Curtain Road / Rivington Street Central London Grid scheme Consultation Report August 2016

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

1

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.

2

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.

3

1.3 Location map

4

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.

5

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

6

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

7

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

8

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

9

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

10

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.

11

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.

12

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

13

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

14

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

Passenger Transport

(CPT)

Questioned the need to reduce the speed limit to

20mph in the area. It suggested that this could

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

Officers

Supportive. Welcomed safety improvements.

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

Campaign

Partially supportive. Suggested implementing

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

of Blind People (RNIB)

Expressed concern about raising the junction of

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.

15

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.

16

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.

17

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.

18

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

19

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.

20

Appendix B – Copy of the consultation letter

21

22

Appendix C – Leaflet distribution area

23

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.

24

Appendix E – Stakeholders consulted

3663 First for Foodservice

Abellio West London Ltd t/a Abellio Surrey, Action for Blind People

Action on Hearing Loss (RNID)

Age UK London

Alive in Space Landscape and Urban Design Studio

Anderson Travel Ltd,

Angel BID

APC-Overnight Argall BID

Arriva Kent Thameside/Kent & Sussex, Arriva Guildford & W Sussex,

Arriva

Association of British Drivers Association of Town Centre Management

ATCoaches t/a Abbey Travel,

Baker Street Quarter

Barking and Dagenham

Bayswater BID

Best Bike Training //Cycletastic Better Bankside

Bexley Accessible Transport Scheme,

Bexley Council Bexleyheath BID

bhs bikeability

bidvest logistics

bikeworks

bikeXcite

Blue Triangle Buses Ltd,

Borough Cycling Officers Group

Breakspears Road Project

Brentwood Community Transport,

Brewery Logistics Group

British Cycling

British Land British Medical Association

British Motorcycle Federation

British Retail Association

British School of Cycling

Bucks Cycle Training

Business B Ltd t/a The Expeditional,

Buzzlines,

CABE - Design Council

Camden Council Camden mobility forum

Camden Town Unlimited

Campaign for Better Transport

Campbell's

Capital City School Sport Partnership

Carousel Buses Ltd

CBI-London

Centaur Overland Travel Ltd,

Central London Cab Trade Section

Central London CTC

Central London Forward Central London Freight Quality Partnership

Central London NHS Trust

Centre for Accessible Environments

Chalkwell Garage & Coach Hire Ltd,

Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport

City Bikes (Vauxhall Walk)

City link

City of London City of London Access Forum

City of London Police

City of Westminster

Cobra Corporate Servics Ltd,

Community Transport Association

Confederation of Passenger Transport

Covent Garden Market Authority

Cross River Partnership

Coaches Excetera,

Croydon mobility forum

CT Plus Ltd t/a Hackney Community Transport,

CTC

Cycle Confident

Cycle Experience

Cycle Newham

Cycle Systems

Cycle Training East

Cycle Training UK (CTUK)

Cycling Embassy of Great Britain

Cycling Tuition

cycling4all

25

Cyclists in the City

Department for Transport

DHL

Clarkes of London,

E11 BID (Leytonstone)

Ealing Broadway BID

Ealing Council East and South East London Thames Gateway Transport Partnership

Polestar Travel,

Edgware Road Partnership

Enfield Council

English Heritage

Ensign Bus Company Ltd,

Evolution Cycle Training

Express Network Forum

Federation of Small Businesses

First Beeline Buses Ltd,

Fitzrovia Partnership

Freight Transport Association

Friends of the Earth

Future Inclusion

Garratt Business Park (Earlsfield)

Gatwick Flyer Ltd,

Go-Coach Hire Ltd

Golden Tours (Transport) Ltd,

Greater London Authority Greater London Forum for Older People

Green Urban Transport Ltd,

Guide Dogs Hainault Business Park

HammersmithLondon

Haringey mobility forum

Health Poverty Action Heart of London Business Alliance

Hermes Europe

Hillingdon Council Hillingdon mobility forum

Hounslow mobility forum

HR Richmond Ltd t/a Quality Line,

IBM Ilford Town BID

Inclusion London Independent Disability Advisory Group

Independent Shoreditch

Inmidtown

Institute for Sustainability

Institute of Advanced Motorists

Institution of Civil Engineers inStreatham

Islington Council Islington mobility forum

Snowdrop Coaches

Bikeability

The Little Bus Company,

John Lewis Partnership K&C mobility forum

Kimpton Industrial Park (Sutton)

Kingston First

Kingston mobility forum

Laing o'Rourke

Lambeth Cyclists Leonard Cheshire Disability

Lewisham Council Licensed Private Hire Car Association (LPHCA)

Line Line Coaches (TGM),

Living Streets

Local Government Ombudsman

London ambulance Service

London Bike Hub

London Borough of Hackney

London Cab Drivers' Club Ltd

London Central Cab Section London Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI)

London Climate Change Partnership

London Councils

London Cycling Campaign

London Duck Tours Ltd

London European Partnership for Transport

London Fire Brigade

London First

London General

London Private Hire Board London Riverside (Rainham)

London Strategic Health Authority London Suburban Taxi Drivers' Coalition

London Taxi Drivers' Club London Tourist Coach Operators Association (LTCOA)

London TravelWatch

London United Busways Ltd,

26

London Visual Impairment Forum

LoveWimbledon BID

Marshalls Coaches

Merton Council

Metrobus Ltd,

Metroline Ltd

Metropolitan Police Service

Mobile Cycle Training Service

Mode Transport

Motorcycle Action Group (MAG)

Mullany's Coaches,

National Autistic Society

National Express Ltd

National Motorcycle Council New Addington BID

New West End Company (NWEC)

NHS London Northbank Guild

Ocean Youth Connexions Olympus Bus & Coach Company t/a Olympian Coaches,

On Your Bike Cycle Training Orpington 1st

Oxford Tube

Parcel Force Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety (PACTS)

Passenger Focus

philip kemp cycle training

Planning Design

Porcellio Ltd t/a Meridian Duck Tours,

Premium Coaches Ltd,

Private Hire Board

Purple Parking Ltd,

Puzzle Focus Ltd

Queen Mary University of London

R Hearn t/a Hearn's Coaches,

RAC

Red Rose Travel

Redbridge Cycling Centre

Redwing Coaches (Pullmanor Ltd),

Reliance Travel,

Reynolds Diplomat Coaches

Richmond Council

RNIB RNID (Royal National Institute for Deaf People)

Road Danger Reduction Forum

Road Haulage Association

Roadpeace Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames

Royal Institute of British Architects

Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors Royal London Society for Blind People

Royal Mail

Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI)

Sainsbury's Supermarkets

Red Eagle

SCOPE

South Bucks CycleTraining

South East London PCT

South Herts Plus Cycle Training

South London Business Forum

South London Partnership

Southbank Employers Group

Southdown PSV Ltd,

Southgate & Finchley Coaches Ltd

Space syntax

Spokes Cycling Instruction

Stratford Renaissance Partnership

Successful Sutton

Sullivan Bus and Coach Ltd

Sunwin Service Group

Superdrug

Sustrans Sutton mobility forum

Taxi Rank & Interchange Manager

Team London Bridge

Technicolour Tyre Company Terravision Transport Ltd / Stansted Transport Ltd,

TGM Group Ltd

Thamesmead Business Services

The Automobile Association

The Big Bus Company Ltd,

The British Motorcyclists' Federation

The Canal & River Trust

The City of Oxford Motor Services Ltd,

The Ghost Bus Tours Ltd

The Kings Ferry Ltd,

The Licensed Taxi Drivers' Association

The Original London Sightseeing Tour /London Pride Sightseeing Ltd,

The Road Haulage Assoc. Ltd.

The Royal Parks

27

The Southwark Cyclists Thomas's London Day Schools (Transport) Ltd Time for Twickenham

TNT Tower Hamlets mobility forum

Tower Transit Operations Ltd,

Trailblazers, Muscular Dystrophy UK

Transport for All

Tyssen Community School Cycle Training

UK Power Networks

University College London

University of Westminster

uno,

UPS

Urban Movement

Vandome Cycles

Vauxhall One BID

Victoria BID Vision Impairment Forum

Walk London Wandsworth mobility forum

Waterloo Quarter

Westminster Council

Westminster Cyclists Wheels for Wellbeing

Whizz-Kidz

Willow Lane Trading Estate (Merton)

Wilsons Cycles

Wincanton

www.cyclinginstructor.com

Yodel Young Lewisham and Greenwich Cyclists