Request ID: FOI-0251-2324 Date published: 10 May 2023
You asked
follow up from 3569-2223
a) How much of the £64 million active travel recent TfL allocation went to Brent?
b) Did TfL on record specify any targets or requirements for how these funds are to be spent inside Brent?
c) Vision Zero and accompanying new TfL report highlighting that people living in London's most deprived areas are twice as likely to be killed or seriously injured in vehicle road collisions. Car-free housing new South Kilburn doubling its vehicle roads is not an opinion, its Brent's actual plan. New green growing active travel cycle routes started with Cathedral Walk and then was swiftly abandoned as plan(s) policy early 2000's. A green active travel plan for car-free housing zoned false dawn.
Brent Master Developer still wants the opposite of what TfL Vision Zero wants inside this particular new car-free housing 30,000 population by 2041 zoned? Does TfL take a neutral stance when the London Plan is being ignored? ( or could this non compliance explain no active travel funds for this car-free intensive housing zone, yet available to car based conservation areas Brent Kilburn north and already actioned ?)
d) It is problematic fact that except for the Legible London Map panel at Portobello Road RBKC, which maps South Kilburn's green ways and green parks (on its 15-minute walk map), no City of Westminster at at boundary panel green maps South Kilburn. South Kilburn is mapped as total grey instead.
When was the TFL green data for these maps so uncaringly changed and when did South Kilburn for this public information get TfL re- defined as if all grey zone?
South Kilburn has parks, greenways and cycle routes surviving developers in 2023, surely useful to know about? Yet, at present time city ramblers and cyclists have to be very lucky and chance upon the Portobello Road correct TfL Panel, clearly a panels public use function major fail.
e) When will TfL green level-up these Legible London Panels and stick to 2023 green facts, rather than developers grey dream?
We answered
TfL Ref: FOI-0251-2324
Thank you for your clarified request which we received on 20 April 2023, asking for various information concerning the London Borough of Brent.
Your request has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Information Regulations (EIRs) and our information access policy. I can confirm that we hold some of the information you require. You specifically asked:
a) How much of the £64 million active travel recent TfL allocation went to Brent? b) Did TfL on record specify any targets or requirements for how these funds are to be spent inside Brent?
Please find attached the recent LIP Funding confirmation letter to Brent, which should answer your questions A & B above.
Please note that in accordance with TfL’s obligations under the Data Protection legislation some personal data has been removed, as required by Regulation 13 of the Environmental Information Regulations. This is because disclosure of this personal data would be a breach of the legislation, specifically the first principle of the legislation, 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 of Schedule 2 which would make the processing ‘fair’.
c) Does TfL take a neutral stance when the London Plan is being ignored? ( or could this non-compliance explain no active travel funds for this car-free intensive housing zone, yet available to car based conservation areas Brent Kilburn north and already actioned ?)
Details about TfL's role in planning can be found on our website using the following link: https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/urban-planning-and-construction/our-role-in-planning?intcmp=3484. TfL has been consulted on planning applications for developments coming forward in the area, and where appropriate, have requested design amendments and/or contributions towards public transport enhancements to adhere to the policies and requirements within the London Plan, included those transport related, in order to support good growth. TfL's advice on strategic transport aspects for referable applications (criteria for a referable application can be found here ) and across London can be found here. TfL's advice is included in the report that helps guide the decision makers. Planning decisions are made by elected representatives on planning committees as well as the Mayor of London, Government Inspectors and Secretaries of State. TfL does not decide planning applications - it is up to the planning authorities to balance the various relevant and related planning policies in making their decisions in a reasonable manner.
For major planning applications, TfL would expect the developer’s consultant to prepare Transport Assessment, TfL’s advice can be found here: https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/urban-planning-and-construction/transport-assessment-guide/transport-assessments?intcmp=10094 d) It is problematic fact that except for the Legible London Map panel at Portobello Road RBKC, which maps South Kilburn's green ways and green parks (on its 15-minute walk map), no City of Westminster at boundary panel green maps South Kilburn. South Kilburn is mapped as total grey instead.
When was the TFL green data for these maps so uncaringly changed and when did South Kilburn for this public information get TfL re- defined as if all grey zone?
e) When will TfL green level-up these Legible London Panels and stick to 2023 green facts, rather than developers grey dream?
We are not entirely clear on the precise details of your request here, nor the exact area of London in question.
Please note Legible London uses a consistent colour palette for the mapping shown on the Legible London street signs which is set out in TfL’s Street Map Design Standards here. This defines the colours to be used for the various elements of the map including roads, urban area as well as green areas and woodland areas. The map content of Legible London is derived from Ordnance Survey data backed up where required by field surveys to check any local details. To ensure that the maps are useful for pedestrian wayfinding, a balance is found to provide a good level of helpful and informative wayfinding assets and landmarks on the maps while not overcrowding them to become difficult to use and interpret.
In terms of the 15-minute walk maps which you mentioned, these are intended to provide orientation in the wider context and so provide less detailed mapping information (the 5-minute walk maps provide more local information and landmarks). Due to the mapping scale, only larger parks and green spaces are likely to be included in the 15-minute walk maps (in the same way that not all the yellow landmarks are included as well). As a result it may appear that there is less green space present.
The appearance of South Kilburn Open Space has never changed on either scale of Legible London map. It’s always been shown as green space.
We continually review and update the Legible London mapping database, together with receiving input and suggested amendments from the London boroughs, so will capture any further local changes to parks and greenspace as and when they occur.
If this is not the information you are looking for, or if you are unable to access it for any reason, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Please see the attached information sheet for details of your right to appeal as well as information on copyright and what to do if you would like to re-use any of the information we have disclosed.
Yours sincerely
Eva Hextall FOI Case Management Team General Counsel Transport for London
