Contents
Executive summary .................................................................................................... 1
1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 2
2 The consultation ............................................................................................... 4
3 Overview of consultation responses ................................................................. 5
4 Conclusion and next steps ............................................................................. 15
Appendix A – Response to issues commonly raised ................................................ 16
Appendix B – Copy of the consultation letter ............................................................ 20
Appendix C – Leaflet distribution area...................................................................... 22
Appendix D – Stakeholder email .............................................................................. 23
Appendix E – Stakeholders consulted ...................................................................... 24
1
Executive summary
Between 1 February and 29 February 2016, we consulted the public and
stakeholders on proposed improvements to cycling facilities at the junction of
Curtain Road and Rivington Street. The proposed changes are part of the Central
London Grid programme and would create a clearer, safer cycle route along
Rivington Street, the route alignment for this section of the Grid.
We received a total of 32 responses to the consultation. Of the 28 respondents
who answered the closed question concerning support, 23 supported or partially
supported our proposals.
Responses included: comments about design features such the raised area,
parking and pedestrian crossing; safety for cyclists and pedestrians; general
support or opposition to the scheme; removing through motor traffic from local
roads; and the proposed 20mph zone in a wider area.
Next steps
After considering all responses, we intend to proceed with the scheme as set out
in the consultation documents, subject to the formal Traffic Order process. We
have made the following change to the design as the result of the consultation:
Use a 60mm high kerb between the raised junction area and the footway
to help visually impaired people distinguish between the carriageway and
the footway
We plan to carry out construction later in 2016.
We will keep visitors and road users informed of our plans and progress, including
writing to local residents, businesses and other stakeholders before starting works
in their area. We already provide road traffic information to help people better plan
their journeys and make informed choices about how, where and when they
travel.
2
1 Introduction
The proposed changes are part of the Central London Grid programme and would
create a clearer, safer cycle route along Rivington Street, the route alignment for
this section of the Grid.
1.1 Purpose of the Scheme
The proposed changes at this junction aim to improve safety and accessibility for
cyclists and accommodate current cyclists and the predicted increase of cyclists
along this route.
1.2 Descriptions of the proposals
The proposals for this junction included:
Relocating the pedestrian crossing south of the junction on Curtain
Road. Traffic would wait south of the junction and would not obstruct
cyclists travelling east-west along the Rivington Street Grid route
Raised road surface at junction to encourage traffic approaching the
junction to slow down
Footway build out and bollard on the south west corner of the junction
Six new cycle parking stands
The junction would also be resurfaced during construction.
4
2 The consultation
2.1 Consultation duration and structure
The consultation ran from 1 - 29 February 2016.
Information on the consultation, including details of the proposals consulted on,
was available online at https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/curtain-road from
1 February 2016.
Respondents were asked about whether they supported the proposals (‘yes’,
‘partially’, ‘no’, ‘not sure’, ‘no opinion’). Respondents were also given an
opportunity to comment on the proposals.
Respondents were also asked to submit their name, email address and postcode,
whether they were responding on behalf of an organisation, and how they heard
about the consultation. All questions were optional.
Other information, such as the respondent’s IP address and the date and time of
responding, was recorded automatically. All data is held under conditions that
conform to the requirements of the Data Protection Act 1998.
2.2 Consultation material, distribution and publicity
Consultation website
The consultation web page at https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/curtain-road
provided explanatory text and a design drawing of the proposals.
Non-web formats
A consultation letter and drawing explaining our proposals were sent to 2,558
addresses near the scheme area. Printed plans, accompanying descriptions and
response forms were available on request by telephone, email or writing to
FREEPOST TFL CONSULTATIONS.
A copy of the letter is in Appendix B and a map of the distribution area can be
found in Appendix C.
Stakeholder email
We emailed around 300 stakeholder organisations to let them know about the
consultation. The email contained a brief summary of the proposals and a link to
the consultation website. Please see Appendix D for the email and Appendix E for
the list of recipients.
5
3 Overview of consultation responses
There were 32 responses to the consultation. The responses are analysed below.
3.1 Respondent type
22 responses were from members of the public and 10 responses
from stakeholder groups. Responses from stakeholder groups and businesses are
included in the overall analysis and also summarised in
Section 3.6 Summary of stakeholder and business responses.
Figure 1: Consultation responses by respondent type
6
3.2 Support for the scheme
Q1. Do you support our proposals for Curtain Road / Rivington Street?
Of the total 32 respondents to the consultation, 28 answered Q1. Four
respondents did not answer this question. Of those who answered the question,
19 supported the scheme, 4 partially supported the scheme, 1 was not sure, 3 did
not support the scheme and 1 had no opinion. Three email responses from
Question 2 expressed clear support or opposition to the scheme and were
analysed as a response to Question 1.
Figure 2: Support for scheme
7
3.3 Comments on the proposals
Q2. Please give us any comments you have on our proposals for the junction of
Curtain Road and Rivington Street.
Of the 32 respondents to the consultation, 26 respondents provided comments to
Q2. “Please give us any comments you have on our proposals for the junction of
Curtain Road and Rivington Street.”
Junction design
11 respondents included comments or suggestions about proposed changes to
the road layout at the junction. 2 responses included more than one comment
about junction proposals.
Raised road surface at junction
2 respondents supported raising the junction. Reasons given included
slowing traffic
2 respondents including the RNIB opposed raising the junction. Reasons
given included pedestrian safety and distinction between the carriageway
and the footway for visually impaired road users
1 respondent suggested using tarmac for the raised area to create a better
surface for cycling
The RNIB called for the use of high contrast surfacing and a 60mm high
kerb (minimum) to alert visually impaired road users to the crossing area
Road signs and markings
2 respondents suggested changes to road signs and road markings,
including 1 suggestion to add double red lines
Parking
2 respondents suggested removing parking on roads at or near the
scheme area
Pedestrian crossing
2 respondents supported moving the pedestrian crossing
1 respondent called for the pedestrian crossing to be made widened
further
1 respondent called for the crossings at side roads to be raised to provide
continuous crossings
8
Junction geometry
1 respondent called for the turning radius at one corner of the junction to
be reduced further than proposed
Impact on road safety
10 responses included comments about safety.
Cycling safety
5 respondents said the scheme would improve cycling safety
2 respondents said the scheme would not improve cycling safety
1 respondents expressed concern about potential cyclist/pedestrian
collisions on Rivington Street
Pedestrian safety
2 respondents said the scheme would improve pedestrian safety
2 respondents said the scheme would not improve safety for visually
impaired pedestrians
1 respondent said that the scheme would not improve pedestrian safety
Motor vehicle speeds
2 respondents raised concerns about unsafe motor vehicle speeds in the
scheme area
General support/opposition
There were 9 comments supporting or opposing the scheme:
7 comments offered general support for the scheme
2 comments opposed the scheme on the grounds of cost
Impact on motor traffic
There were 7 responses that included comments about motor traffic. Three
responses included more than one comment about traffic:
Traffic filtering
2 comments suggested filtering or removing traffic from Curtain Road
2 comments suggested removing through traffic from Rivington Road
9
1 comment suggested maintaining Rivington Road as a pedestrian zone
only during the day
1 respondent suggested replacing one traffic lane on Curtain Road with a
contra-flow cycle lane
20mph zone
2 respondents supported the 20mph zone
1 respondent (Confederation of Passenger Transport) expressed concern
about increased journey times caused by a lower speed limit
Congestion
2 respondents mentioned traffic congestion at night, highlighting the high
number of taxis using the scheme area
Traffic management
Other respondents called for measures to reduce vehicle speeds, changes to local
traffic flows around the scheme area, and adding a taxi rank.
Cycle provision
5 responses included comments about cycle provision. Three responses
contained more than one comment:
2 comments suggested changing the cycle lane alignment
2 comments supported more cycle parking, including 1 suggestion to
put cycle parking on the carriageway
2 comments expressed concern about cyclists’ behaviour or education
1 comment suggested providing more space for cycling
1 comment requested more segregation
10
3.4 About respondents
We asked consultation respondents a number of questions about their relationship
to the area and how they travelled locally
Question 6: Are you (local resident, business owner etc.)? We asked respondents to give information about whether they lived or worked
locally or other ways in which they used the area. 22 respondents answered this
question, and respondents could give more than one answer. 6 respondents said
that they were local residents, 1 said they were a business owner, 7 said they
were visitors to the area, 5 said they were commuters to the area, two said they
were not local but interested in the scheme and three gave another response. 10
did not answer the question.
Figure 3. Relationship to the local area
Question 8: What types of transport do you normally use locally?
We asked users what kind of transport they normally used. There were 56
responses to the question and respondents could give more than one answer. 8
respondents said they used the tube, 4 said they took taxis, 8 were regular bus
users, 17 were cyclists, 13 walked, 3 drove a private car, and one was a
motorcyclist or scooter user. Two used other means of transport and 11 did not
answer the question.
11
Figure 4. Response to Q8. What types of transport do you normally use
locally?
Question 9: How often do you cycle? We asked respondents how often they cycled. There were 20 responses to the question and respondents could only choose one answer. 16 respondents said they cycled on most days, 1 said they cycled once a week, 2 said they cycled 1-3 times a month and 1 less than once a month. 12 respondents did not answer the question.
13
3.5 About the consultation
We asked respondents two questions about the closed question about how they
heard about the consultation. 22 respondents answered the question and
respondents could only choose one answer. 5 respondents said that they heard
by email and 1 via a letter, 11 reported being aware through the TfL website and 5
said they heard on social media. 10 respondents did not answer the question.
Figure 6. Response to Q10. How did you hear about this consultation?
Question 11: Please tell us what you think about the quality of this consultation
6 respondents gave a comment about the consultation. Two responses included
more than one comment.
3 respondents said the consultation was good or very good
3 respondents said the consultation was satisfactory (“OK”)
1 respondent commented that the responses should be considered
1 respondent said that including a location map would have been helpful
14
3.6 Summary of stakeholder and business responses
There were 10 responses from stakeholder organisations. These are summarised below.
Stakeholder Summary of response
Artwords Bookshop Supportive, particularly of moving the existing
pedestrian crossing south of Rivington Street.
Confederation of
Passenger Transport
(CPT)
Questioned the need to reduce the speed limit to
20mph in the area. It suggested that this could
impact on journey times and traffic.
CTC London Supportive. It said the scheme was a useful
improvement to the Rivington Street cycle route.
Hackney Council
Officers
Supportive. Welcomed safety improvements.
Living Streets Hackney Concerned that the footways on Curtain Road and
Rivington Street do not have enough capacity to
accommodate cycle stands. Suggested relocating
cycle parking into the carriageway and further
tightening the left turn radius from Curtain Road
into Rivington Street by increasing the footway
build-out. Suggested that this would allow a wider
pedestrian crossing closer to desire lines.
London Cycling
Campaign
Partially supportive. Suggested implementing
modal filters in the area, including on Curtain
Road, to remove through motor traffic and provide
benefits for pedestrians, cyclists and businesses.
London Fire Brigade No impact on London Fire Brigade.
Metropolitan Police Acknowledged scheme but did not comment.
Royal National Institute
of Blind People (RNIB)
Expressed concern about raising the junction of
Curtain Road / Rivington Street because this could
cause difficulty for visually impaired people.
Suggested a kerb at least 60mm high and using
high contrast surfacing to better demarcate the
carriageway and footway.
Wheels for Wellbeing Supportive. No further comment.
15
4 Conclusion and next steps
We received a total of 32 responses to the consultation. Of the 28 respondents
who answered the closed question concerning support, 23 supported or partially
supported our proposals.
Responses about the scheme included comments about the scheme design
(raised area, parking, pedestrian crossing), safety for cyclists and pedestrians,
general support and opposition to the scheme, and comments about filtering or
removing traffic from local roads and the proposed 20mph zone in a wider area.
Next steps
After considering all responses, we intend to proceed with the scheme as set out
in the consultation documents, subject to the formal Traffic Order process. We
have made the following change to the design as the result of the consultation:
Use a 60mm high kerb between the raised junction area and the footway to
help avoid difficulty for visually impaired people
We plan to carry out construction later in 2016.
We will keep visitors and road users informed of our plans and progress, including
writing to local residents, businesses and other stakeholders before undertaking
work in their area. We already provide road traffic information to help people
better plan their journeys and make informed choices about how, where and when
they travel.
16
Appendix A – Response to issues commonly
raised
Junction design
A number of respondents made suggestions concerning the layout of the road.
These included:
Concerns over raising the junction
Some respondents, including the RNIB, said that raising the crossing to footway
level could cause difficulty to visually impaired people as a small difference in
height can make it difficult to identify where the carriageway ends and the footway
begins.
In response to the RNIB’s concerns, we have changed the design to include a
kerb height of 60mm between the carriageway and the footway to help visually
impaired people distinguish the raised crossing area from the kerb. The raised
area will not have a coloured surfacing.
In the scheme design, the relocated pedestrian crossing will follow a standard
layout with tactile paving and a dropped kerb to indicate the crossing position to
visually impaired people. There will be tactile paving on the footways at the
informal crossings at Rivington Street to indicate the crossing position to visually
impaired road users. We will not create continuous footways, as the raised area
and associated road markings will clearly indicate to the traffic to slow down.
Double red line restriction near junction
One respondent suggested adding double red lines near the junction. We are
proposing to implement double red lines on Curtain Road to replace the existing
zig-zag markings at the current crossing. New zig-zag markings will be provided
on the approach and exit of the crossing and drivers are not legally allowed to
stop within the crossing limits or along the zig zag area.
Removing kerb build-out and parking to accommodate cycle lane
One respondent suggested removing the kerb build-out and parking to increase
space for cycling. The kerb build-out aims to reduce the speed of turning vehicles,
therefore improving safety for vulnerable road users in particular. The focus of this
scheme is to improve cycling provision for cyclists travelling along Rivington Street
and across Curtain Road in line with the TfL cycle design guidelines. The design
attempts to balance the needs of all road users proportionately.
17
Pedestrian crossing
Some respondents suggested a different position for the pedestrian crossing. The
Rivington Street / Curtain Road junction is heavily used by pedestrians,
particularly at night. We are providing the pedestrian crossing as close as possible
to the junction on desire lines so that pedestrians on Rivington Street can cross
using the most direct route.
Use asphalt for raised junction area
One respondent suggested using asphalt for the raised area to provide a better
surface for cycling as granite setts or bricks can become damaged and leave a
poor surface for cycling. The raised table will be built from asphalt as this provides
a smooth surface for cyclists and requires less maintenance.
Impact on road safety
Some respondents raised concerns over vehicular speed/safety at this junction.
The raised table and signage are designed to encourage all traffic to slow down at
the junction.
Junction design doesn't improve safety (alignment for cycles)
Some respondents called for the route along Rivington Street to be made more
direct. We consider that the route along Rivington Street is reasonably direct.
Working within the confines of London’s existing road layout can be challenging
and Rivington Street is slightly offset at this junction. However, it is outside the
scope of this scheme to realign the junction outside the existing highway
boundary, and we do not believe such a measure would offer good value for
money. As traffic on Curtain Road will now be held to the south of the crossing by
traffic signals, we consider there will be sufficient space and opportunity for
cyclists travelling in either direction to cross the junction safely.
We are satisfied that the improved level of provision in this scheme is appropriate
in light of the further road layout changes in this location planned as part of the
Shoreditch Triangle scheme.
Collisions at this junction
Some respondents asked for collision figures for this junction. Over the three-year
period ending 31 October 2015, two collisions have occurred at this junction, one
involving a pedestrian and the other a cyclist.
18
Cyclist behaviour/education
Some respondents raised concerns over cyclist behaviour, saying they present a
danger to pedestrians. We acknowledge these concerns, however our research
shows that most cyclists ride responsibly, and are no more likely to disobey road
rules than other road users.
We promote adherence to the Highway Code by all road users and encourage
responsible cycling and mutual respect between cyclists and other road users. We
work to eliminate offences such as jumping red lights, cycling on the pavement
and cycling at night without lights. We do this using police enforcement and
education programmes, as well as thorough marketing and engagement
campaigns.
We recognise that some pavement cyclists break the law to avoid the dangers of
motor traffic. However, we anticipate that providing dedicated and safe space for
cyclists will discourage people from riding on pavements. Providing dedicated
space for cyclists can also help other road users by letting them know where to
expect high volumes of cyclists.
Impact on motor traffic
Traffic filtering
Changing traffic flows on Curtain Road
Some respondents suggested changes to the traffic flows on Curtain Road.
Potential changes such as removing traffic from Curtain Road or providing a
contra-flow cycle lane were considered as part of this scheme. However, the
purpose of the scheme is to improve connectivity for east-west cycling along
Rivington Street. Changing traffic flows on Curtain Road would have a significant
impact on the wider road network and is considered outside of the scope of this
scheme.
Pedestrianisation of Rivington Street
Hackney Council is the highway authority for Rivington Street. We have shared
the results of this consultation with the Borough for their consideration.
20mph zone
The proposed 20mph zone is intended to: reduce the number of collisions that
result in death or serious injury; enhance the place function of these roads; and
encourage active travel by promoting walking and cycling. Curtain Road was
19
selected as a pilot site for a 20mph speed limit in March 2015, with the trial to last
18 months, beginning in December 2016. Traffic speeds and traffic flow data will
be monitored to assess whether to make the reduced speed limits permanent. We
will inform local residents and businesses of the details of the trial before it
launches.
Congestion (including taxis on Curtain Road)
The purpose of this scheme is to improve the cycling provision along Rivington
Street at the junction with Curtain Road. As the scheme relocates an existing stop
line on Curtain Road, any impact on traffic capacity is likely to be minimal. It is not
considered that the proposed changes will be affected by the number of taxis
using the local area.
23
Appendix D – Stakeholder email
Dear Stakeholder,
We are asking for your views on proposed improvements to cycle facilities at the junction
of Curtain Road, part of the Transport for London Road Network, and Rivington Street.
The proposed changes are part of the Central London Grid programme and would create
a clearer, safer cycle route along Rivington Street, the route alignment for this section of
the Grid.
The proposed changes include:
Six new cycle parking stands
Raised road surface at junction
Pedestrian crossing relocated south of the junction on Curtain Road
Footway build out and bollard on the south west corner of the junction
For further information, to view a drawing of the scheme and to give us your views,
please visit our website on tfl.gov.uk/cycling/curtain-road
The consultation will close on Monday 29 February 2016.
Yours faithfully
Matthew Moore,
Consultation Team,
Transport for London.
24
Appendix E – Stakeholders consulted
3663 First for Foodservice
Abellio West London Ltd t/a Abellio Surrey, Action for Blind People
Action on Hearing Loss (RNID)
Age UK London
Alive in Space Landscape and Urban Design Studio
Anderson Travel Ltd,
Angel BID
APC-Overnight Argall BID
Arriva Kent Thameside/Kent & Sussex, Arriva Guildford & W Sussex,
Arriva
Association of British Drivers Association of Town Centre Management
ATCoaches t/a Abbey Travel,
Baker Street Quarter
Barking and Dagenham
Bayswater BID
Best Bike Training //Cycletastic Better Bankside
Bexley Accessible Transport Scheme,
Bexley Council Bexleyheath BID
bhs bikeability
bidvest logistics
bikeworks
bikeXcite
Blue Triangle Buses Ltd,
Borough Cycling Officers Group
Breakspears Road Project
Brentwood Community Transport,
Brewery Logistics Group
British Cycling
British Land British Medical Association
British Motorcycle Federation
British Retail Association
British School of Cycling
Bucks Cycle Training
Business B Ltd t/a The Expeditional,
Buzzlines,
CABE - Design Council
Camden Council Camden mobility forum
Camden Town Unlimited
Campaign for Better Transport
Campbell's
Capital City School Sport Partnership
Carousel Buses Ltd
CBI-London
Centaur Overland Travel Ltd,
Central London Cab Trade Section
Central London CTC
Central London Forward Central London Freight Quality Partnership
Central London NHS Trust
Centre for Accessible Environments
Chalkwell Garage & Coach Hire Ltd,
Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport
City Bikes (Vauxhall Walk)
City link
City of London City of London Access Forum
City of London Police
City of Westminster
Cobra Corporate Servics Ltd,
Community Transport Association
Confederation of Passenger Transport
Covent Garden Market Authority
Cross River Partnership
Coaches Excetera,
Croydon mobility forum
CT Plus Ltd t/a Hackney Community Transport,
CTC
Cycle Confident
Cycle Experience
Cycle Newham
Cycle Systems
Cycle Training East
Cycle Training UK (CTUK)
Cycling Embassy of Great Britain
Cycling Tuition
cycling4all
25
Cyclists in the City
Department for Transport
DHL
Clarkes of London,
E11 BID (Leytonstone)
Ealing Broadway BID
Ealing Council East and South East London Thames Gateway Transport Partnership
Polestar Travel,
Edgware Road Partnership
Enfield Council
English Heritage
Ensign Bus Company Ltd,
Evolution Cycle Training
Express Network Forum
Federation of Small Businesses
First Beeline Buses Ltd,
Fitzrovia Partnership
Freight Transport Association
Friends of the Earth
Future Inclusion
Garratt Business Park (Earlsfield)
Gatwick Flyer Ltd,
Go-Coach Hire Ltd
Golden Tours (Transport) Ltd,
Greater London Authority Greater London Forum for Older People
Green Urban Transport Ltd,
Guide Dogs Hainault Business Park
HammersmithLondon
Haringey mobility forum
Health Poverty Action Heart of London Business Alliance
Hermes Europe
Hillingdon Council Hillingdon mobility forum
Hounslow mobility forum
HR Richmond Ltd t/a Quality Line,
IBM Ilford Town BID
Inclusion London Independent Disability Advisory Group
Independent Shoreditch
Inmidtown
Institute for Sustainability
Institute of Advanced Motorists
Institution of Civil Engineers inStreatham
Islington Council Islington mobility forum
Snowdrop Coaches
Bikeability
The Little Bus Company,
John Lewis Partnership K&C mobility forum
Kimpton Industrial Park (Sutton)
Kingston First
Kingston mobility forum
Laing o'Rourke
Lambeth Cyclists Leonard Cheshire Disability
Lewisham Council Licensed Private Hire Car Association (LPHCA)
Line Line Coaches (TGM),
Living Streets
Local Government Ombudsman
London ambulance Service
London Bike Hub
London Borough of Hackney
London Cab Drivers' Club Ltd
London Central Cab Section London Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI)
London Climate Change Partnership
London Councils
London Cycling Campaign
London Duck Tours Ltd
London European Partnership for Transport
London Fire Brigade
London First
London General
London Private Hire Board London Riverside (Rainham)
London Strategic Health Authority London Suburban Taxi Drivers' Coalition
London Taxi Drivers' Club London Tourist Coach Operators Association (LTCOA)
London TravelWatch
London United Busways Ltd,
26
London Visual Impairment Forum
LoveWimbledon BID
Marshalls Coaches
Merton Council
Metrobus Ltd,
Metroline Ltd
Metropolitan Police Service
Mobile Cycle Training Service
Mode Transport
Motorcycle Action Group (MAG)
Mullany's Coaches,
National Autistic Society
National Express Ltd
National Motorcycle Council New Addington BID
New West End Company (NWEC)
NHS London Northbank Guild
Ocean Youth Connexions Olympus Bus & Coach Company t/a Olympian Coaches,
On Your Bike Cycle Training Orpington 1st
Oxford Tube
Parcel Force Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety (PACTS)
Passenger Focus
philip kemp cycle training
Planning Design
Porcellio Ltd t/a Meridian Duck Tours,
Premium Coaches Ltd,
Private Hire Board
Purple Parking Ltd,
Puzzle Focus Ltd
Queen Mary University of London
R Hearn t/a Hearn's Coaches,
RAC
Red Rose Travel
Redbridge Cycling Centre
Redwing Coaches (Pullmanor Ltd),
Reliance Travel,
Reynolds Diplomat Coaches
Richmond Council
RNIB RNID (Royal National Institute for Deaf People)
Road Danger Reduction Forum
Road Haulage Association
Roadpeace Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames
Royal Institute of British Architects
Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors Royal London Society for Blind People
Royal Mail
Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI)
Sainsbury's Supermarkets
Red Eagle
SCOPE
South Bucks CycleTraining
South East London PCT
South Herts Plus Cycle Training
South London Business Forum
South London Partnership
Southbank Employers Group
Southdown PSV Ltd,
Southgate & Finchley Coaches Ltd
Space syntax
Spokes Cycling Instruction
Stratford Renaissance Partnership
Successful Sutton
Sullivan Bus and Coach Ltd
Sunwin Service Group
Superdrug
Sustrans Sutton mobility forum
Taxi Rank & Interchange Manager
Team London Bridge
Technicolour Tyre Company Terravision Transport Ltd / Stansted Transport Ltd,
TGM Group Ltd
Thamesmead Business Services
The Automobile Association
The Big Bus Company Ltd,
The British Motorcyclists' Federation
The Canal & River Trust
The City of Oxford Motor Services Ltd,
The Ghost Bus Tours Ltd
The Kings Ferry Ltd,
The Licensed Taxi Drivers' Association
The Original London Sightseeing Tour /London Pride Sightseeing Ltd,
The Road Haulage Assoc. Ltd.
The Royal Parks
27
The Southwark Cyclists Thomas's London Day Schools (Transport) Ltd Time for Twickenham
TNT Tower Hamlets mobility forum
Tower Transit Operations Ltd,
Trailblazers, Muscular Dystrophy UK
Transport for All
Tyssen Community School Cycle Training
UK Power Networks
University College London
University of Westminster
uno,
UPS
Urban Movement
Vandome Cycles
Vauxhall One BID
Victoria BID Vision Impairment Forum
Walk London Wandsworth mobility forum
Waterloo Quarter
Westminster Council
Westminster Cyclists Wheels for Wellbeing
Whizz-Kidz
Willow Lane Trading Estate (Merton)
Wilsons Cycles
Wincanton
www.cyclinginstructor.com
Yodel Young Lewisham and Greenwich Cyclists