Dear Transport for London,

REQUEST

a) Please can I have copies of all the traffic count data you hold for the Canada Water Opportunity Area? This to include Salter Road, Redriff Road, B205 because these roads are also shown on the video of a model used by LBS. Excel spreadsheets or similar is fine.

b) A section of A200 Lower Road (southbound), adjacent to the Osprey Estate, was made a 'focus area' for pollution in 2017. However, traffic counts are also very high in Rotherhithe Old Road (A200 northbound) and the pollution is bad. Can you inform me why A200 Lower Road (southbound) was made a focus for pollution while Rotherhithe Old Road (A200 northbound) was not? Counts for Rotherhithe Old Road (A200 northbound) were higher. It is noted that Southwark Council now propose to increase traffic in Rotherhithe Old Road while significantly reducing traffic in A200 Lower Road (southbound).

I note that there are about 187 air pollution 'focus areas' being targeted by Transport for London?

IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST

When anyone says "we have used data from TfL" it is in the public interest to know that is true. DFT publish their count data on their website and are very transparent.

I understand from LBS that "TfL do not have a direct influence in the design of projects but as Lower Road including the one-way system are Strategic roles we do require their approval, before we can make any changes"

Creating Cycleway 4 requires changes to nearby roads costing many millions of pounds. Some of the proposed changes produce disbenefits and increase traffic flipping 2014 proposals.

"Cycleway 4 will create a continuous segregated cycle route between Tower Bridge and Greenwich" and you say it will "improve public spaces" and "facilities for people who are walking" - I do not doubt the new cycleway will be fantastic and I shall enjoy using it - HOWEVER proposals by Southwark Council that facilitate Cycleway 4 also create disbenefits and impacts on health including pollution and traffic noise along Rotherhithe Old Road. Removing zebra crossings, installing pedestrian islands and increasing crossing times is not necessarily "improvement" for pedestrians.

https://tfl.gov.uk/travel-information/im...
webpage informs "Lower Road Southwark Council is currently consulting on detailed proposals for the Lower Road section of the route. This includes their proposals to make some roads in the area two-way. Find out how to have your say on Southwark Council's Lower Road consultation page [link https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/p... There is now a "Rotherhithe Movement Plan" consultation by Southwark Council traffic department.

I have been informed verbally that data / information has been used by developers at Canada Water and Southwark Council to plan for development, CW4 and make proposals to make some roads in the area two-way however I cannot find the data on your website. Data including traffic counts and modelling. Information used to create Southwark's plans for the A200 / A2208 gyratory (including by Mouchel in 2013/14) and traffic assessment used by developers.

When looking at the Southwark Council consultation documents I cannot find anything about pollution even though their proposals will increase traffic volume along Rotherhithe Old Road where homes are already covered in toxic traffic soot (brake dust, particulates etc). Proposals also show some major bus route journey times getting WORSE. A video - I understand in part built using data from TfL - shows congestion / traffic queues, more traffic lights (starts / stops / braking), and there are higher counts of traffic and longer journeys. Zebra crossing are to be removed too. I suspect A200 / A2208 pelican crossing times have been and will be increased further / made worse by additional crossings inserted which will increase crossing times for pedestrians and possible cyclists who use the crossing on a very busy main road. Recently I watched a baby in a pram stuck in the middle of the A200 crossing island near King George's Park in clouds of exhaust - at pram height.

I could not find anything about increase / decrease in pollution caused by the planned road changes to implement CW4 although videos show congestion / traffic queues, more traffic lights (starts / stops / braking), and there are higher counts of traffic and longer journeys. Increase journey times for general traffic in some "sections"of the Rotherhithe Movement Plan including 9, 10, 11, & 13 which is the proposed route for all "through" traffic to be funnelled through.

Southwark inform:

"We used traffic modelling software to:
Model the existing road network based on traffic flows in 2017
Model future trends and estimated traffic flow for 2021, based on committed developments in the area and around London...Use these to plan new road networks that work for all road users – as seen in the Rotherhithe Movement Plan... Model the impact of these proposed new networks on future traffic flows"

Residents are extremely concerned and worried about Rotherhithe Movement Plan proposals.

Yours sincerely
Jerry Hewitt

FOI, Transport for London

Dear Jerry Hewitt

 

Our ref: FOI-1454-1920/GH

 

Thank you for your request received by Transport for London (TfL) on 14
August 2019 asking for information about Cycleway 4 & Rotherhithe Movement
Plan.

 

Your request will be processed in accordance with the requirements of the
Environmental Information Regulations and our information access policy.

 

A response will be sent to you by 12 September 2019. We publish a
substantial range of information on our website on subjects including
operational performance, contracts, expenditure, journey data, governance
and our financial performance. This includes data which is frequently
asked for in FOI requests or other public queries. Please check
[1]http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transpar... to see if this helps you.

 

We will publish anonymised versions of requests and responses on the
[2]www.tfl.gov.uk website. We will not publish your name and we will send
a copy of the response to you before it is published on our website.

 

In the meantime, if you would like to discuss this matter further, please
do not hesitate to contact me.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Graham Hurt

FOI Case Officer

FOI Case Management Team

General Counsel

Transport for London

 

show quoted sections

 

References

Visible links
1. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transpar...
2. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/
3. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/

Dear Graham Hurt, FOI Case Officer ,FOI Case Management Team

Thank you for the response.
If it is not too much trouble, a traffic survey company Intelligent Data Collection carried out substantial data collection in April / May 2018 at A200 Rotherhithe Old Road and in the area.
Including using video cameras.
Did TfL make use of 2018 data collected by Intelligent Data Collection when making you plans? I note that TfL says it's model uses 2017 traffic flows. It's 2019 now, and if newer data is available it's reasonable for the public to expect it to be used.
I do hope TfL/London Borough of Southwark decide to work with local residents adversely affected by Cycleway 4 / A200 road changes (one needs the other) so we can find positive solutions and more forward.
Many thanks,
Jerry Hewitt
Rotherhithe ward Resident

Yours sincerely,

Jerry Hewitt

FOI, Transport for London

1 Attachment

Dear Jerry Hewitt

 

Our ref: FOI-1454-1920/GH

 

Thank you for your request received by Transport for London (TfL) on 14
August 2019 asking for information about Cycleway 4 & Rotherhithe Movement
Plan.

 

Your request has been considered under the requirements of the
Environmental Information Regulations and our information access policy.
Unfortunately we do not hold the information you require.

 

As I am sure you are aware, the roads listed in your request in respect of
traffic counts and air pollution are all London Borough of Southwark
highways and therefore we would expect them to hold this data.

 

TfL did jointly commission a strategic transport study for this area with
Southwark and the major developers which we have provided to Southwark to
publish. This does not contain the requested data but does consider
highways and public transport at a strategic level.

 

The British Land application for the existing shopping and leisure
centres, the Printworks and other smaller sites may have some of this
information in respect of this site/development. This is all uploaded onto
Southwark old Planning Application register under reference 18/AP/1604 and
includes the Transport Assessment and a recent addendum thereto which you
may find useful.

 

Whilst TfL did provide Southwark with our base traffic models for Cycleway
4 to ensure consistency across the route, these would have been updated to
incorporate their design changes for Lower Road - it would be Southwark
who hold the latest information that you are requesting, so they would be
best placed to answer your request.

 

I am sorry that we are unable to assist you further on this occasion. If
you are not satisfied with this response please see the attached
information sheet for details of your right to appeal.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Graham Hurt

 

FOI Case Officer

FOI Case Management Team

General Counsel

Transport for London

 

 

show quoted sections

 

References

Visible links
1. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/

Dear Transport for London,
Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.
I am writing to request an internal review of Transport for London's handling of my FOI request 'Cycleway 4 & Rotherhithe Movement Plan'.

Part (a) of my request asked "a) Please can I have copies of all the traffic count data you hold for the Canada Water Opportunity Area?" You kindly referred me to Southwark Council. The Canada Water Opportunity Area includes the Strategic Road Network A200 Gyratory. You have nothing to hand over? Please can you provide traffic count data used to construct the models used by Southwark Council and the developers? If you do not hold count data - including from fieldwork counts (manual, ATC etc) how can you produce the models they used? And you do not carry out fieldwork to verify / check your models?

Part (b) of my request asked "b) A section of A200 Lower Road (southbound), adjacent to the Osprey Estate, was made a 'focus area' for pollution in 2017. However, traffic counts are also very high in Rotherhithe Old Road (A200 northbound) and the pollution is bad. Can you inform me why A200 Lower Road (southbound) was made a focus for pollution while Rotherhithe Old Road (A200 northbound) was not?"

There has been no response at all to this part of the request. I understand from London Environment Strategy APPENDIX 2: EVIDENCE BASE that TfL works closely with GLA for the LAEI and TfL coordinates its
development on the GLA’s behalf. The inventory air quality maps inform the declaration of air quality focus
areas (see the Air Quality ‘Focus Areas’ in London section), where further local action is required to reduce public exposure to levels above the air quality limit values. Action can include changes to roads and motor traffic.

This is very important because Southwark Council acknowledge recently that "“However, with the change in traffic flows, it is reasonable to expect an improvement on the Lower Road section of the gyratory, but a deterioration on Rotherhithe Old Road, Rotherhithe New Road, Bush Road and Bestwood Street."

The Mayor’s Air Quality Fund (MAQF) fund projects and I believe from 2020 following reassessment of the GLA Air Quality ‘Focus Areas’, boroughs are to incorporate focus areas into their AQAPs and you should know why an area was made a focus area, or not? If you do not know why an particular area was made a focus area or not then please let me know. Maybe the decision is made by the borough and nothing to do with you and I should ask Southwark Council? Who decides focus areas? Is fair question to ask given the emerging shambles in Southwark over the Rotherhithe Movement Plan. And where action is making an already polluted residential streets worse (that should have been included in any focus area).

Please note Southwark Council wrote:
"The modelling work for these proposals took nearly two years to be completed, so any data collected recently is unlikely to have been used. The model that we use are updated and maintained by TfL, so we are dependent on them updating the models. Once work has started on modelling we would not go back and change base data, however, the flows are checked to ensure that are as accurate as possible and if necessary adjustments are made."

So far there is no evidence of any field work carried out by Southwark Council to check flows and therefore no evidence yet of any verification. British Land have informed my twice that they do not hold the dates and times of data collection (saturation flows and cruise times measurements ) carried out in 2018. Assessments and studies produced without keeping a record of dates and times data is collected is unprofessional, not robust and possibly invalid (open to charges that it's "made up" / faked) and if you jointly commission work with Southwark Council and developers you need to ensure they keep records properly!

Thank you for the link to the Strategic Transport Study. You have read it? The study states:
“This commission, and the information within this Forecasting Report, will be used to provide the empirical evidence to support the production of a Transport for London (TfL) and London Borough Southwark (LBS) jointly authored Strategic Transport Study (STS), which in turn will support an updated Area Action Plan (AAP) document.”

"will be use" to produce a Transport for London (TfL) and London Borough Southwark (LBS) jointly authored Strategic Transport Study (STS).

So where is that study? It would appear that the study you linked me to leads to another study. Although I can't find one. The Strategic Transport Study you jointly commissioned is deeply flawed and failed to consider policy of the AAP which is directly relevant. But that's another issue entirely.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...

Yours faithfully,
Jerry Hewitt

Dear TfL
In addition, please be informed that Southwark Council state in a planning officers report for Application 18/AP/1604 that:
"Transport modelling
430. Together with TfL, the council undertook a strategic modelling exercise in 2018 to update
the evidence base of the Opportunity Area. The work undertaken through the Strategic
Transport Study (STS) formed the methodology and basis for the strategic modelling
undertaken by BL."
Commissioning is rather different to undertaking. It was contracted out.
Yours sincerely,
Jerry Hewitt

FOI, Transport for London

Thank you for your request for an internal review which was received on 14 September 2019.

You have stated that you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request for information under the Freedom of Information Act.

The review will be conducted by an internal review panel in accordance with TfL’s Internal Review Procedure, which is available via the following URL:

http://content.tfl.gov.uk/internal-revie...

Every effort will be made to provide you with a response by 12 October 2019. However, if the review will not be completed by this date, we will contact you and notify you of the revised response date as soon as possible.

Yours sincerely

Emma Flint
Principal Information Access Advisor
FOI Case Management Team
General Counsel

show quoted sections

Dear FOI,

You wrote:

"Every effort will be made to provide you with a response by 12 October 2019. However, if the review will not be completed by this date, we will contact you and notify you of the revised response date as soon as possible"

Its nearly two months.

Yours sincerely,

Jerry Hewitt

FOI, Transport for London

Dear Mr Hewitt

Please accept my apologies for the delay in responding. A response to your internal review is being finalised and will be sent to you within the next few days.

Yours sincerely

Emma Flint
Principal Information Access Adviser
FOI Case Management Team
Transport for London
[TfL request email]

show quoted sections

FOI, Transport for London

4 Attachments

Dear Mr Hewitt

 

I am contacting you with regards to your internal review request of 14
September 2019. Following your email a review has been carried out by an
Independent Review Panel (‘the Panel’) consisting of individuals who were
not involved in the handling of your request (FOI-1454-1920). Please
accept my apologies for the delay in responding.

 

The review has focused on the following issues you have raised in your
email of 14 September that fall within the scope of the Environment
Information Regulations -

 

Part (a) of my request asked "a) Please can I have copies of all the
traffic count data you hold for the Canada Water Opportunity Area?" You
kindly referred me to Southwark Council. The Canada Water Opportunity Area
includes the Strategic Road Network A200 Gyratory. You have nothing to
hand over? Please can you provide traffic count data used to construct the
models used by Southwark Council and the developers? If you do not hold
count data - including from fieldwork counts (manual, ATC etc) how can you
produce the models they used? And you do not carry out fieldwork to verify
/ check your models?

 

As advised in our response of 9 September TfL did provide Southwark with
our base traffic models for Cycleway 4, please find this information
attached as requested. These files contain the detailed traffic flows and
bus routes used in the Lower Road Gyratory VISSIM traffic model. This
model produced the journey time results seen on the Southwark consultation
page.

 

Attached you will also find the Local Area Model Validation Report which
was prepared for the strategic modelling informing the Canada Water
Strategic Transport Study. However, different data is sometimes used for
strategic and local modelling and it is unclear whether your question
relates to strategic or local modelling. The attached relates only to
strategic modelling.

 

The Panel were advised by the Principal Modeller in TfL’s Strategic
Analysis team that you have previously been advised about the Strategic
Transport Study work as well as British Land’s planning application which
focused on identifying the wider transport impacts of potential
development in the Canada Water area, looking at a time horizon of 2031
and beyond, but it is important to note that this material, nor indeed any
of the work undertaken for the Strategic Transport Study or by British
Land, will appropriately inform your original questions about Cycleway 4.
Consequently there was not a detailed assessment of how Cycleway 4 could
affect the local area around Rotherhithe in the immediate term.
Furthermore, the design of Cycleway 4 will have moved on since it was
assessed it as part of the Strategic Transport Study.

 

Part (b) of my request asked "b) A section of A200 Lower Road
(southbound), adjacent to the Osprey Estate, was made a 'focus area' for
pollution in 2017. However, traffic counts are also very high in
Rotherhithe Old Road (A200 northbound) and the pollution is bad. Can you
inform me why A200 Lower Road (southbound) was made a focus for pollution
while Rotherhithe Old Road (A200 northbound) was not?"

 

TfL have identified Air Quality Focus Areas across London. The TfL Air
Quality Focus Area covers both the A200 Lower Road (southbound) and
Rotherhithe Old Road (A200 northbound).  It’s not an unusual occurrence
that the Focus Areas in a local report differs from the London-wide ones
as the TfL London-wide ones are, by their nature, not as carefully defined
at a local area. Therefore is it not unusual that a local study has
changed the definition.  Unfortunately the Panel are unable to advise why
the identified Air Quality Focus Area is different as the Panel have not
been able to identify the authors of the original study to ascertain the
difference.  However as this is a Southwark lead scheme, they will be best
placed to provide a more definitive answer to your question.

 

Who decides focus areas?

 

The Air Quality Focus Areas are a by product of the scheme design and as
Southwick are the lead authority on this design scheme they are better
placed to provide you will the information that you seek.

 

Please note that in accordance with TfL’s obligations under Data
Protection legislation some personal data has been removed, as required by
Regulation 13 of the EIR. This is because disclosure of this personal data
would be a breach of the legislation, specifically the first principle
which requires all processing of personal data to be fair and lawful. It
would not be fair to disclose this personal information when the
individuals have no expectation it would be disclosed and TfL has not
satisfied one of the conditions which would make the processing ‘fair’.

 

I hope the above response has provided a better clarity in regards to the
response provided to FOI-1454-1920, however if you are dissatisfied with
the internal review actions to date please do not hesitate to contact me
or alternately you can refer the matter to the independent authority
responsible for enforcing the Freedom of Information Act, at the following
address:

 

Information Commissioner’s Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire SK9 5AF

 

A complaint form is also available on the ICO’s website
([1]www.ico.org.uk).

 

Yours sincerely

 

Emma Flint

Principal Information Access Adviser

FOI Case Management Team

Transport for London

[2][TfL request email]

 

 

 

show quoted sections

 

References

Visible links
1. http://www.ico.org.uk/
2. mailto:[TfL request email]
3. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/

Dear FOI,
Thank you to the Panel.
Thank you for informing me there was not a detailed "assessment of how Cycleway 4 could affect the local area around Rotherhithe in the immediate term". Thank you for pointing out that cycleway 4 will have moved on since it was assessed as part of the flawed Strategic Transport Study. Part (a) of my request asked "a) Please can I have copies of all the traffic count data you hold for the Canada Water Opportunity Area?" and thank you for the AM / PM Rts spreadsheets. I shall endeavor to make those coherent with LBS's key traffic flow diagram. I expect this Rotherhithe Movement Plan / CW4 / A200 gyratory issue will rumble on into 2020 and I am not very keen on contacting the independent authority because more requests are likely to be made. I would however appreciate confirming that you have handed over copies of all the traffic count data you hold for the Canada Water Opportunity Area? It is very difficult to see that the AM / PM Rts spreadsheets you provided can be produced without holding other traffic count data that you could provide - or at least inform me of the nature / extent any such information is held if cost is prohibitive. Important for the TfL’s Strategic Analysis team to understand that London Borough of Southwark's team point to TfL and wash their hands of traffic count data responsibility while - as far as I can tell - fail to update their own proposal to take into account new data such as British Land's 2018 counts (although British Land sat on the information).
When your modelling is being used produce "unhealthy high streets" and increase pollution in residential streets that already breach pollution limits the information requested should be handed over. In the absence of sensible explanations stories take over and the trolls run amok which can impede good and proper planning and development that we urgently need in London.
Yours sincerely,
Jerry Hewitt