Danny's Days - 17th March 2025

This week, we need your help one more time. We are trying to stop the TfL proposal from last year we urgently need you to contact by email Our MP, TfL, RBKC and if you can copy in the local SOS group, then we can monitor how many emails are sent. There is a button which brings up all the email addresses at the bottom of this website https://sos10.co.uk/

Here is a basic template to follow if you wish to:

I applaud the Mayor’s aim to encourage walking, cycling and public transport. But we believe that the proposed changes to Holland Park roundabout itself are unnecessary and detrimental, given

• The lack of accidents injuring cyclists and pedestrians on the roundabout
• The traffic issues that TfL’s proposed scheme will raise for other modes of transport
• The increased danger of unsegregated cycleways, given cyclists’ tendency to jump red lights
• The lack of local support for the scheme, including from cyclists

Optimising the 2 existing cycleways on the roundabout and linking them up with the planned cycleways on Shepherd’s Bush Green would be a much safer, cheaper and easier route – benefitting both cyclists and pedestrians and with much less downside for other modes of transport on such an important 4-way major arterial route in, out of and across London.

We have found

1.  ACCIDENT DATA

In TfL’s consultation report, TfL state that “Our monitoring shows that there have been a significant number of collisions at the roundabout: in the three-year period up to May 2023 there have been 54 collisions in total, in which 59 people were hurt including 14 cyclists and pedestrians, six of them serious”.

This statement is false. The above figures quoted by TfL applied to the area covered by the whole of the scheme, not just the roundabout. 

2. TRAFFIC MODELLING DATA

During the consultation, TfL claimed that there would be no increase in traffic on Holland Park Roundabout. But they did not base their assessment on local traffic modelling that related to

• The existing area, instead they used modelling assessments for C34 cycleway connecting Hammersmith and Fulham – a quieter route that doesn’t go through a roundabout or link up major arterial routes, and thus bears no resemblance to the proposed scheme.
• A relevant time period, as the C34 modelling was done during covid.
• The most impacted time periods, as modelling was done outside of rush hour.

Nor did they admit during the consultation their prediction that traffic on major arterial roads would be displaced along a number of residential streets in RBKC, nor canvas the thousands of residents in these and nearby streets who would be affected.

Independent Modelling Commissioned

In February 2024, the Holland Park Avenue Traders Association commissioned an independent agency (Magna Transport Planning Ltd) to conduct a traffic modelling study on the roundabout and its surrounding areas on 29^th February 2024 during the hours of 07.00-10.00 and 15.00-19.00.

This modelling shows that the proposed scheme will lead to very substantial traffic delays both on Holland Park Avenue and the roundabout itself, and on nearby residential streets.

In the AM peak hour (8-9am) the number of vehicles waiting in a queue will increase:

o   On Holland Park Avenue, from 19 vehicles to 170 vehicles (795% increase) with each vehicle waiting an average of 12 minutes.

o   On Holland Road, from 24 vehicles to 78 vehicles (225% increase in queues) with each vehicle waiting an average of 5 minutes. 

o   On the West Cross route, from 28 vehicles to 50 vehicles (79% increase in queues) with each vehicle waiting an average of 2 minutes. 

·         In the PM peak hour (6-7pm), the number of vehicles waiting in a queue will increase:

o   On Holland Park Avenue, from 49 vehicles to 127 vehicles (159% increase in queues) with each vehicle waiting an average of 11 minutes. 

o   On Holland Road, from 52 vehicles to 206 vehicles (296% increase in queues) with each vehicle waiting an average of 7 minutes. 

o   On the West Cross route, from 26 vehicles to 44 vehicles (69% increase in queues) with each vehicle waiting an average of 2 minutes. 

This will lead to:

• More queues and longer journey times on Holland Road, Holland Park Avenue, Shepherd’s Bush Green, Royal Crescent and the West Cross Route
• Increased traffic displacement onto local quiet residential side streets, increasing the risk of accidents for local cyclists and pedestrians

·         More pollution and noise from idling cars

• Increased risk of accidents due to the ‘stop/start’ nature of queues
• Significant delays to bus journey times and emergency vehicle response times
• Less pass-by trade for the shops along Holland Park Avenue, resulting in future closures

What TfL is now saying

Subsequent to the Consultation, TfL admits in their Consultation report that

• Traffic would be displaced along a number of residential streets in RBKC, most notably North Pole Road, St. Ann’s Road, St. Ann’s Villas, Ladbroke Grove and Abbotsbury Road
• Traffic would increase along the A4 and A40 at rush hour, increasing commuter congestion

This is in direct contradiction of TfL’s desire to reduce traffic on residential streets by creating and maintaining low traffic neighbourhoods – which much of this local area enjoys today.

When shown the modelling, TfL responded:

“We have reviewed the modelling report commissioned by the Holland Park Traders Association and this does not follow TfL’s traffic modelling guidelines and the Model Auditing Process. For example, the traffic model provided by the Traders Association does not take account of future demand or account for traffic reassignment.”

MTPL’s response to this is:

“TfL’s assertion does not negate the validity of the analysis, nor does it address the substantive issues raised. Our modelling has been carried out using industry-standard methodologies. The results clearly indicate a significant reduction in vehicular capacity, which raises serious concerns about the operational performance of the junction and the wider network. 

In terms of traffic reassignment, even if we were to assume a modal shift of 10% of total traffic, equating to approximately 500 people per hour converting to cycle trips, the substantial reduction in vehicular capacity at the roundabout will still lead to a significant increase in queues and delays. In our professional view, such a modal shift is highly optimistic. However, if TfL possesses robust evidence in relation to Holland Park Roundabout improvements, demonstrating that more than 10% of vehicular traffic per hour will reassign to cycling or other modes, we would expect them to provide this data for review.

Furthermore, despite requests in the past, TfL has yet to provide its own modelling results or LINSIG files for independent review. This lack of transparency undermines the ability to engage in a fair and informed technical discussion. If TfL has undertaken its own modelling, it should be disclosed for scrutiny to ensure a balanced and evidence-based assessment. We urge TfL to provide its modelling outputs and justification for the proposed design so that a meaningful comparison can be made. In the absence of such data, our modelling remains the only detailed technical assessment available and should be given appropriate weight in the decision-making process.”

In other words, TRAFFIC CONGESTION WILL SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE CAUSING TRAFFIC TO BE DISPLACED INTO LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREETS, RESULTING IN INCREASED NOISE, POLLUTION AND RISK OF ACCIDENTS TO LOCAL PEDESTRIANS AND CYCLISTS, AS WELL AS DELAYS TO BUSES AND EMERGENCY VEHICLE RESPONSE TIMES.

3. CONSULTATION DATA

TfL claim that on the basis of the consultation results, they will go ahead with the proposal as planned, as they base public support on the percentage of people who agreed the scheme would increase cycling and walking. Yet, analysing the data (as far as is possible given the way it has been presented) shows only a minority of people and cyclists who responded to the consultation expressed support. Specifically:

• Only 244 responses in the consultation support the proposed scheme. (Source: Row 11 in the 'Support' table in Appendix C in the 2024 Consultation Report). This means that out of a total sample population of 2,090 less than 12% support the proposal.
• Even cyclists are not supportive, with at most 30% of cyclists supporting the scheme
• There were 10+ times as many comments opposing the scheme as supporting it (6,078 vs. 569)

 The lack of cyclist support is illustrated by some quotes from cyclists below:

• “It would appear that a major driver for this proposal is to ensure better access and safety for cyclists.  As someone who cycles frequently through this junction, this is a completely misguided initiative and a woeful misallocation of public funds, which will lead to significantly increased congestion and have an adverse impact on all those living in the area. The cycle path which is already in place provides a perfectly adequate & safe route out of the traffic around the outer rim of the roundabout. There is no need for cyclists to compete with vehicles and you rarely see cyclists trying to weave their way through the traffic filtering in and out of the roundabout. The central issue to be considered is not cyclist safety, it is how to ease the traffic congestion which engenders considerable irritation for those using both private and public vehicles and of course does nothing for the air quality in our neighbourhood. Who’s actually benefitting from this scheme. Since its not cyclists and certainly isn’t the local neighbourhood, it makes you wonder who is driving this at TFL, who are the contracting beneficiaries and why there is such readiness to misconstrue or overlook the findings of their own survey.” Simon (Norland resident) 

• “As a cyclist who uses the area regularly, I find the proposed scheme an unnecessary waste of money, which will result in greater traffic and more congestion, without benefitting cyclists who can use the existing system which is perfectly adequate and safe.” Sam (Pembridge resident)

• “I’m writing as a 24-year-old cyclist who has grown up around Holland Park roundabout and cycles in the area regularly. I’m really concerned about TFL's plan to put a cycle lane through the main roundabout. Instead of making things safer, I think it’ll just turn into a busy route for cyclists from outside the borough, creating more congestion and bringing cyclists into direct contact with fast-moving traffic. There’s already a safer route for cyclists around the outside and adding a lane inside the roundabout seems like it would just add confusion and danger. I also worry about how this change will impact the flow of traffic and the general feel of the area. I hope this plan can be reconsidered.” Ned (resident in Norland ward)

In other words, PEOPLE INCLUDING CYCLISTS WHO RESPONDED TO THE CONSULTATION ARE NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THE SCHEME. YET, TFL IS PUSHING AHEAD WITH IT AGAINST PEOPLE’S WISHES AT HIGH EXPENSE. 

In Conclusion

WE PROPOSE UPGRADING THE TWO EXISTING CYCLEWAYS ON THE ROUNDABOUT AS THEY WILL TAKE CYCLISTS SAFELY ROUND THE ROUNDABOUT WITH NONE OF THE PROBLEMS OF TfL’S PROPOSED SCHEME.