A1 Upper Street: Parking and loading bays P ropos ed c hang es to park ing and loading bays along A 1 Upper S treet December 2015

1

A1 Upper Street: Parking and loading bays P ropos ed c hang es to park ing and loading bays along A 1 Upper S treet

C ontents

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

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

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

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

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

6 Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 7

Appendix A – Copy of the consultation letter .............................................................. 8

Appendix B – Consultation letter distribution area .................................................... 12

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

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

1 Background We proposed to extend the hours of operation of the parking and loading bays along Upper Street in Islington, following requests from local businesses. The changes we proposed would affect parking and loading bays between Islington Green and Canonbury Lane on both sides of the road. They have been developed to support local businesses and benefit those wishing to shop or dine in the area.

We proposed to:

• Extend the parking and loading times by 3 hours to finish at 4pm instead of 1pm for bays in the northbound direction (towards Canonbury Lane)

• Extend the parking and loading times by 3 hours to start at 10am instead of 1pm for bays in the southbound direction (towards Islington Green)

• Shorten the hours of operation to finish at 4pm instead of 7pm at the northbound parking bay opposite St Mary’s Church to keep traffic flowing in the evening peak

• Replace one loading bay with a parking bay in front of property numbers 111-124 Upper Street. This location currently has two loading bays and one parking bay. Our proposals would create a longer parking bay.

The parking and loading bays along Upper Street operate in a way that keeps traffic flowing into central London in the mornings and away from central London in the evenings. Parking and loading would still be prohibited in the morning and evening peak times in the relevant direction so that the road is clear for all moving traffic to use, including buses and cyclists.

There would be no changes to:

• The length of time people are allowed to park and load within the new operating times for each bay

• The ability to park and load outside the red route operating hours of 7am – 7pm Monday – Saturday

2 Introduction We recently invited the public and key stakeholders to take part in a public consultation and comment on our proposals. The consultation took place between 8 July and 28 August 2015. Members of the public could take part in the consultation using the TfL consultation tool online, by email or post.

This report details responses received and will contribute to the decision on whether to go ahead with the proposed scheme or not.

1

2.1 Purpose of the Scheme

The purpose of the scheme is to extend the hours of operation of the parking and loading bays along A1 Upper Street in Islington to support local businesses. 2.2 Location maps

3 The consultation The consultation ran between 8 July and 28 August 2015 and was designed to enable TfL to understand local opinions about the proposals.

The consultation enabled TfL to: • Raise general awareness of the scheme among local residents, stakeholders and the

public • Explain the proposed changes • Provide the opportunity for people to contact us with their feedback about the

proposals

Digital Map Data (c) Collins Bartholomew Ltd (2015)

2

The potential outcomes of the consultation were: • 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 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

3.1 Who we consulted The public consultation intended to seek the views of businesses and residents occupying properties along A1 Upper Street between Islington Green and Canonbury Lane. Please see Appendix B for a map of the local area we consulted.

We also consulted stakeholders including The Metropolitan Police, Members of Parliament, Assembly Members and local business and other interest groups.

A list of the stakeholders we consulted is shown in Appendix C and a summary of their responses is given in Section 5.

3.2 Consultation material, distribution and publicity We wrote a letter which contained a map explaining the proposed scheme and changes to the junction. This was distributed to 383 local households and businesses. A copy of this letter and map is shown in Appendix A.

The consultation material asked two specific questions regarding the proposals:

1. Do you support the proposed changes to the parking and loading hours along A1 Upper Street between Canonbury Lane and Islington Green? Yes / Partially / Not sure / No opinion / No

2. Do you support the proposed changes to the parking and loading bays in front of

property numbers 111-124 Upper Street? Yes / Partially / Not sure / No opinion / No

In addition, we had a free text area where people were able to leave their comments.

We invited people to respond to the consultation using the TfL website https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/upper-street or by writing to us at FREEPOST TFL CONSULTATIONS or by emailing us at consultations@tfl.gov.uk

3

4 Overview of consultation responses A total of 11 consultation responses were received. All of these responses were submitted online.

In the consultation we asked two specific questions to see how much support there was for our proposals. The chart below shows the specific question we asked and the number of people who answered yes, no, those who were not sure and those who did not answer the question.

Chart 1 below shows the answers received to our first specific question

The consultation showed that eight people were supportive of the proposed changes to the parking and loading hours, one person partially supported the proposals, one person had no opinion and one person opposed the proposals.

4

Chart 2 below shows the answers received to our second specific question

The consultation showed that nine people were supportive of the proposed changes to the parking and bay in front of property numbers 111-124 Upper Street. One person had no opinion and one person did not answer the question.

Additional comments

Respondents were given the opportunity to provide further comments about our proposal. Of the 11 responses received, eight provided comments. Table 1 below summarises the views and suggestions received. Our full response to issues raised is provided in Appendix D.

5

Table 1: Views and suggestions made

Support for proposals/positive comments Number of times issue raised

Will benefit businesses and residents 1 Opposition/Negative comments Extending loading hours would be dangerous for cyclists 1 Red route stopping signs are confusing 1 The scheme should do more to reduce congestion for buses on the road 1 Start PM restrictions at 3pm not 4pm 1 Safety concerns Add CCTV cameras along the route 1 Extending parking hours is contradictory to TfL improving cycle safety 1 Other comments Stop camera fines for stationary vehicles 2 The pedestrian crossing outside Angel station needs to improve 1

5 Responses from statutory bodies and other stakeholders

We received two responses from stakeholders. Their responses are summarised below.

London TravelWatch

Partially supportive of the proposals but showed concern for the following reasons: Believe that the proposals should be more favourable to buses. That loading and waiting restrictions should apply where and when congestion occurs to minimise inconvenience to passengers. This would support policies to make bus travel more attractive, even where it takes capacity away from other users. Feel that it is disappointing that parking hours on one of London's most important bus corridors is being extended. It seems strange that when there is so much emphasis on improving the safety of cyclists more on-street parking is being considered. Sadlers Well Theatre Supportive. These proposals offer great improvement to the existing arrangements and we support them for both business and residential. The London Borough of Islington No response received.

6

6 Conclusion

The proposals as consulted were well received by the majority of respondents to the consultation, with 9 of 11 responses in favour of the changes. The response rate was very low, however. Some respondents raised concerns and we have responded to these in Appendix D. After consideration, we have decided to progress with the proposals we consulted on.

To make the changes, TfL is required to formally advertise a new traffic order in public and take account of the responses received to this statutory consultation. Should there be no objections at this stage to TfL making the order, signage indicating the new hours of operation for the bays in question can be erected to inform the public of the changes. The earliest that the changes could be brought into effect would be spring 2016.

7

Appendix A – Copy of the consultation letter

8

9

10

11

Appendix B – Consultation letter distribution area

© C rown c opyrig ht and databas e rig hts (2015) O rdnanc e S urvey

12

Appendix C – List of stakeholders consulted

Elected Members Tania Mathias MP

Gareth Bacon AM

Emily Thornberry MP

Jennette Arnold AM

James Berry MP

Jenny Jones AM

Jeremy Corbyn MP

Joanne McCartney AM

Seema Malhotra MP

Murad Qureshi AM

Siobhain McDonagh MP

Nicky Gavron AM

Stephen Hammond MP

Richard Tracey AM

Zac Goldsmith MP

Stephen Knight AM

Andrew Boff AM

Tom Copley AM

Caroline Pidgeon AM

Valerie Shawcross AM

Darren Johnson AM

Victoria Borwick AM

Fiona Twycross AM

Local Authorities

London Borough of Islington

Police & Health Authorities

Metropolitan Police Islington Safer Transport Team

London Ambulance Service Metropolitan Police - Community Police

Local Interest Groups

Islington AIM (formerly BID) Islington Transport Aware

The Angel Association Living Streets - Islington

13

Other Stakeholders L ondon T ravelWatch

L icenced T axi D rivers Association

AA Motoring T rus t

L iving S treets

Action on Hearing L oss (formerly R NID )

L ondon Ambulance S ervice

Age C oncern L ondon

L ondon C ouncils

Age UK

L ondon C ycling C ampaign (Is lington)

A lzheimer's S ociety

L ondon F ire and E mergency P lanning Authority

As ian P eoples D isabilities A lliance

L ondon O lder P eople's S trategy G roup

Association of B ritish Drivers

Association of C ar F leet O perators

L ondon Underground

B etter T ransport

MIND

B ritish Motorcyclis ts F ederation

Motorcycle Action G roup

B T

Motorcycle Industry Association

C ampaign for B etter T ransport

National C hildren's B ureau

C ampaign for B etter T ransport

National G rid

C C G Is lington

National G rid - electricity

C onfederation of B ritish Industry (C B I)

P ort of L ondon Authority

C T C , the national cycling charity

R MT Union

D epartment for T ransport

R NIB

D isability A lliance

R oad Haulage Association

D isability R ights UK

R oyal Mail

D isabled P ersons T ransport Advisory C ommittee

R oyal Mail P arcel F orce

E DF E nergy

R oyal P arks

14

F reight T ransport Association

S ense

G L A S trategy Access P anel members

S ixty P lus

G reater L ondon Authority

S troke Association

G reater L ondon F orum for the E lderly

S us trans

G reen F lag G roup

T axi and P rivate hire

G uide Dogs for the B lind Association

T hames Water

House of C ommons

T he B ritish D ys lexia Association

IC E –L ondon

Unions T ogether

J oint C ommittee on Mobility of B lind and P artially S ighted P eople (J C MB P S )

Unite Union

J oint Mobility Unit V ictoria B us iness Improvement D is trict

Appendix D – Response to issues raised

The red route signs are very confusing. They should tell people clearly when not to park Red route signs for parking and loading follow the same conventions set out in national standards and as used on other roads in the UK. They have been approved for use by the Department for Transport. We use the same red route signage across London to ensure it is consistent and understandable across the network, and there are no plans to change the signage or how restrictions are indicated. The afternoon restrictions should start at 3pm rather than 4pm In order to keep signage on the TfL network consistent, we only use certain ‘start and finish’ hours on signs. 4pm is widely used elsewhere on red route signage, and that is why we are proposing amending the hours of parking and loading to this time. Extending the parking and loading bay hours will encourage large vehicles to park for longer which will be detrimental for other road users, in particular cyclists. The length of time that vehicles can park and load within each bay is not being amended as part of this scheme. Restrictions for each bay will still be enforced to ensure there is good compliance and that bays are not occupied for longer than is allowed.

15

P ark ing and loading res tric tions s hould apply where and when c ong es tion oc c urs to minimis e inc onvenienc e to bus pas s eng ers T he change in hours has been proposed while s till accommodating the tidal nature of traffic flow on Upper S treet. T fL B uses have been consulted and the proposed changes fall outs ide peak hours when congestion is at its wors t. O uts ide of peak hours , we do not anticipate that the changes will unduly affect bus journey times or bus passengers . More CCTV should be installed along Upper Street There are already a number of CCTV cameras along Upper Street that are used by TfL to monitor incidents and traffic levels. There are no current plans to provide further CCTV cameras along Upper Street. Cameras should not be used to enforce stationary traffic violations TfL uses cameras to enforce parking and loading and keep the road network moving. Although London boroughs are no longer permitted to use CCTV for parking enforcement, TfL has demonstrated the need for CCTV enforcement on its road network and is therefore not subject to the same restriction as the boroughs. Better pedestrian crossing facilities are needed on Upper Street near Angel station The pedestrian crossings near Angel station were not included as part of this consultation as the scheme only proposes changes to parking and loading times between Islington Green and Canonbury Lane. There are no current plans to change the layout of the crossings near to the station, but comments received have been noted for any future work at this location.

16