A4 Knightsbridge junction with Brompton Road
Safer Junctions programme
Brief
August 2018
Page i
A4 Knightsbridge junction with Brompton Road
Brief
Contents
1. Background
- Strategic Context
- Local Context
2. Commission
- Considerations
- Other relevant investigations
3. Methodology
- Identifying potential interventions
- Feasibility designs
- Local modelling of options
- Key study stages and deliverables
4. Governance
5. Timescales
6. Appendices
Page ii
1. Background
Strategic context
Transport for London, as the highway authority, has responsibility for maintaining,
operating and improving the Transport for London Road Network in London. This
network comprises around five per cent of all roads in London, but carries over
one third of all traffic.
The transport network plays a vital role in supporting economic growth, by linking
people to jobs, delivering products to markets and supporting domestic and
international trade. Transport also promotes social cohesion, by providing access
to key services, such as health and education services, shops and leisure
facilities.
The Mayor’s Transport Strategy sets out a clear commitment to the Vision Zero
approach to eliminating road deaths and serious injuries on London’s roads.
Vision Zero includes a number of programmes designed to tackle road danger
reduction, including Safer Junctions.
Safety improvements at specific junctions will be critical to achieving the Mayor’s
Vision Zero ambition in reducing road danger and following the analysis of the
road casualty data, the Safer Junctions list was published in April 2017 and
identified 73 junctions on the TLRN with the highest Vulnerable Road User (VRU)
collision rate. The list includes:
21 junctions which have been upgraded in the last three years,
33 at which TfL were already investigating improvements, and
19 where investigations would begin.
Over the period 2013 – 2015, 1819 KSIs (all modes) were recorded at all
junctions in London. This data was used to identify the sites to be prioritised for
study. 46 KSIs were recorded at the 19 new locations which are being
investigated as part of the Safer Junctions programme.
It should be noted that the junctions in the Safer Junction programme are also
major locations of social interaction and in many cases perform an important
‘place’ function. Hence design proposals should seek to make these locations
more appealing to pedestrians and cyclists, with the aim of reducing road danger
throughout the Safer Junction scheme area. This holistic approach will not only
drive down collisions, but improve the urban realm, encourage modal shift to
walking and cycling, and contribute to wider regeneration objectives.
Examples of interventions that should be considered for all Safer Junctions
include:
New and/or improved pedestrian crossings
Innovative facilities to separate cyclists from traffic in time and space, and
improve existing cycle facilities where they exist
Wider pedestrian footways, and decluttering of existing footways
‘Floating’ bus stops
Opportunities to introduce Sustainable Urban Drainage
Confidential
Page 1
24/08/18
Opportunities to introduce pocket parks, improved hard and soft
landscaping, and new cycle parking
A review of street lighting throughout the scheme area, to identify any sub-
standard locations
Measures to reduce traffic speeds (including consideration of 20mph), and
ensure those speed reductions are self-enforcing (e.g. through raised
pedestrian crossings)
Measures to bring about traffic reduction through the junction (e.g. traffic
lane removal, where practicable and without significant adverse impacts
on buses; making roads accessible to pedestrians, cyclists and buses
only)
Opportunities for increased bus priority
In June 2018, the TfL Healthy Streets Portfolio Board approved the Safer
Junctions programme budget of £0.5m in 2018/19 to continue work on the 19
junctions where collision investigations began in 2017/18.
Local context
The junction of Knightsbridge and Brompton Road on the border of the Royal
Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and the City of Westminster is situated along
the A4 corridor. The A4 is a strategic arterial corridor that runs from the City west
towards the GLA boundary, connecting with the M4. Within RB Kensington and
Chelsea, the A4 is complex, with sections of single and dual carriageway bi-
directional, two lane road (with stretches of bus lanes in some sections).
The junction is a key intersection within central London and is sensitive to any
traffic signal alterations. There are lots of nearby developments, including the
Chelsfield development (K1), which will need to be considered within the
proposals to be taken forward. Generally, the junction is dominated by vehicular
traffic, including taxi and private hire vehicles. Constrained footways, infrequent
crossing points, and high levels of both general traffic and pedestrian flows create
an environment that not only is unpleasant, but also potentially unsafe.
A high level of correspondence has been received which questions the absence
of a controlled crossing across Sloane Street. This has been investigated
previously but never progressed due to the potential impact on the surrounding
network outlined in initial modelling results.
There is a ‘Vision for Sloane Street’ which was developed by Cadogan Estates
and presented to RBK&C. RBK&C have previously been in touch with our
Network Performance teams to discuss improvements to relieve congestion at the
junction. It is congestion that remains the number one concern for the local
residents.
It is worth noting that Will Norman, Walking and Cycling Commissioner for
London has requested that the proposals be delivered before May 2020.
Confidential
Page 2
24/08/18
Collision Issues
48 personal injury collisions occurred in the 36 month period ending 31st October
2016, of which five resulted in serious injuries (11.6%). This is slightly below the
comparative rate of 12.6% for ATS junctions on the TLRN in Inner London
Boroughs.
Key collision issues at the junction of A4 Knightsbridge junction with Brompton
Road / Sloane Street include:
19 collisions (44.2%) involved a pedestrians
16 collisions (37.2%) occurred in dark conditions
14 collisions (32.6%) involved a pedal cyclist
9 collisions (20.9%) involved a bus or coach
9 collisions (20.9%) involved a goods vehicle
2 collisions (4.7%) involved a u-turning vehicle
Confidential
Page 3
24/08/18
2. Commission
To appoint Traffic Design Engineering (TDE) to carry out feasibility and concept
design. TDE will act as the Principal Designer and carry out all the duties under
the CDM Regulations 2015.
The scope of this commission is for TDE to consider the content of the A4
Knightsbridge junction with Brompton Road / Sloane Street collision study report
(as supplied Appendix A) together with the comments and recommendations
provided by key internal stakeholders at the site meeting (as supplied in Appendix
B) and further develop these to:
Provide feasibility design options based on the potential interventions to
reduce road danger, including exploring opportunities to improve cycle
facilities, encourage pedestrian priority, reduce traffic dominance and
vehicle speeds and where possible introduce urban realm improvements
and / or green infrastructure (See also, ‘Strategic Context’);
Provide concept design of the preferred option;
Utilise the results from the base Healthy Streets surveys undertaken by
TDE to inform the design;
Assist the Sponsor to assess the impact of proposals using the TfL’s City
Planner strategic assessment framework tool;
Provide designs to TfL Network Performance in order for them to
undertake traffic modelling of recommended solutions for the design of all
options and to assess local impacts. TfL Network Performance will be
commissioned separately by the TfL Sponsor;
Provide technical input to the Sponsor for the Business Case and other
required paperwork in preparation for associated programme and portfolio
boards;
Calculate potential collision savings and other quantifiable benefits which
may be derived, such as more walking and cycling; and,
Provide a detailed Microsoft project programme and cost estimate for TDE
tasks related to carrying out the feasibility and concept designs.
In order to adhere to the required timescale, it is recommended that certain
surveys required by the LoHAC design team for detailed design may be required
to be procured during the concept design stage. All additional surveys required to
carry out the design, will require prior authorisation from the Sponsor. TDE to
provide specification and quotations to the Sponsor so that separate survey
commissions can be agreed.
The design has to be produced and comply with all the relevant design standards
and TfL specific requirements.
Figure 1 overleaf shows the geographic scope of the study with the local context.
Confidential
Page 4
24/08/18
Figure 1 - Network in scope for intervention
Considerations – Safer Junctions Programme Wide
Traffic re-timings of signals and the large impact of changes to traffic
across several lanes, but this could impact negatively on the bus
network
Pedestrian behaviour (with no historical record of personal injury
collisions) of crossing injudiciously or informally across junctions
could be resolved by an all-round pedestrian signal stage
The delay of improvements to a location because of other planned
changes or factors
Confidential
Page 5
24/08/18
It is accepted that in order to provide a holistic approach to reducing road danger,
some design considerations may be in direct contradiction with each other. To
assist in the prioritisation of proposed measures, this hierarchy of needs is to be
followed:
Reduction in VRU collisions
Increased cycling and walking
Reduction in vehicular collisions
Maintain or improve bus journey time reliability
Green Infrastructure and Urban Realm improvements
Maintain or improve journey time reliability for general traffic
Confidential
Page 6
24/08/18
There are several elements to the Design Strategy for the Safer Junctions
programme which should be considered.
Design Strategy - Overarching Principles
Highways Infrastructure – To see significant improvements in addressing
collision patterns and reducing road danger for vulnerable road users,
meaningful changes and improvements are needed to the highways
infrastructure. The provision of direct crossings and raised tables can
highlight pedestrian priority and reduce the dominance of vehicular traffic.
For cyclists, direct cycle lanes, tracks and early release traffic signals
should be investigated, especially where there is future cycle demand.
ASLs and advisory cycle lanes are not considered sufficiently
transformational for Safer Junctions.
The use of public transport for longer trips should be encouraged by bus
priority measures including bus lane extensions and bus gates should also
be considered. Wherever possible, impacts to the bus network should be
mitigated.
Street Makeover - By encouraging more pedestrians to spend time in the
area through enhancing the place function of the site, vehicle dominance in
the area will be reduced.
Streetscape and urban realm improvements can design out conflict points
while enabling pedestrians to safely follow desire lines. This can include,
but is not limited to removal of clutter, introducing pocket parks and green
infrastructure (eg. sustainable urban drainage), wider, better quality
pavements and cycle parking. This also helps support a number of
Healthy Streets indicators including shade and shelter, places to stop,
people feel relaxed and clean air, which would not routinely be addressed
through traditional highway infrastructure improvements.
Removal of through traffic from selected residential streets can remove key
dangerous manoeuvres and provide opportunities for streetscape
improvements.
An Urban Designer has been appointed to the Safer Junctions programme
to provide technical input and strategic guidance to facilitate the
incorporation of Streetscape and urban realm improvements into the
designs for this Safer Junction.
Safety and Security – Reduced speed limits, especially 20mph, are known
to reduce the severity of collisions and encourage more active forms of
transport. A high quality urban environment will in turn result in more
passive surveillance to reduce crime and encourage more active forms of
transport.
Future Proofed – The pressures on the street are ever-changing and so
the design needs to be adaptable to change: flexible on a daily basis and
resilient over the long-term. The Safer Junctions programme will need to
Confidential
Page 7
24/08/18
respond to any known intensifying role as a focal point for pedestrian,
cyclist or motorcyclist activity.
Innovative – The deliverables need not rely solely on tried and tested
measures. Where appropriate, efforts should be made to trial innovative
and creative solutions in order to reduce road danger.
Safer Streets for All – A dimension of the design strategy is to increase
motorist awareness of all vulnerable road users. The design should
support the provision of alternative modes such as walking and cycling, in
particular focussed on shorter trips to local main attractors where there is
most scope for increased use, such as nearby town centres and public
transport interchanges.
Where appropriate, having a distinct change in the character of the
junction may be appropriate to encourage motorists to slow down,
especially where cyclists travel and where pedestrians cross frequently.
Whilst additional motorised trips should not be encouraged within the Safer
Junctions programme, the safety of motorcyclists should be protected
through the design of the individual projects.
Parking and Loading - Special consideration should also be given to
loading and parking along the route and maintaining or improving servicing
arrangements. Loading pads which allow for footways to open up during
the busiest periods is one approach that could provide for different users at
different times of the day.
Behaviour Change Initiatives – Where possible, if a location is identified
which may also benefit from softer road safety interventions, this should be
highlighted to the Sponsor to bring to the attention of colleagues in
Customer Communication and Technology (CCT).
Confidential
Page 8
24/08/18
Other Relevant Investigations
Currently Strategy and Network Development (S&ND) is not aware of any other
ongoing investigations or projects at the junction of the A4 Knightsbridge junction
with Brompton Road / Sloane Street which TDE should also be aware of.
However, other investigations in the wider local area being undertaken which are
of relevance to this study are: -
K1 permanent changes to the highway on Brompton Road and at the
Knightsbridge / Brompton Road junction. As part of the K1 development, the
access to the underground station is changing from the west side of Sloane
Street onto Brompton Road. The developers also put forward plans to widen
the footway on Sloane Street and change the crossing on Brompton Road
from a two stage to a straight across. The latest plans should be available
from City Planning (Alexander Rajnarine).
Proposed Measures for Feasibility and Concept Design under this Commission
These proposals are based on the recommendations made in the Collision Study
prepared by TDE, comments made at the site meeting of 10th May 2018 and at
the post-site meeting involving key internal stakeholders held at the TfL offices at
Palestra on 21st May 2018.
TDE are instructed to investigate and provide feasibility and concept designs,
which could include a combination of the following proposals:
Location: Knightsbridge Road, A315 Westbound
1. Increase ASL to 7.5m and provide early release
Summary: Investigate left turn hook and available space for cyclists
between vehicles changing lane within the junction, as the road splits.
Proposal and potential impact: Early release will allow cyclist, waiting at the
stop line, to proceed, and also help position cyclists at the internal stop line
heading west and southwest
2. Lead in lane to ASL
Summary: Assess the existing lane widths and investigate reallocating lane
widths to provide a leading lane. Existing stagger crossing island could
possibly be reduced in size and the road space reallocated to provide feed in
lane
Proposal and potential impact: Topographical surveys would be required
to obtain existing lane widths.
3. Investigate if countdown facilities could be provided to assist pedestrians
crossing the road
Summary: Pedestrians may be hesitant to cross the road or cross at the
end of the stage during the blackout period when the green man has ended
Confidential
Page 10
24/08/18
Proposal and potential impact: Installation of louvers will need to be
investigated by TI to take this forward.
4. Reallocated road space and provision a straight across crossing facility.
Summary: Investigate straight across crossing to reduce delays to
pedestrians
Proposal and potential impact: A straight across crossing may lead to an
all red phase at the junction as an alternative method of control is not
considered possible. This would lead to an increased cycle time and could
result in longer pedestrian wait time as well as lost time to cyclists.
5. Reallocation of road space to provide a larger footway and improve the
level change from footway to carriageway
Summary: Outside Harvey Nichols the footway falls quite steeply towards the
carriageway.
Proposal and potential impact: Topographical surveys would be required to
understand available space.
Location: Sloane Street, A3216
6. Increase ASL to 7.5m and provide early release
Summary: Investigate potential for left turn hook. Current room may be tighet
for cyclists between left and right turning vehicles/merging vehicles on the exit
arms of the junction
Proposal and potential impact: Early release will allow cyclists, at the stop
line, to proceed past the possible left hook area and also help position cyclists
ahead of general traffic
7.Assess the existing lane widths and reallocation of lane widths to provide a
leading lane
Summary: Currently no lead in lane to ASL
Proposal and potential impact: Early release will allow cyclists, at the stop
line, to proceed past the possible left hook area and also help position cyclists
ahead of general traffic. Road markings could be amended to make near side
left turn only and offside lane right turn only.
8.Investigate reducing Sloane Street (northbound) to one lane and incorporate a
staggered crossing facility.
Summary: A staggered crossing facility would allow for a more flexible
method of control. Investigate straight across crossing facility, removal of the
existing island and build out of footway space.
Proposal and potential impact: Extensive modelling would be required to
assess the impact. Topographical surveys would be required to gain existing
lane widths.
Confidential
Page 11
24/08/18
9. Provide a crossing facility on Sloane Street, at the junction of Basil Street.
Summary: No formal signalised crossing facility is currently provided at this
location. This may help with managing pedestrians exiting the underground
station
Proposal and potential impact: Providing the crossing facility would require
banning the right turn movement out of Basil Street, with possible benefits for
north bound buses
Location: Brompton Road, A4
9. Change operation of Brompton road to two lanes.
Summary: Footway widths could be increased to improve pedestrian comfort
levels
Proposal and potential impact: Layout is dependant on what the
developers plans are for reinstatement and requirements of underground
exiting)
10.Assess existing lane widths for provision of a leading lane, using carriageway
space on westbound Brompton Road
Summary: No lead in lane to ASL
Proposal and potential impact: Topographical surveys would be required
to obtain existing lane widths.
11.Increase ASL to 7.5m and provide early release
Summary: Potential for left turn hook. Cyclists constrained between left and
right turning vehicles/ merging vehicles on the exit arms of the junction
Proposal and potential impact: Early release will allow cyclists, at the stop
line, to proceed past the possible left hook area and also help position cyclists
ahead of general traffic. Road markings could be amended to make near side
left turn only and offside lane right turn only.
Location:Knightsbridge Road, A315 eastbound
12.Relocate gully away from crossing area
Summary: Gully in the crossing area is too close to the drop kerb and is a
possible slip hazard
Proposal and potential impact: Topographical surveys would be required to
get existing lane widths.
13.Review method of control to see if green man could appear in stages where
there is no conflict
Summary: Long wait times at junction
Confidential
Page 12
24/08/18
Proposal and potential impact: Need confirmation if pedestrian stage can
appear in more than the current stages
14. Assess the existing lane widths and investigate reallocating lane widths to
provide a leading lane. Increase ASL to 7.5m and provide early release
Summary: No lead in lane to ASL, cyclists cannot easily use the
ASL
Proposal and potential impact: Early release will allow for cyclists to place
themselves within the junction
3. Methodology
Identifying potential interventions
TDE is required to produce feasibility designs for each site identified as a Safer
Junction site. These may vary in cost for delivery; PPD Commercial should lead
on all cost estimating for emerging designs, in collaboration with the Designer.
The final interventions are expected to remain within an overall budget of circa
£5m (including all design development, project management, sponsorship,
communications, and miscellaneous delivery costs).
Early Contractor Involvement will be considered by PPD, in order to inform the
cost estimates, and help the designer address risks at any early stage (e.g. in
relation to statutory undertakers and procuring necessary surveys).
S&ND will make available any relevant completed studies, which describe issues
and suggest solutions. TDE should not rely on collating existing ideas, and will be
expected to develop design recommendations independently.
Innovative and creative solutions may be proposed, but non-standard or
unapproved techniques will need to be agreed by the Sponsor before significant
work is undertaken in developing these options.
The design should address the following issues:
Improve road safety, focussing on, but not limited to vulnerable road user
collisions;
Facilitating public realm improvements to encourage more people to spend
time in the area and maximise the junction’s potential against TfL’s Healthy
Streets indicators;
Improving local ambience through increasing TfL’s green estate. This will
also mitigate the exposure of pedestrians (especially children), cyclists and
motorcyclists to fumes from stationary traffic and maximising opportunities
for carbon capture and sequestration, addressing environmental impacts;
Improving accessibility and severance issues for pedestrians and cyclists,
including cycle parking provisions;
Journey time reliability should be maintained or improved for buses where
feasible;
Confidential
Page 13
24/08/18
In acceptance of the role of Principal Designer, all CDM Regulation 2015
requirements will apply including managing, co-ordinating and
programming the feasibility and concept design to include all aspects for
delivering the design (i.e. Engineering and Technical Services, Traffic
Infrastructure, Network Impact Management, WCAP, Highways Technical
Approval Authority, external including contractors for surveys and London
Borough of Kensington and Chelsea / City of Westminster etc.). The
S&ND Principal Sponsor will send a letter formally appointing TDE as
Principal Designer and provide the initial PCI separately.
Feasibility designs
TDE is expected to undertake 2D geometric designs of intervention measures for
identified locations. CAD based designs should include/ identify:
General highway layout (existing and proposed), showing the highway
boundary;
Geometric alterations to the highway;
Land take requirements, if required;
Lane definition; and,
Statutory plant, and furniture affected by the proposals and the implications
for the design.
Where unavailable, topographical surveys may be required for the purpose of
providing suitable feasibility designs however this should be agreed with the
Sponsor prior to commissioning.
Where required, TDE to assist the Sponsor in presentation of the proposals to the
Streetscape Design Review Group (SDRG).
TDE, in conjunction with the Sponsor, is to provide PPD with the draft feasibility
designs to facilitate construction cost estimates for the project.
Concept design of the preferred option is then to be progressed.
Concept design
The final concept design package is to include:
General Arrangement drawings showing proposed dimensions;
Site Clearance drawings;
Signs and Road Marking drawings; and,
(where appropriate) Outline Urban Realm improvement designs (in
conjunction with the nominated Urban Designer.
Confidential
Page 14
24/08/18
A Risk workshop with stakeholders will be arranged by PPD during the concept
design stage, and output to be included within ARM. TDE will be required to
provide their technical input. The output of this meeting will be a detailed Risk
Register and Issues Register to be maintained by PPD using ARM.
TDE, in conjunction with the Sponsor, is to provide PPD with the draft concept
design to facilitate construction cost estimates for the project.
Assess impact of proposals using strategic assessment framework
TDE will be provided with a Fingerprint output from TfL’s City Planner strategic
assessment framework tool for each junction. The attributes of the framework
include the following Transport Outcomes:
Safety – Road casualties and crime levels
Active – Active travel, current and potential cycling and walking levels
Green – Air quality
Space efficient – Freight flow levels and car dependency
Connected public transport – Improved connectivity
Accessible public transport – Access inequality
Quality public transport – Bus performance, demand and provision
Sustainable, active travel developments – Car dependency and poor
connectivity
Unlocking development – Forecast population and employment growth
Once feasibility designs are defined, TDE should assist the Sponsor in
completion of a high-level evaluation of all options based on this assessment
framework.
Local Modelling of options
Local modelling will be required in order to undertake the assessment of network
performance/engineering feasibility. Separate briefs to Network Performance and
Traffic Infrastructure will be issued by the Sponsor.
Public Consultation
As a result of the limited timeframe for delivery, public consultation will only take
place where there is a statutory requirement. Where no formal public
engagement is required, extensive pre-engagement via TfL CCT will take place
Confidential
Page 15
24/08/18
throughout the design period to maximise the potential for local stakeholder buy-
in.
Where formal public consultation is to take place, TDE is to assist with the
preparation of material for the consultation.
Key Study Stages and Deliverables
Stage 1
Project initiation meeting
Brief note outlining TDE’s understanding of study objectives and strategic
and local objectives
Stage 2
Following confirmation of the above with S&ND, the following is expected:
Design of interventions to feasibility and concept level as specified
Assess impact of each proposal on a local level for all road users utilising
the assessment framework
Periodic spend profile to end of concept design
Detailed Microsoft Project plan to end of concept design
Designer’s Response to the Stage 1 Road Safety Audit and TfL Highways
Approval Document (HAD) for the Technical Approval process
Technical input to the TfL Engineering Scheme Impact Report (SIR)
Deliverables
In addition to the common deliverables noted in the next section, the following
items should also be provided:
Option drawings
Any option drawings should be produced in line with recommendations made by
key internal stakeholders in attendance at the Safer Junctions site meetings and /
or wash up sessions.
The Sponsor will select the optimum design option which captures the design
objectives within the scope of this commission, based on the hierarchy of needs
established earlier in this Commissioning Brief.
Utility Surveys
Confidential
Page 16
24/08/18
Utility surveys, e.g. C2’s shall be undertaken and subsurface utilities are to be
determined with the project area. This shall be undertaken during the course of
this task order. During the feasibility and concept design stages, the LoHAC
designer is to be available for early engagement activities in order to understand
the rationale behind design decisions and to ensure that any surveys necessary
to undertake the detailed design are procured in good time to meet the agreed
timescales. TDE are to assist in the procurement and commissioning of these
surveys.
Road Safety Audit
On completion of the concept design, the Sponsor will arrange for a Stage 1
Safety Audit to be undertaken by TfL’s in-house Road Safety Team. The Safety
Audit reports shall be received by TDE who shall consider and provide a
designer’s response in respect of any remedial works or additional features
considered necessary.
Construction and Design Management
CDM Regulations 2015 should be considered as part of assessing viability of any
design. The S&ND Principal Sponsor will send a formal letter of appointment to
TDE and provide the Pre-Construction Information (PCI) documentation.
Confidential
Page 17
24/08/18
DELIVERABLES
Common Deliverables
Required?
Project Plan that sets out time and cost details, including project
milestones and deliverables.
Periodic reports to coincide with TfL 4-weekly accounting periods
detailing time worked, money spent, and percentage complete.
Report
on
work
undertaken
and
implementation
recommendations (no report without a recommendation). The
Report will include a single page Executive Summary as a
forward outlining the Commission objectives and conclusions,
and a single page Design Statement outlining the key design
parameters and decisions.
The following will be included in the Report or produced as separate
documents:
Common Deliverables
Required?
Appropriate plans (AutoCAD and PDF format)
Traffic counts – To be discussed and confirmed with Sponsor
Appropriate Traffic Models giving:
Base
Options
Preferred option
Signed off TSSR
Topographical survey - To be discussed and confirmed with
Sponsor
Stage 1 Road Safety Audit – To be completed by TfL’s in-house
Road Safety Audit team
Stage 1/2 Road Safety Audit combined
Road Safety Audit Designer’s Response
Location of Statutory Undertakers plant and potential implications
to design.
Streetscape Design Review Group (SDRG) approval, where
required
Highways Technical Approval at the end of each stage
Network Performance (NP) approval
Consultation documentation (plan, text etc.)
Summary results of consultation exercise(s)
Cost estimate for construction
CDM documentation
Public consultation drawings (where required)
TMO drawings and schedules
Environmental Checklist
Healthy Streets Check (with Sponsor)
Guardrail Assessment
Design change log
Confidential
Page 18
24/08/18
4. Governance
The S&ND Portfolio Sponsor for Road Safety is accountable for the
commissioning of this work and the requirements set out in this brief. A PPD
Project Manager has been appointed for early involvement of this project, prior to
handover at the detailed design stage. The PPD Project Manager is accountable
or responsible for all Health and Safety and Project Management activities as set
out in the Pathway RACI matrix.
The S&ND Principal Sponsor (based in the appropriate Network Sponsorship
Area Team) will be responsible for stakeholder engagement, decision making,
and project governance during design development. They will provide appropriate
scrutiny and challenge to the Project Manager, who will oversee the design
schedule and cost estimates.
TDE should provide a weekly progress report.
A project Progress Meeting will also take place on a monthly basis. TDE should
be available for this and may be invited to attend for part of the meeting. There
may be other meetings between the Sponsor and TDE however this will be
confirmed / requested over the course of the commission period. Please find
attached the governance structure in Appendix C.
Confidential
Page 19
24/08/18
5. Timescales
TfL has committed to Will Norman, the Walking and Cycling Commissioner for
London, to complete detailed design and Gate 4 approval at this location by April
2020.
In order to meet this deadline, TDE are requested to complete the feasibility and
concept design with public consultation as outlined in this brief by 31 December
2018.
Indicative milestones for the final design are:
By end August 2019
Feasibility, concept design and public
consultation complete (12 months)
Mid August 2018
TDE to respond with understanding of brief, output
delivery programme and fee estimate (one week)
S&ND to confirm commission (one week)
End December 2019
Feasibility design to be completed with amendments
incorporated including Highways TAA submission
End January 2019
Gate 2 sign-off by S&ND
Spring 2019
Public consultation to run concurrently to the concept
design with one month to collate consultation report.
End July 2018
Concept design to be completed with amendments
incorporated including Stage 1 Road Safety Audit and
Highways TAA submission
End August 2019
Gate 3 sign off by RSM-S
By end of April 2020
Detailed design complete (5 months)
By end of February 2021 Construction complete (10 months)
Confidential
Page 20
24/08/18
6. Appendices
Appendix A – A4 Knightsbridge junction with Brompton Road / Sloane
Street Safer Junctions collision study
Appendix B – Summary of site visit / meetings with key internal
stakeholders
Appendix C – Strategic Assessment Framework ‘Fingerprint’
Appendix D – ‘Before’ Healthy Streets check
Appendix E - Safer Junctions Governance Structure
Confidential
Page 21
24/08/18
Appendix A – A4 Knightsbridge junction with Brompton
Road / Sloane Street Safer Junctions collision study
Knightsbridge
Brompton Road - Version A - DRAFT ISSUE FOR COMMENTS.pdf
Confidential
Page 22
24/08/18
Appendix B – Summary of site visit / meetings with key
internal stakeholders
Knightsbridge
Brompton Road Safer Junctions Site Meeting notes.xlsx
Confidential
Page 23
24/08/18
Appendix C – Strategic Assessment Framework
‘Fingerprint’
Confidential
Page 24
24/08/18
Appendix D – Base Healthy Streets Check
Confidential
Page 25
24/08/18
Appendix E - Safer Junctions Governance Structure
*Please note that members of the Design and Modelling team listed overleaf
shown in italics are subject to Transformation and consequently the individuals
involved may be subject to change.
Confidential
Page 26
24/08/18
Safer Junctions Governance
Portfolio Board is the
Heathy Streets
escalation point for critical risks
Portfolio Board
and issues to the programme
and provides endorsement of
critical decisions
The SJ Programme Board
oversees senior level, strategic
Safer Junctions
Programme Board approves
Networks
issues relating to areas such
changes to scope, programme
as finance and governance of
Programme Board
and budget of individual
Programme Board
the programme.
projects
Working Group
The Working Group is a forum
to discuss progress and make
TLRN capital
project level decisions in each
of the fol owing project areas:
scheme
Design and
City Planning
Monitoring, evaluation
Sponsorship
Project Management
Modelling*
and dissemination
Key Responsibilities
• Project Business Case
• Early contractor Involvement
• Highway Design
•
• Monitoring, assessment
Outcome Definition
• Project Development
• Cost management
• Traffic Infrastructure design
and reporting
•
Project Benefits
• Project schedule
• Design Modelling
Key People
•
•
Kornelis (Korak) Van
Mike Cook
•
Tuyl
Simon Bradbury
• Julie Clark
• Hemendu Ranpuria
•
•
Kwong Chung Law
Peter Sadler
• Anya Bownes
• Beatriz Garcia-
•
•
•
Richard Silvester
Stella Lam
Faith Martin
• Caroline Wel s / Liane
Granados
•
Nigel Pompilis / Dave
• Henry Cresser
Robbins
• Gary Ward
Brown / Neil Davis / Jack
Confidential
Page 10
• David Sockett 24/08/18
Pulker