Opposing the proposed changes

• The main reasons why respondents oppose each of the proposed changes is because they feel they are unnecessary, and that they feel the changes will negatively impact traffic and cause congestion
• Other popular reasons driving opposition are, ‘concerns for safety’, that they ‘do not think it will be used’, and that an ‘alternative change’ would be better suited to the route

An asterisk (*) indicates a small base size, caution should be taken when interpreting the results

Base: those opposing (41)

This table shows key themes of respondents’ comments as to why they oppose updating the crossing at Victoria Road North to be a traffic light crossing: 54% said it would cause congestion / traffic issues, 29% said it’s unnecessary, 15% said they need more information, and 15% said made other comments

Base: those opposing (14*) | *caution small base

This table shows key themes of respondents’ comments as to why they oppose creating additional space for pedestrians and installing CCTV or more lighting along Sydenham Terrace: 43% said it is not needed / pedestrians have enough space, 21% said it will have a negative impact on cars / traffic, 14% wanted more information, 7% said too much light, 7% do not support CCTV, 7% mentioned the cost, and 7% said they want Police to increase security

Base: those opposing (28*) | *caution small base

This table shows key themes of respondents’ comments as to why they oppose adding a bi-directional cycle track along Sydenham Terrace: 29% said there are too many considerations for cyclists / e-scooters, 29% said they were concerned about safety, 25% said they do not think it will be used, 21% said the cost, 11% said it is unnecessary, and 7% said it will have a negative impact on traffic

Base: those opposing (27*) | *caution small base

This table shows key themes of respondents’ comments as to why they oppose adding an uncontrolled pedestrian crossing at the junction between Sydenham Terrace and Canal Walk: 26% said it is unnecessary, 19% said they do not think uncontrolled crossings work, 19% said they want a controlled crossing, 19% were concerned about safety, 15% want an alternative, 15% said there would be a negative impact on traffic, 15% said other reasons

Base: those opposing (36)

This table shows key themes of respondents’ comments as to why they oppose making the road closure on Canal Walk permanent: 28% said it will directly affect specific travel routes, 25% said it will have a negative impact on traffic, 19% said they do not think there is an issue with the road being open, 11% said it will negatively impact residents, 11% wanted an alternative, and 17% made other comments

Base: those opposing (13*) | *caution small base

This table shows key themes of respondents’ comments as to why they oppose improving crossings along Canal Walk at junctions with Bridgeside Close, Milford Road and Railway View: 54% said it was unnecessary, 23% said it would have an negative impact on traffic, 23% wanted an alternative, and 8% mentioned the cost

Base: those opposing (13*) | *caution small base

This table shows key themes of respondents’ comments as to why they oppose improving pedestrian crossing the junction between East Surrey Street and Upper Arundel Street: 54% said it was unnecessary, 15% said it will not work, 15% wanted an alternative, 8% said it would have a negative impact on traffic, and 15% made other comments

Base: those opposing (34)

This table shows key themes of respondents’ comments as to why they oppose adding an uncontrolled crossing at George House junction with Somers Road: 31% said they are concerned about safety, 25% said it’s unnecessary, 13% said it would have a negative impact on traffic, 9% want an alternative, 6% do not agree with uncontrolled crossings, 3% said it will not work, and 9% made other comments

Base: those opposing (14*) | *caution small base

This table shows key themes of respondents’ comments as to why they oppose improving pedestrian crossing at Carlisle Road junction with Somers Road: 50% said it is unnecessary, 14% said they want an alternative, 14% said it will not work, 7% mentioned the cost, 7% said it won’t be used, 7% said it would have a negative impact on traffic, and 14% made other comments

Base: those opposing (44)

This table shows key themes of respondents’ comments as to why they oppose adding a ‘build out’ and uncontrolled crossing on Greetham Street, next to the railway bridge: 34% said it will have a negative impact on traffic, 32% said it’s unnecessary, 16% were concerned about safety, 7% said it will not be used, 7% said they want an alternative, 5% said other

Base: those opposing (27*) | *caution small base

This table shows the key themes of comments from those respondents who oppose adding an uncontrolled crossing at Isambard Brunel Road junction with Dugald Street: 30% said it was unnecessary, 19% want an alternative, 15% were concerned about safety, 11% said it will not work, 7% said it will have a negative impact on traffic, 7% mentioned the cost, and 4% said it will not be used