The Stage 1 Road Safety Audit for the A105 cycle lanes scheme has now been published. The auditors, from Transport for London (TfL), have indicated that they are satisfied with the responses to all the safety issues that they raised. Unfortunately, the auditors did not comment on hazards for pedestrians crossing roads at the Green Lanes/Hedge Lane/Bourne Hill junction, presumably because their terms of reference state that "Safety Audit is not intended to identify pre-existing hazards which remain unchanged due to the proposals".
The Road Safety Audit document is available in the Consultation Downloads section of the A105 page of the Cycle Enfield website.
A Road Safety Audit (RSA) considers the road safety implications of a scheme on all roads users, particularly vulnerable users. The RSA team are independent from the designers and identify potential risks and mitigation measures for consideration by the designer and client. RSA is not a single procedure but a series of stages carried out pre and post implementation.
Stage 1: Completion of Preliminary Design / Conceptual Design
Carried out as soon as practicable following completion of the preliminary design, when the scheme is sufficiently progressed so that all
significant features are clearly shown.
Stage 2: Completion of Detailed Design
Carried out as soon as practicable after the detailed design is sufficiently progressed so that it could be constructed. .
Stage 3: Completion of Construction
Carried out as soon as practicable after the works are complete.
Stage 4: Monitoring
Carried out when monitoring identifies an emerging collision problem.
TfL carried out the Stage 1 audit in early March this year and issued its findings later in the same month. Each of its recommendations was then considered by the scheme's designers, who either set out arguments in favour of their original design or made modifications in line with the recommendations. In turn, the auditors considered the designers' responses and indicated whether they accepted them.
The auditors identified 15 "problems" with road safety implications that fell within their strict terms of reference, plus a further 16 that did not fall within their terms of reference (these were "detailed design issues" or "demand-dependent issues").
The scheme designers indicated that they accepted, partially accepted or rejected each of the recommendations. In every case the auditors accepted these responses, though in many cases they stipulated that it will be necessary to monitor how the designs work in practice and if necessary make changes.
Presumably, the drawings being used for the statutory consultation incorporate the design changes resulting from the road safety audit (I haven't checked this).
The version of the document on the website, incorporating recommendations, responses and acceptance of those responses, was signed off by the project manager and by Enfield Council in late June and issued by TfL on 25th July.
The statutory consultation phase for the A105 is currently running. The deadline for objections is tomorrow (Friday 29th July).
