Carriageway design & alignment

- The over-arching aim is to create a street in which vehicles are prioritised less and forced to slow down, through wider footways/ narrower carriageways, informal crossings in different materials, reduced signing and lining and lower 50mm height kerbs.

- Following comments received in the consultation about the proposed road not being wide enough, the design team explained that the proposed width of 6.4m has been approved by TfL Buses as being suitable for allowing 2 buses to pass safely. If suitable for buses, it is also suitable for other large vehicles (fire appliance, artic, refuse vehicle etc).

- The width of each lane (3.2m) is at the maximum recommended by the London Cycle Design Guidance for cyclists to ride in the primary position safely without the likelihood of unsafe overtaking manoeuvres by vehicles using the same lane. Note that cyclists can be overtaken, but only when there is no opposing traffic.

- The informal crossings were discussed. It was explained that they are not to be marked with tactile pavers as they are only really to help reinforce the speed reduction along the street through variation of materials. Post mtg note: There will however be a dropped kerb – not a slight ramp up as described. Pedestrians can still cross the street wherever they want, as happens now. The design team stressed that if there were any issues raised in the Road Safety Audit about any of these crossings (eg in proximity to bus stops) then it would be addressed at the next design stage.

- Additional formal crossing. It was noted that the existing crossings outside Holy Trinity School and at the A205 were to be retained but with no intermediate crossing for people with impairments/ better accessibility. It was explained that the accident statistics do not point to a specific requirement for a designated crossing (Post-mtg note: there were 6 in 5 years from Oct 09 to Sep 14, all “slight” and none involving peds or cycles. This is low for this class of road ). Therefore the design team will not be considering any further action in the next design stage.

- Loading bays – the design team confirmed that the parking bays double up as loading bays, which is why there appears to be a lack of loading in the middle and south sections. Concerns were voiced about the bay outside #19 (Florists): can this be moved slightly so as not to impact on the shop front display because of the required 1.8m minimum footway width? It was note that primarily this loading bay was to assist the florist and there isn't enough room for displays / loading or a more suitable / convenient location for the loading bay. Therefore the florist should consider formally requesting a licence to display flowers or reduce the amount display to assist other pedestrians.

- The design team confirmed that the proposed double yellow lines have 2 “blips”, which means that there is no stopping for parking or loading allowed. Parking / loading only possible in marked bays. It was noted that there will be a strong requirement for enforcement by the Council’s contractors to avoid the existing situation of blocked lanes during off-peak times. Post meeting note:- It is usual for additional stringent enforcement to be carried out after these types of schemes have been implemented and normally soft enforcement is carried out for a period of two weeks to warn drivers of the changes before formal fixed penalty notices are issued. The Council's parking enforcement team will be notified of scheme completion.

- The width of the side entry roads (Thorpewood Ave, Clyde Terrace, Derby Hill) was queried. Could they be reduced in width? PCL to look into the possibility and satisfy the adequacy of turning movement for large vehicles, in particular refuse and fire at next design stage.

continued..