consultations, news

Support Wightman Road filtering – complete the council survey by this Sunday 14 May!

‘Daddy, can we please cycle to Finsbury Park again this weekend?’

wightman photo

Last summer extraordinary things happened in one part of Haringey. It was a summer of fun for kids: on roads and streets where before there was only bad air and road traffic noise, now there was the sound of kids playing out. Street football was a daily occurrence, children were using the road to cycle to school and there was even the occasional lemonade stand. It wasn’t just children who were joining in with being more active. Adults across this large area realised they didn’t really need the car for their shorter journeys – walking was nearly as fast and made them feel pretty good now the air was cleaner. Cycling to Finsbury Park to pick up the tube was quicker than the bus and nicer than cramming onto the packed trains, and getting there on a bike suddenly seemed easy now the journey could be done mostly without having to ride with speeding traffic.

Surely this was all the work of a council fully committed to the health of their residents, the sort that would make bold claims about making their borough the most liveable in London? Sadly this utopia did not last. While other boroughs nearby were permanently closing roads to through traffic to entrench a new, healthier lifestyle in their boroughs, Wightman Road and its adjoining roads were reopened as through routes for motor traffic. The weekend bike rides to the park had to stop.

‘I’m sorry. There’s no safe way to cycle there now’.

As a cycle campaign we are of course primarily interested in high quality provision for cycling that allows anyone to feel confident using a bike to get around. This has been the focus of our continuing engagement in the Green Lanes Area Transport Study. There are many ways to achieve this but many options that improve conditions for people on bikes also have much wider benefits for those in the area – even if they never cycle. For example making areas more healthy and liveable, reducing air pollution and even reducing journey times for drivers by lowering overall traffic levels and simplifying routes. If you live in or travel through Harringay or the Green Lanes area, you have until Sunday to complete the council survey on future options for Wightman Road and the surrounding area. We believe this is an issue primarily for local people to decide, so please take a look at Living Wightman’s advice on how to complete the survey. While some of the options presented can deliver a suitable cycle route (in particular we recommend you support the proposal for a northbound cycle track on Green Lanes, desperately needed in an area with no safe north/south routes), the option to ‘filter’ Wightman Road will deliver multiple health and air quality benefits as well as a safe route suitable for all-ages cycling. Many parts of this borough are already ‘filtered’ to through traffic. Other boroughs which are right next to Haringey are showing how such schemes, if well managed, can reduce traffic over a wide area. The use of Wightman Road as a conduit for through traffic has negative consequences for the areas to the north and south that also have long-standing issues with excessive through traffic.

The council’s response to the issues encountered on Wightman Road is a real test for them – are they serious about tackling pollution and unlocking the massive potential for active travel in this borough? Or, as suggested by the recent consultation on the Wood Green AAP, is the future of our borough just as polluted, congested and unhealthy as our present? This is your chance to tell the council what sort of place you want this borough to evolve into. Don’t miss the chance to have your voice heard.

 

consultations

Wood Green Area Action Plan – respond by 31 March

Haringey Cycling Campaign have met with Haringey Council and provided a detailed response to the Wood Green Area Action Plan consultation, based on discussions with members at our last monthly meeting. But we know that many of our members and supporters will want to add their own voices to this consultation. Remember, you have until this Friday 31 March to have your say!

 
We’ve outlined our thoughts below, and highlighted in bold some of the main points we feel really need to be made. Please feel free to cut and paste into your own response, or write your own response if you’d prefer. As we are a cycling campaign, our comments relate only to proposed cycling provision and related traffic management in the area. We do not feel it is within our remit to comment on any of the other elements of the plan, but as individual responders, you are of course welcome to do so yourselves.

 
While we accept that plans are at an early stage, we welcome the stated intention to encourage walking and cycling and to improve the local cycle network. However the routes shown in the plans are mainly existing cycle routes which are of a poor quality. The new connections proposed do not suggest cycling is being planned for as a serious mode of transport. Although the proposed cycle routes are welcome additions as leisure routes or connectors to a proper cycle network, they cannot form the backbone of a comprehensive provision for cycling. Overall, the network shown does not seem central to the transport element of the regeneration plan, and does not deal with the key issues currently limiting the take-up of cycling for transport in this area. Significant modal shift towards more sustainable methods of transport will come about principally by a reduction of through traffic in residential areas and the provision of protected space for cycling on the main north/south and east/west main road routes. The AAP should include at its core a high quality cycle network if it wants to reflect a truly modern approach to traffic management that enables anyone to choose to cycle to work, shops, school or to leisure facilities.

 
The plans as they stand appear to represent outdated ideas about traffic management. Making more space for motor traffic is a sure way to attract more traffic to the area, a phenomenon known as ‘induced traffic’ that has been observed by transport professionals repeatedly since 1925. Allowing more through traffic on Mary Neuner Way with no restrictions to traffic on adjoining roads will only exacerbate the current unacceptable traffic levels in this area, Wightman Road to the south and the residential areas to the north. This project is an opportunity to sort out these problems once and for all and must not be missed. A coordinated policy for traffic reduction is essential and we suggest that all possible measures to achieve this be considered. Haringey’s neighbouring boroughs have shown that a reduction in road capacity for motor vehicles is a reliable way to reduce overall motor traffic volumes and enable active travel.

 
As part of measures to modernise roads in and around the area, the dangerous junction at Turnpike Lane/Wightman Road must be overhauled or it will remain a key barrier to north/south cycling to and from the Heartlands area. Suggestions that reductions in capacity at this junction will exacerbate traffic problems simply do not stand up to scrutiny.

 
One of the stated aims of the AAP is to bring more shoppers to Wood Green from the Palace Gates/Alexandra Park area and beyond. These efforts will be seriously undermined if principle routes into Wood Green, such as Station Road, remain hostile to active travel. To attract more visitors from north and south of the area, the creation of dedicated, protected space for cycling on Wood Green High Road must be a priority. Enfield Council are currently building cycle tracks on Green Lanes that will stop at the border. Hackney Council are considering doing the same on Green Lanes to the south of Haringey. Green Lanes will remain the principle north/south route for cycling in this part of the borough and should be modernised to form a continuous network with our neighbouring boroughs.

 
The AAP provides the opportunity to break with the past and begin to build the kind of inclusive, modern road environment that Haringey residents deserve. Cycling in Wood Green is currently mainly the preserve of the quick and the brave, meaning most residents do not feel safe enough to benefit from active travel due to a road environment that is heavily balanced towards the private car. The opportunity presented by the AAP to rectify this unfairness must not be missed.

consultations

A small, but important, consultation (deadline 1 Feb)

Screenshot 2017-01-30 at 22.52.32

Haringey Council is currently consulting on a number of proposals for the Hornsey Park area, on Hornsey Park Road between Clarendon Road and Avenue Road. You can see detail of this consultation on the website of the Parkside Malvern Residents Association. We fully support PMRA’s ambition for a quieter Hornsey Park Road that is less dominated by motor traffic.

Those of you who are local to, or cycle through this area may wish to respond to this consultation in detail. When doing so please include in your response an objection to the proposal to reduce carriageway lane widths to 3.2m. We have provided a detailed response to the wider aspects of the plans, but our overriding concern is that the proposed road widths be brought into line with London’s published standards for cycle design:

LCDS 4.4.2

The London Cycle Design Standards specifically warn against lanes of this width and instead offers the following guidance: ‘If the proportion of HGV and public service vehicle traffic is less than 10 per cent then, subject to the carriageway geometry and speed and volume of traffic, motor traffic lane widths may generally be reduced to between 2.5 and 2.9 metres.’ Reducing the road width from 3.2m to 2.5-2.9m would also enhance the desired speed reduction and ‘gateway’ effect. We are strongly opposed to the proposed 3.2m width as this is likely to leave room for doubt about whether sufficient room is available for overtaking, increasing the possibility that following vehicles will attempt to pass far too closely. There are roads very near to Hornsey Park Road that feel hostile to cycling due to close passes and dangerous tailgating, exacerbated by the road widths present alongside traffic islands. We are anxious that this situation is not replicated on Hornsey Park Road.

consultations, news

Bruce Grove Consultation – urgent action needed!

Transport for London are currently consulting on changes to the A10 at Bruce Grove (from the rail station south to Forster Road). The consultation is open until 7 December, please have your say via https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/bruce-grove/

These proposals were discussed at Haringey Cycling Campaign’s monthly meeting on the 14 November. Unfortunately, we found very little to recommend from a cycling perspective. The junction treatment outside Bruce Grove station is likely to benefit pedestrians and to a lesser extent those on bikes. However, in our view the remainder of the proposed work would decrease safety for people cycling, and as such we are requesting TfL go back to the drawing board and come back with something much better. Our reasoning is set out below – you may wish to raise these points in your response. Remember the consultation closes on 7 December!

The proposals include a dangerous and unnecessary pinch point
The new signalised pedestrian crossing proposes to narrow the existing carriageway width to 3m in each direction. We object to this creation of a pinch point, which seems unnecessary for pedestrian safety as the proposed crossing is signalised. We are concerned that the proposed narrowing will increase conflict between road users – in theory cycles should “take the lane” to prevent dangerous overtaking but this would only be a sensible approach on a road with light volumes of traffic travelling at low speeds. For what we think are obvious reasons, this approach is not applicable to this situation.

Proposals remove existing cycle provision
There is an existing cycle route (LCN 54) that crosses the High Rd at St Loys Rd. In 2003 and 2006 detailed proposals were made, but not implemented, to upgrade this crossing. There are presently cycle reservations to the north and south of the junction, which are at least some assistance in crossing the High Road. The present proposals include the removal of the south reservation and this is not an acceptable alteration as no replacement provision is shown.

Current proposals are incompatible with increasing cycle numbers
A 2007 Transport for London scheme for the A10 from Monument Way to St Loys Rd, consulted on but not implemented, included cycle lanes. There remains ample road space for comprehensive cycle provision. Indeed, as part of implementing Mini Holland, Enfield are currently consulting on a proposal for protected cycle tracks on the A1010 up to the Haringey border. Cycle Superhighway 1 does not provide a suitable alternative route, particularly with the decision not to filter through traffic on Broadwater Road. The A10 at Bruce Grove is and will remain heavily used by cycles: Planning policy for Tottenham regeneration seeks to reduce private car use and improving cycle provision in Enfield and Waltham Forest means that the ambition for the A10 should be as a main cycle route.

We therefore urge that these proposals are either redesigned or not taken forward as part of this scheme.

consultations, news

CS1 response

Last chance to have your say on Haringey’s Cycle Superhighway

Here’s our proposed response to Transport for London’s Cycle Superhighway route 1 (CS1) consultation which ends on Sunday.

The response below is a draft on behalf of Haringey Cycling Campaign and London Cycling Campaign  – there may be minor edits after the London Cycling Campaign IRG (Infrastructure Review Group) meeting on Thursday 26th March.

B9_5SuDIgAAHHxY
Proposed 2-way cycle track on the western pavement of the High Road between West Green Road and Town Hall Approach, lanes separated by trees (which already exist)

 

We feel there are many problems with the present proposals.

TfL are already reconsidering the South section of the route through Haringey, following our objections to the St Ann’s Road alignment.

Hopefully there will also be a rethink on the centre section from South Tottenham station, past Seven Sisters Road to Philip Lane, which includes sections of shared space on the pavement outside a busy Seven Sisters underground station entrance and High Road bus stop – where local cyclists have recently been stopped from cycling by MPS Haringey (although the acting Inspector has since apologised by email and sent a memo to all neighbourhood team reminding officers what a shared use space sign looks like).

Please let TfL know your views! The deadline for responses is Sunday the 29th March.

CS1 consultation event in Marcus Garvey library
CS1 consultation event in Marcus Garvey library

 

The TfL consultation documents can be found at  https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/cs1

 

Our full draft response can be read here – with section by section notes: CS1 notes LCC.HCC

Our thoughts and sketch for a protected right turn at Philip Lane in to Town Hall Approach can be found here: Philip Lane Protected Right

A very well written response to the proposals by Tottenham Civic Society can be read here: Tottenham Civic Society – CS1

Here's how busy the current shared space is - even busier when students are arriving and leaving College of North East London. The large tree planter CANNOT be removed or reduced so all pedestrians and cyclists using CS1's proposed route will be funnelled to the right of this tree, where everyone is walking.
Here’s how busy the current shared space is – even busier when students are arriving and leaving College of North East London. The large tree planter CANNOT be removed or reduced so all pedestrians and cyclists using CS1’s proposed route will be funnelled to the right of this tree, where everyone is walking.
consultations, news

Cycle Superhighway 1 – our letter to Haringey Council

B9_HmjJCMAIhkw3UPDATE: Keep a look out for how to respond to the CS1 consultation – WE WILL NEED YOUR SUPPORT.

Here’s the proposed  two-way cycle track on the pavement on the High Road north of Seven Sisters.

What to know what we think of the latest plans? Here’s our letter to Haringey Council regarding the proposed alignment of Cycle Superhighway 1:

Dear Malcolm,

1st February 2015

TfL have recently issued revised drawings for CS1.  The trees which encroached on the cycle path near Seven Sisters Underground have been relocated and parking which obstructed access to the contra flow near Lordship Lane has been removed, however it seems no other comments from LCC/ HCC have been addressed and apart from these points the drawings appear identical to those issued before.   The new drawings have been reviewed by the LCC Infrastructure Review Group (IRG) and it was agreed points as below would be raised in the forthcoming TfL Design Review Group.  We will keep you informed of any comments from LCC.
CS1, Haringey
As stated previously the alignment does not make sense. If this alignment is used there are a number of issues to address:-
1) Modal filter needed at Frinton Rd
2) Frinton to St Ann’s Rd is a right turn onto a hugely busy road – must be signalised and segregated
3) In the High Rd at the rail bridge, the reduced 2.5m pavement width on the east side of the toucan is not suitable. The toucan should be moved closer to the Crowland Rd Junction.
4) The “stepping stone” markings proposed look confusing, with no clarity for pedestrian or cycle priority. Not appropriate for a cycle superhighway to go through a shared use area – it is a busy area and there will be conflict.
5) High Rd/Seven Sisters Rd needs to be a cycle segregated T Junction, with one phase, not toucans.
6) Cycle friendly signal control needed at West Green Rd junction as LCDS Fig 4.9 options 1 and 2 to allow movements, as shown in HCC drawing.
7) Proximity of Underground exits serious risk of conflict – pedestrians both sides. Peds will need a crossing point to get into the Underground and clear signage.
8) Outside College of North East London: raised tree planter is used as informal seating by students. Major risk of conflict and lack of continuity. Need to reconfigure tree pit or purchase land from College.
9) Where the roads split and CS1 goes up Town Hall Approach Rd: this is a very busy narrow section of one way road: when buses are stopped here cyclists won’t be able to pass. Need to let cyclists onto the paved area to overtake buses, to feed in to re-configured straight across toucan to join to local E/W cycle route.
10) Need to provide hatched centre line marking at TH Approach all traffic 2-way section, to ensure awareness of oncoming traffic.
11) Junction of Town Hall Approach Rd and Philip Lane is a busy junction. Philip Lane needs proper segregation – junction should be cycle segregated leading into protected tracks. Armadillos or wands may work here – stepped tracks wouldn’t be acceptable if there is a risk that they would be parked on. All of Philip Lane (pages 13, 14, 15) needs segregation.
12) Strode Rd into Sperling Rd – only about 3m wide – entirely unsuitable to share with pedestrians
13) At Lordship Lane bus stop conflicts with S bound cycle 2-stage turn. Move bus stop to other side of Broadwater Rd junction. Cyclists turning right into a major road will require control (lights).
14) Lordship Lane needs two toucans synchronised to get cyclists across. This would eradicate need for traffic islands with cycle bollards, allowing room for segregated tracks.
HCC lobbied strongly for CS1 to avoid St Ann’s Rd, but now that it is definitely following this alignment, it needs to be made as cycle friendly as possible.  Another major concern to HCC, is the design of the junctions in the area of Seven Sisters Station and the related pedestrian areas.  It seems TfL aim to thread CS1 through this area with a minimum of change to the recently completed work, which in spite of repeated reminders to the design team, took no account of the planned CS1.  This simply will not work.  There have been numerous complaints on the dangers of the present layout, for example going straight ahead from West Green Rd to Broad Lane, across other traffic flows.  If CS1 is “bolted on” to this already unsatisfactory situation, a need for many more dangerous manoeuvres will be added.  For example how will cycles access CS1 from Broad Lane?  Are they meant to filter through waiting pedestrians at the unsegregated Toucan Crossings?  This might be acceptable for a low volume cycle route, but for a superhighway and the high pedestrian traffic in this location, it isn’t.
We can find no precedent for the “stepping stone” shared use markings proposed by TfL and think they will cause confusion.  There are precedents for clearly marked cycle paths in pedestrian areas, for example in Seville where studs are used in conjunction with pedestrian priority signs (where appropriate).  The photograph below shows a cycle route at a tramline crossing (see also
http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/jan/28/seville-cycling-capital-southern-europe-bike-lanesfor a general review of cycle provision in Seville).  There is also guidance on cycle route shared use marking and junction design in the new London Cycle Design Standards.  TfL are presently building or upgrading a number of Cycle Superhighways following these Standards and it would be a real missed opportunity if the only Superhighway planned for Haringey is not compliant.  I would be grateful if you could take this up with TfL.
Regards,   Michael Poteliakhoff
Coordinator, Haringey Cycling Campaign
__________

 

The consultation on Cycle Superhighway 1 was due to launch in late 2014, but consultation is now due in February 2015, and CS1 is due for completion in April 2016.

barclays-cycle-superhighways-map1

TfL’s current proposals can be seen in TfL Board papers at https://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/board-20150204-part-1-item-07a-propose-csh-scheme.pdf  (pages 50-55).

London Cycling Campaign and Haringey Cycling Campaign have objected to the proposed alignment in Haringey, in particular the narrow and very busy section along St Ann’s Rd, but we are now concentrating on whatever alignment goes ahead being built to the best possible standard.

It looks as if it’s going to be more of a “Superquietway” than a proper CS.  Our full consultation response comments will be made when the details go public – make sure you give TfL your feedback!

 

consultations, news

Our response to TfL’s Archway consultation

Thank you to all London Cycling Campaign members and supporters in Haringey and Islington who spared a minute to respond to Transport for London’s proposals for the removal of the Archway Gyratory system.
Click here  to review Islington Cyclists Action Group’s full response on their website.
20141204-Archway-Redesigned-1038x576
As well as many individual responses, Haringey Cycling Campaign responded to the proposals too. Here’s what we said:
Haringey Cycling Campaign welcomes the proposals, however the cycle routes through the junction are incomplete, with dangerous manoeuvres through general traffic still needed.  Continuous segregated cycle tracks and protected junctions are needed throughout.   We fully support the detailed comments of Islington Cyclists Action Group which can be summarised as-
1) Coming from Junction Road to St Johns Way there is a left hook risk: requiring cyclists to turn right across left turning traffic. A cycle track along the central Archway island and a cycle crossing on ArchwayRoad would ensure these cyclists are safe.
2) It is not clear how to get from Archway station into Holloway Road. We need a segregated track, clearly distinguishing bikes and pedestrians, linking the track down Highgate Hill in front of the station to the southbound Holloway Road track.
3) It is impossible to cross Archway Road north of Tollhouse Way. We need a link from Archway Road (northbound) to Archway Road/Harberton Road, particularly at Despard Road and Waterlow Road.
4) Macdonald Road and Vorley Road should be two way for cycling
Incomplete cycle provision can give a false sense of security and lead to increased risk, as at the Cycle Superhighway junctions now being upgraded and we trust these points can be addressed.
The scheme should avoid using guardrailing (none is shown), but there should be features such as kerbs, planting, bollards or seating to indicate the extent of pedestrian areas. The cycle lanes should have 45deg angle kerbs. Cycle parking can also be used to emphasise the edge of a pedestrian area, as used very successfully at Kingsland High St.
consultations, news

Our view of proposed 20mph limit across the ‘whole’ of the borough

Read more about the 20mph in Haringey consultation, and have your say via the Haringey Council website here. 

We feel that there a number of roads which are currently intended to be exempt, and will remain at 30mph.

Here’s our letter to Haringey’s Cabinet Member for the Environment, Cllr Stuart McNamara.

Image thanks to Bounds Green Residents Association.

20mphsign

Dear Cllr McNamara,

HCC fully supports the planned implementation a 20mph default speed limit on all borough roads in Haringey, apart from certain main roads, however it seems to us some of the roads intended to be designated at 30mph, should have a 20mph limit, to take account of local conditions and to maximise pedestrian and cycle safety.  The roads we would ask to be reconsidered are-

 

Fortis Green Rd, which has a number of shops and restaurants and also a very narrow section, where a 20mph limit will greatly improve road safety.

 

Hornsey High Street, where there are many shops and restaurants and at least 3 schools in the vicinity.

 

West Green Road, where there are many schools, shops and restaurants and where heavy traffic congestion during the day means that the average traffic speed must be already below 20mph.  An official 20mph limit will smooth the traffic flow and improve safety.

 

The whole of the Tottenham Lane/ Church Lane one way system, which is next to a school in one direction and leads up to shops in the other and where speeding traffic can be very intimidating in a mainly residential area.

 

Cycling Champion Cllr Toni Mallett has said she considers Hornsey High Street and West Green Rd should in particular be made 20mph and I hope all the roads above can be looked at again, in consultation with local councillors.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Michael Poteliakhoff

Coordinator HCC

consultations

Plans for Bounds Green Rd/Whittington Rd/Trinity Rd junction

Haringey Council are now making a concerted effort to consult Haringey Cycling Campaign on all schemes which include a cycling element. You could argue that all road schemes involve cycling, but we don’t have the capacity to review and respond to everything!

 

We’ve been sent drawings of plans to block off the end of Trinity Road, adding a paved area. There is a proposed cycle lane across the area where the buckled barrier is shown below, but we think it won’t get used because the turn is too tight off Bounds Green Road.

Do you live near, or use the junction below?

Would you like to see the plans and give some feedback?

Email haringey@lcc.org.uk with ‘Bounds Green Rd/Whittington Rd/Trinity Rd junction’ in the title and we’ll add your feedback to our response.

 

Bounds Green Road Trinity Road