Follow on from FOI-1949-1920 Thank you very much for the response and information provided. It is very helpful. Part 3 of my original request asked: "3.) Section 11.2 informs us that "through further assessment of each option using flow and delay differences, it was decided that option 2 was the best performing design and also addressed both TfL and LBS policies of introducing cycle superhighway 4 and a Lower Road gyratory re-structure respectively" Do you know who made this decision? Mott MacDonald? TfL & Southwark Council jointly?" Do you know who made this decision? A very important decision was made and we need to know who decided that "option 2 was the best performing design" and thereby cast option 1 and other options out of the process prior to consultation by Southwark Council. Mott MacDonald decided option 2 was the best performing design? TfL decided option 2 was the best performing design? Southwark Council decided option 2 was the best performing design? Joint decision of some kind? Also, attachments "Canada Water Base Model audit FINAL Redacted.pdf" and "RP LMVR 1a v7 FINAL.pdf" are dated 2017. You have nothing more recent? The Rotherhithe Movement Plan was put out by Southwark for consultation in 2019. And after British Land's own traffic count data from April 2018 show that PCUs for Rotherhithe Movement Plan do not cohere with April 2018 count observations. It is important for us to know and understand why such important PCUs don't cohere with robust observed 2018 counts when seeking to increase motor traffic substantially along residential streets including Bush Road, Rotherhithe Old Road and Rotherhithe New Road.

---

TfL Ref: FOI-2418-1920

Thank you for your email received by Transport for London (TfL) on 10 November 2019.

Your request has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act and our information access policy.  Unfortunately we do not hold the information you require. You asked:

1. "3.) Section 11.2 informs us that "through further assessment of each option using flow and delay differences, it was decided that option 2 was the best performing design and also addressed both TfL and LBS policies of introducing cycle superhighway 4 and a Lower Road gyratory re-structure respectively" Do you know who made this decision? Mott MacDonald? TfL & Southwark Council jointly?"

Do you know who made this decision? A  very important decision was made and we need to know who decided that "option 2 was the best performing design" and thereby cast option 1 and other options out of the process prior to consultation by Southwark Council.

The London Borough of Southwark is the leading authority with regard to the design of the scheme, as a consequence TfL does not hold the requested information.  We therefore recommend that you raise a request with LB Southwark.

1. Also, attachments "Canada Water Base Model audit FINAL Redacted.pdf"  and "RP LMVR 1a v7 FINAL.pdf" are dated 2017. You have nothing more recent?

The base model was created in 2017 for CSH 4 and provided to London Borough of Southwark’s consultants for development of the Lower Road Gyratory scheme; the model for the proposed model – Option 8 – Revision H is dated September 2019.

We don’t have anything more recent. The reports we provided relate to the strategic modelling. However, there may be other reports produced by Aecom for London Borough of Southwark relating to the VISSIM modelling that informed the detailed decision making.

I would recommend that you contact the borough directly. Their contact details can be found at the following link https://www.southwark.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/freedom-of-information-and-data-protection

If this is not the information you are looking for, or if you are unable to access it for some 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 Officer

FOI Case Management Team

General Counsel

Transport for London

Back to top

---