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