TfL Ref: EIR-0986-2425 and EIR-1030-2425
Thank you for your further requests received by Transport for London (TfL) on 26th June 2024.
Your requests have been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Information Regulations (EIRs) and our information access policy.
Specifically you asked the following:
Case reference EIR-0986-2425:
“Thank you very much for your detailed response below. It is disappointing that TfL is not able to identify documentation regarding the basis of validity for maintaining COVID-related measures
I do appreciate the explanation you have provided below, regarding the substance of the matter. It implies that all separate safety considerations were considered together as a whole, rather than individually:
"the safety of the corridor was considered on the basis of the introduction of the entire scheme,".
In other words, if there were relevant safety considerations for producing the space available for cycling on Bishopsgate by building out temporary footway, this was not considered separately, rather all features of the scheme, including bus gates, banned turns, and so on were considered together, so that they must all be retained, or all removed. This does not seem to be either good policy, or a valid way of making administrative decisions.
I refer to this item in the a 10 Bishopsgate ETRO:
Comments submitted as part of the public consultation indicate that there are locations within the scheme extent where the design of the highway features (eg. footway build outs) could be amended to improve the corridor for pedestrians and cyclists further. Should the ETRO measures be retained, then the highway measures that this enables can be reviewed.
Unfortunately, this is expressed in such vague terms that I am not sure how to formulate a request for information about "the Highway measures that this enables" being reviewed, in such a way that I will not receive a similar response to the one below, stating that the search terms are too general to produce a sufficiently concise number of documents. Nonetheless, I imagine there must be some documentary evidence of review of these highway measures, and I would like to receive that information, please."
And;
Case reference EIR-1030-2425:
“Please would you provide the road safety audit for the pitlane outside 175 Bishopsgate”.
I can confirm that we hold the information you require.
In answer to the first request above, as noted in previous correspondence, TfL is working on the next phase of works on the Bishopsgate corridor to remove all remaining blue barriers and replace these with a semi-permanent footway style construction. These proposals will also address a number of other issues that have been raised with TfL, through correspondence, the consultation as part of the experimental scheme, or improvements identified by our engineers. This includes changes to the buildout by Primrose Street. Drawings of the proposed changes are attached. Drawing number 3877002-TFL-PRD-00_DR-TE-01 includes the changes that are designed to remove and replace the blue barriers as well as addressing the buildout by Primrose Street. Drawing number 3877002-TFL-PRD-00_DR-TE-02 identifies line marking improvements that have been identified and will be combined with the physical works of removing the blue barriers to form the combined final scheme. The proposals are currently in draft form and are with TfL’s contractor for further design work, with a completion date before the end of this current financial year.
In answer to the second request, please find the Road Safety Audit attached. Note that signatures, and the names and contact details of external staff, have been redacted under Regulation 13 of the EIR, the exception that protects against the unfair release of personal data.
Finally, I understand that you had confirmed to meet the project team on 5 July at Bishopsgate, but that a technical issue with your email meant that you did not receive the email which confirmed the location to meet. The team has subsequently offered another date this week, but have yet to hear from you. The purpose of the meeting is to gain clarity on your concerns. The team has tried hard to answer your questions through the ongoing exchange of correspondence, but continued requests for information and ongoing questions suggest that a meeting may be more constructive for both parties. We hope that the information attached to this email does answer all your questions. If it does not, then we would still be willing to meet, but this may take some time to arrange due to summer holiday commitments.
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,
David Wells
FOI Case Officer
FOI Case Management Team
General Counsel
Transport for London
