4. CONCLUSION
4.1 The Council’s SoC does not provide sound evidence for the trial to be made permanent.
a) The trial has not met its objectives with regard to safety and pollution
b) The trial has created multiple adverse impacts, which outweigh any positive impacts, and which the
Council is largely not taking into account
c) There are alternative plans for the area which could achieve the Council’s objectives without such
adverse impacts, and these have not been fairly and adequately considered
d) The Council’s Statement of Case supporting the trial being made permanent is based on many
statements which are unsubstantiated, and statements for which the evidence is quite contrary to the
assertions, and some incorrect information.
4.2 The trial removes a vital westbound route
The west-bound Torrington-Tavistock corridor which has been blocked was not a short cut; it was not even only a key west-bound vehicle route; it was in fact the only west-bound vehicular route between the Strand and Euston Road; once that is digested, one begins to understand the significant problems caused by its closure.
4.3 BRAG proposes that corridor should be reversed to its previous two way traffic but with the modification
that, instead of one bidirectional cycle lane, there should be two unidirectional cycle lanes.
​
5. CONCLUSION
Proofs of evidence will demonstrate:
-
Traffic displaced from Tavistock Place
-
The flawed nature of the consultation process
-
The Freedom of Information request for data ignored by Council
-
Stop-start traffic and consequent pollution in surrounding streets
-
Cycling accident information
-
Increased risk to cyclists in surrounding streets
-
Routes designated for emergency vehicles
-
Problems caused to hospital patients and staff
-
Problems caused for people with impaired mobility
-
Problems caused for local businesses
-
BRAG’s proposal to reverse the trial, but with modifications
-
Commentary of the Council’s critique of BRAG’s proposal
-
Commentary on the Council’s SoC
-
Video evidence covering displaced traffic, risks to cyclists and the impeding of emergency vehicles
-
Pedestrian accident information
​
Documents to be referred to:
a) National standards re road widths etc as referred to by Council barrister in Pre-Inquiry
Meeting, and which, it is understood, will be part of a common library of documents
b) BRAG formal response to the consultation
c) Camden Council Cabinet papers for January 2015
d) Website document (not the hard copy leaflet) published by the Council at the beginning of the trial in
November 2015
e) BRAG’s Community Planning Day Report
​
​