Councillors and committees
King's Road Outcome of Consultation
To note the results of the consultation on traffic management measures and consider the way forward
1. the results of the consultation as set out in Annex 2 are noted;
2. the scheme shown in Annex 5 to authorise footway parking on an experimental basis under the provisions of Section 15 of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 on the footway outside 267 / 269 Kings Road to 303 Kings Road inclusive, and between nos 284 to 328 Kings Road is not progressed.
The report outlined the results of a local consultation on the introduction of new traffic management measures in the King’s Road area i.e. to make King’s Road and New Road one way westbound towards Park Road and to make Tudor Road one way eastbound towards Queen’s Road as shown on Annex 1 to the report. The other option was to do nothing. The results of the consultation exercise were set out at Annex 2.
The officer explained inaccuracies in the report on page 4, para 15. Instead of 64.5% of the overall responses received supporting the introduction of one way working between Queen’s Road and Park Road and New Road and Tudor Road being one way with 31.6% against, the results should read 47.5% in favour of one way and 50.2% against.
As a consequence of the results and current data on traffic flows the officer’s view was that the proposed one-way system should not be taken forward. However, the officer recognised that there was a need to address the current issues in King’s Road and an alternative proposal was put forward in the report for footway parking as shown at Annex 5. This would introduce, on an experimental basis, footway parking outside 267/269 King’s Road to 303 King’s Road inclusive and between 284 to 328 King’s Road inclusive. This proposal would enable cars to pass safely whilst still providing a footway width of 1.7m. This proposal, however, has not been consulted on.
The Committee noted the two petitions against the proposal to introduce footway parking which were presented earlier in the meeting (see Minute 55 for full details).
Members of the public in the gallery were invited to give views:
Views against pavement parking and in favour of a trial of the one-way system included:
· One of the petitioners drew attention to the wider context of the area including visitors to Richmond Park. He suggested that pavement parking will not address the traffic flow in King’s Road and considered the one way system which had been approved by this committee for consultation would offer a more holistic, safer and forward thinking approach.
· There would be pedestrian / cyclist conflicts in King’s Road.
· One way should be trialled and monitored.
· There would be congestion and air quality impacts arising from a narrow two way streamer into a one way street and there are articles available on the web to demonstrate this.
Views against the one way system proposal:
· Tudor Road and New Road residents group was formed after consultation came out and represents views of about 96% of respondents.
· A resident of Tudor Road drew attention to regular flooding issues at Tudor Court which were 6-12 inches deep across width of road and presented a road hazard. The one way proposal will increase traffic flow in this dangerous area.
· A second Tudor Road resident expressed sympathy for King’s Road and suggested the issue is too much parking on King’s Road and there is very little drop kerb parking.
· A suggestion was made that there was a lack of transparency as residents were not aware of the decisions until the consultation.
· Impacts on surrounding area won’t be acceptable.
· Kingston cycling campaign had objected to one way system and stated that would be more dangerous for cyclists and would lead to “dooring”.
· Views were expressed that the one way system should not be trialled.
· Congestion and air pollution will increase in Tudor Road.
· Traffic speeds will increase
Views supporting further action:
· Traffic blockages occur every day, there are increasing physical assaults and multiple occasions of blockages but no serious injuries so far.
· GPS is a probable factor in traffic increase and Richmond Park is a more popular venue.
· The King’s Road issue has been raised since 2010 and petition made in 2017. Recent workshops led to one way system proposal and pavement parking rejected as an option at this point.
· Another scheme to reduce traffic volumes should be possible. King’s Road residents would be happy to work with residents of other roads and the council to reach a solution.
· It was felt that the consultation exercise was well-constructed.
In response to a question about why Alexandra Road
had not been included as part of the one-way system, the officer
explained that there are different proposals being discussed around
school journeys would could involve road closure at the beginning
and end of the school day.
In considering the
proposals for one-way system and on–pavement parking members
acknowledged that a range of views and concerns had been expressed
by the gallery and made the following points:
· With resources being tight, money should not be spent on a trial.
· Pavement parking could be allowed on a single side of King’s Road.
· The results of the consultation should be respected.
· The one-way system has been rejected by residents of New Road and Tudor Road and perhaps the scheme and trial should be rejected by this committee.
· A suggestion was made for the appointment of a consultant to undertake a full holistic traffic management survey from Kingston Hill into the town centre to look at improving traffic management and options.
· GPS is probably a contributory factor in increased traffic flow and to Richmond Park.
· Steps must be taken to stop HGVs using “rat runs”.
· Queen’s Road could be 20 mph.
In response to questions the officer confirmed that
if a trial were agreed, traffic speeds and air pollution would need
to be measured both before and after the trial. A trial would need to last for six months in order
to let the traffic flows to normalise.
The officer acknowledged that the one-way system would lead to
increased speed and traffic calming measures would be included as
part of the trial. The costs of a
Traffic Management Order would be £1500 and traffic calming
measures in the region of £10k to £15k. He added that
the trial would provide valid data rather than
The Chair suggested that if members were minded to reject the recommendation for on-street parking, she would discuss the King’s Road issues with the Leader of the Council and see if a meeting/visit could be arranged for the Leader and herself to King’s Road.
1. The results of the consultation as set out in Annex 2 are noted; and
2. Not to progress the scheme shown in Annex 5 to authorise footway parking on an experimental basis under the provisions of Section 15 of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 on the footway outside 267 / 269 Kings Road to 303 Kings Road inclusive, and between nos 284 to 328 Kings Road.
For – Councillors Zain Abbas, Olivia Boult, David Cunningham, Emily Davey, Caroline Kerr, Rebekah Moll, Maria Netley, Dave Ryder-Mills, Jon Tolley, Olly Wehring
Against – none
Abstain – Councillor Katrina Lidbetter
- King's Road Report, item 61. PDF 108 KB
- Annex 1 - Kings Road, Tudor Road, New Road One Way, item 61. PDF 1 MB
- Annex 2 - Table of consultation results, item 61. PDF 216 KB
- Annex 3 - Consultation comments, item 61. PDF 521 KB
- Annex 4 - area of delivery, item 61. PDF 209 KB
- Annex 5 - Kings Road Footway Parking, item 61. PDF 2 MB