Road and A233 Oakley Road junction improvement Consultation Report June 2015

2

Consultation on A21 Bromley

Common / Hastings Road and

A233 Oakley Road junction

improvement

Consultation Report

Contents

1 Background .................................................................................................................. 1

2 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1

3 The consultation ........................................................................................................... 2

4 Overview of consultation responses ............................................................................. 4

5 Responses from members of the public ....................................................................... 5

6 Responses from statutory bodies and other stakeholders ........................................... 8

7 Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 9

Appendix A – Copy of the consultation leaflet ....................................................................... 10

Appendix B – Leaflet distribution area ................................................................................... 12

Appendix C – List of stakeholders consulted ........................................................................ 13

Appendix D – Response to issues raised .............................................................................. 15

12

1 Background

Transport for London recently consulted stakeholders and the public about the A21

Bromley Common / Hastings Road and A233 Oakley Road junction improvement.

The consultation took place from 3 October to 9 November 2014.

This junction was identified as having a particular cycle safety problem. We therefore

developed proposals to improve safety at the junction, in particular for cyclists.

The responses to this consultation will help inform our decision making as to whether

we go ahead with the scheme as proposed or make changes to the scheme.

2 Introduction

2.1 Purpose of the Scheme

A review of the junction has found that improvements can be made to the pedestrian

and cyclist environment without significantly reducing traffic capacity.

We proposed making changes to the layout of the junction, making the intersection

where Oakley Road and the A21 Hastings Road meet closer to a right angle – this

will improve sight lines. We also proposed to widen the northbound cycle lane on

Hastings Road, increasing the separation of cyclists from other road users.

In addition our proposals seek to improve the pedestrian facilities at the junction with

the introduction of revised informal pedestrian crossings. These informal crossings

offer pedestrians a safe point to cross, with tactile pavements for those with visual

impairments, and central island refuge so the road can be crossed in stages.

The right turn from Hastings Road to Church Road, which is not currently physically

possible, will be specifically prohibited. The revised junction layout would make this a

possible manoeuvre but it would conflict with right turning traffic into Oakley Road

from the north and would not be a safe movement.

We are not changing any other aspects of the junction. Traffic will still only be able to turn left (north) towards Bromley from Oakley Road, while Church Road will remain one way eastbound, with changes to the kerb layout to deter illegal movement

2.2 Location maps This map shows the proposed improvements at the junction.

12

3 The consultation

The consultation was designed to enable TfL to understand opinion about the

proposed improvements to the A21 Bromley Common / Hastings Road and A233

Oakley Road.

The potential outcomes of the consultation are:

We decide the consultation raises no issues that should prevent us from proceeding with the scheme as originally planned.

We modify the scheme in response to issues raised in consultation.

We abandon the scheme as a result of issues raised in the consultation. The objectives of the consultation were:

To give stakeholders and the public easily-understandable information about the proposals and allow them to respond.

To understand the level of support or opposition for the change to....

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

To understand concerns and objections.

To allow respondents to make suggestions.

12

3.1 Who we consulted We sought the views of people living or working within approximately 700m of the location. This extent is shown in Appendix B. We also informed known stakeholders of our consultation. A list of external stakeholders contacted is shown in Appendix A.

3.2 Consultation material, distribution and publicity The consultation was published online on our consultation website. We produced a letter with a map explaining our proposals and how to respond, and distributed this to properties in the immediate area. An email with a link to our online consultation was also issued to known local stakeholders. Copies of the letter, map and email are shown in Appendix B.

12

4 Overview of consultation responses

4.1 How many responses were received? 26 responses were received in total, the vast majority via the TfL Consultation website.

Table 1: Consultation responses by method of response

4.2 Where did the responses come from?

The majority of the 26 respondents were received from members of the public. Table 2: Consultation responses by type of respondent

4.3 Respondent postcodes

We asked all 26 respondents to provide a postcode.

25 respondents provided a postcode

15 are located within the Borough of Bromley

10 of these are in BR2, the district in which the junction is

located

Method of response Number

TfL Consultation website 25

Email 1

Respondent Number

Member of the public 23

Cyclists’ Touring Club (CTC) 1

London Borough of Bromley 1

London Cycling Campaign (LCC) – Bromley Branch

1

12

4.4 What did respondents think of our overall proposals? The following table summarises respondents’ opinions.

Table 3: Answers received to Question 6.4 – What do you think of our proposals? – Overall proposals

The following sections of this report analyse the responses and emerging themes in

more detail, starting with responses from members of the public.

5 Responses from members of the public

5.1 What do you think of our proposals?

The following chart shows the opinions of the 23 members of the public on individual

components of our proposals. Respondents were asked to select “Strongly agree”,

“Agree slightly”, “No opinion”, “Disagree slightly” or “Strongly disagree” for each

component of the proposal.

0 5 10 15 20 25

Overall proposals

Improved pedestrian crossings

Junction layout amended toimprove sight lines

Widen cycle lanes

What do you think of our proposals?

Strongly agree Agree slightly No opinion Disagree slightly Strongly disagree

Overall proposals Number

Strongly agree 16

Agree slightly 6

No opinion 2

Disagree slightly 1

Strongly disagree 3

Total 26

12

5.2 Analysis of open questions

Respondents were invited to leave their comments about the proposal and parts of it.

These have been categorised, summarised, and counted as follows:

A21 Bromley Common southbound, A233 Oakley Road approach

Add white "Give Way" road markings on the turning from southbound A21 into A233 1

Start filter for A21 southbound traffic turning right into A233 earlier to slow traffic 1

There is no cycle lane provided for the turn into A233 Oakley Road 1

The main problem turning right is getting into the right hand lane due to fast traffic 1

Speed of traffic

Consider reducing the speed limit 1

Speed of traffic makes it dangerous for cyclists to ride further from the kerb 1

Speed of traffic on A21 requires further consideration. Motor traffic travels too fast. 1

A21 cyclist safety

Question/comment about southbound cycle lane which appears after Church Lane

but not before 2

Add armadillos on cycle lane markings 1

Replace current bus stop with a floating bus stop on A21 1

Widening the cycle lanes is little help, still no physical protection and little legal

protection in area of high traffic 1

A233 Oakley Road, A21 approach

A protected cycle by-pass could be included for left-turning cyclists 1

Central reserve to enforce compulsory turn left movements - extend it further north

towards Bromley 1

Layout means cyclists stop, to be then confronted by fast traffic. Keep feeder lane,

add informal pedestrian crossing 1

Sight line improvement is a must 1

The central hatching on Oakley Road should be removed to give cars more space to

pass overtake 1

Church Lane

A cycle lane is required on Church Lane heading towards Orpington 1

Could turn into Church Lane be for cyclists only, there is another entrance for Church

Lane a little bit further down. 1

Extended footway in Church Lane could present a hazard when funeral/wedding

processions are parked outside the church 1

The proposed pedestrian crossing at the entrance of Church Lane is far too close to

the junction 1

Visibility

Bollards are big and obstruct views. Their lighting also makes cyclists less

conspicuous. 1

12

Need to review visibility when entering Oakley Road 1

Removal of the sign on the existing refuge on the A21 might improve visibility 1

The proposed pedestrian crossing at the entrance of Church Lane is far too close to

the junction 1

Other comments about pedestrians

Mini-zebra crossing at top of Oakley Road, when you are about to turn left into A21 1

Pedestrians should be considered, but there are few in this area 1

Proposals make things worse for pedestrians 1

Provision of tactile paving and the central reservation crossing for pedestrians is

welcome 1

Removal of one of the traffic islands at the entrance of Oakley Road will make it less

safe for pedestrians 1

The footway into Oakley Road does not need to be widened 1

Overall

Consider converting advisory cycle lanes to mandatory 1

More painted bicycle markings on the road required 1

Need a fully signalled junction with physically separated cycle lanes and signalled

pedestrian crossings 1

Part-time traffic lights would solve most problems here 1

Proposals could mean longer queues back towards Bromley 1

The geometry of the Oakley Road junction needs to be more like a T-junction 1

Proposals aren’t significant

They do little for cycling 2

They do little for cycling or pedestrians 1

They do little for pedestrians 1

This junction isn't a big issue, it works fine 1

This junction isn't a big issue, particularly as there not many cyclists use it 1

Idea or comment outside scope of consultation

Bus lane north of junction, in particular hours of operation, should be much clearer 2

Higher priority should be to improve the junction at traffic lights between A232 and

Oakley Road 1

Improve pedestrian crossings on A21 between Magpie Hall Lane and Oakley Road 1

Problems at A232/A233 need more urgent attention 1

Proposal map has an error 1

Should have been better publicised. I was fortunate to hear about it 1

12

6 Responses from stakeholders Three of the 26 responses to the consultation were received from stakeholders. Here

is a summary of their views:

Stakeholder Widen cycle lanes

Junction layout amended to improve sight lines

Improved pedestrian crossings

Overall proposals

LCC - Bromley Branch Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly agree Agree slightly

London Borough of Bromley Agree slightly Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly agree

London CTC Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly agree

The following is a summary of their additional comments and views:

LCC – Bromley Branch – Shaun McDonald

Shaun McDonald of the LCC – Bromley Branch makes a range of comments. Regarding the southbound A21, the cycle lane should be continuous through the junction, and the direct entrance into Church Lane should be made no entry to motor traffic. A floating bus stop could be used to increase cyclist safety, and this would be easy to implement.

Regarding A233 Oakley Road, the central hatching should be removed to allow more space for cars to pass cyclists easier, and even remove the centre line altogether. A protected cycle by-pass could be included for cyclists turning left from A233

Oakley Road into A21 Bromley Common, with the use of a mini zebra for the

pedestrian crossing. This would make it much safer as then you reduce the

probability of drivers cutting up cyclists by not seeing them as they look right to go

and then cut the corner.

On the proposals map, the text "Bus stop" on Oakley Road is the wrong way around

for the direction of the traffic.

London Borough of Bromley - Councillor Alexa Michael

Councillor Alexa Michael is pleased to see that pedestrian crossings will be improved, and the junction layout amended to improve sight lines. The junction as it is represents significant danger for pedestrians, and improvements are very welcome.

London CTC – John Lee

No additional comments received.

12

7 Conclusion

The responses to the consultation show support for our proposals.

We have decided that we will carry out the improvements as proposed.

12

Appendix A – Copy of the consultation letter and map

12

12

Appendix B – Letter and map distribution area

12

Appendix C – List of stakeholders consulted

Elected Members

Caroline Pidgeon AM Joanne McCartney AM

Darren Johnson AM Fiona Twycross AM

Gareth Bacon AM James Cleverly AM

Jenny Jones AM Bob Stewart MP (Beckenham)

Murad Qureshi AM Jo Johnson MP (Orpington)

Nicky Gavron AM Bob Neill MP (Bromley & Chislehurst)

Andrew Boff AM Ruth Bennett (Bromley Common & Keston)

Victoria Borwick AM Stephen Carr (Bromley Common & Keston)

Tom Copley AM Alexa Michael (Bromley Common & Keston)

Stephen Knight AM Colin Smith (Portfolio Holder for Environment)

Local Authorities Police and Health Authorities

London Borough of Bromley Metropolitan Police

Greater London Authority CCG NHS Bromely

12

Other stakeholders

AA Motoring Trust LB of Bromley Residents Association

Road Haulage Association

Action on Hearing Loss (formerly RNID)

Living Streets Royal Mail

Age Concern London Living Streets Royal Parks

Age UK London ambulance Service Sense

Asian Peoples Disabilities Alliance

London Borough of Bromley Sixty Plus

Association of British Drivers London City Airport Stroke Association

British Motorcyclists Federation

London Councils Sustrans

Bromley Council on Ageing London Cycling Campaign (Bromley)

Taxi and Private hire

Bromley Safer Transport Team

London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority

Thames Water

BT London Older People's Strategy Group

The British Dyslexia Association

Campaign for Better Transport

London Tramlink Transport for London

Confederation of British Industry (CBI)

London Underground Unions Together

CTC, the national cycling charity

Metropolitan Police - Community Police (Bromley)

Unite Union

Department for Transport Metropolitan Police service

Disability Alliance Metropolitan Police service

Disability Voice Bromley MIND

Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee

Motorcycle Action Group

EDF Energy Motorcycle Industry Association

Eltham Public Transport Group

National Children's Bureau

Freight Transport Association

National Grid

Greater London Authority NHS CCG Bromley

Greater London Forum for the Elderly

Orpington District Public Transport Users' Association

Green Flag Group Petts Wood & District RA

Guide Dogs for the Blind Association

Portfolio holder for Environment

House of Commons RADAR London Access Forum

Joint Committee on Mobility of Blind and Partially Sighted People (JCMBPS)

RMT Union

Joint Mobility Unit RNIB

12

Appendix D – Response to issues raised

Could traffic lights be installed at the junction to help manage traffic flows? We feel that the junction generally works well in terms of traffic movement. We would expect that traffic signals to control this junction location would generally increase delays with little or no road safety benefit. However we want to improve visibility for everyone using the junction. Making the intersection between Oakley Road and Hastings Road more of a right angle will aid this. Why have you proposed a pedestrian crossing across Church Lane close to its

junction close to the main Hastings Road junction ?

Pedestrian routes should be direct, and crossings as far as possible aligned with pedestrian 'desire lines'. Pedestrians proceeding along the A21 eastern footway will naturally cross Church Lane close to the junction with Hastings Road. Were we to provide an indirect crossing, most pedestrians would ignore this and continue to cross closer to the road junction. The tactile paving is designed to be detectable by people with visual impairments.

The cycle lane could be improved further with a floating bus stop and continuous

markings

The safely issues identified which the project is manly addressing relate to the northbound cycle movement. Cycle lanes will be provided northbound along the A21 until the northbound Bromley Common bus lane is reached. The points made about lack of continuity of cycle lanes in the opposite southbound direction is recognised and TfL intends to commission some further design work to investigate this further. Although we understand the desire to improve cycle lanes more extensively along the A21, this project is a junction rather than a corridor improvement measure. Amending cycle lanes more extensively along the A21 is outside the scope and funding for this project.