We welcome Redbridge’s proposals – probably the most ambitious proposals the Authority has put forward to date. We hope it will come to be the first of many and look forward to working with the Authority on future schemes.
At the heart of the proposals are the establishment of a set of lightly segregated cycle tracks. Cycle tracks and lanes can enhance the safety of cyclists, ensure a fair allocation of road space and can encourage people to choose cycling as a means of transport. Department for Transport Guidance on cycle infrastructure design is set out in Local Transport Note 1/20 (LTN 1/20). Guidance means that those designing cycle infrastructure should follow what is set out unless they have a good, defensible, reason not to. Where we think we the proposals do not follow the guidance we have said so.
We appreciate the honesty of the Authority in presenting these proposals as ‘preliminary measures and it is hoped that funding may be secured for future interventions such as improvements to assist pedestrians and cyclists at junctions in the area’ and very much hope that Authority is successful in securing the funding to deal with junctions at the beginnings and ends of the tracks. As LTN 1/20 puts it
‘Junctions and crossings are where most conflicts occur, and the actual and perceived hazards are greatest. Junctions are often the most hazardous and intimidating parts of a journey for cyclists. A junction that does not provide safe facilities may prevent people from cycling through the junction, but may also be the reason that people will not use the remainder of a route’
The comments below inevitably focus on th difficulties we can see with the proposals but do need to read in the context of a broad welcome for a significant cycle infrastructure project.
Comments that apply to all the proposals
If the rationale for introducing segregated cycle lanes -the main feature of these schemes – is because they represent cycling and road safety improvements then they need to be continuous and extend over as much of the distance between junctions as possible. The gaps and the beginnings and ends of these lanes appear to be determined by the meeting needs of motor vehicles, for example where a traffic island means that the carriageway width is insufficient to accommodate a motor vehicles and a cycle. Each time a section of segregated lane ends a cyclist will face a motor vehicle cutting in front of them from their right. Most local cyclists have experienced near misses of this kind. So the potential safety benefits of these schemes will be reduced.
Bus boarders feature in all the schemes. The boarder needs to feature a 0.5m buffer for pedestrians to alight onto and the cycle lane needs to remain at 1.5m (not be pinched to, for example 1m). It is not clear from the documents provided in the consultation whether this will be the case.
We note the Borough’s intention to install cycle lane delineators in the form of mini-orcas and orcas-with-wands, that these will be alternating at 4m intervals. Where applicable, will this gap be sufficient to allow motorists to park between orcas/wands? It has happened in other Boroughs.
The cycle lanes bring cyclists into the mini roundabouts at the top of Aldersbrook Road or into the junction of Blake Hall Road, Bush Road and Overton Drive. The consultation does not explain the method used to decide how close to the junctions the start/finish of the lanes should be but in some cases they seem to be further away than they need to be. If the reason is for the convenience of motor traffic that would be a poor reason: motor vehicle convenience should not be a reason to sacrifice cyclists’ safety.
The junctions at the end of these schemes remain far too hostile to enable people other than those who already deal with them to take to these roads safely and with confidence.
In Department for Transport Circular 01/2013, Setting Local Speed Limits, the DfT write
‘84) Based on this positive effect on road safety, and a generally favourable reception from local residents, traffic authorities are able to use their power to introduce 20mph speed limits or zones on:
major streets where there are – or could be – significant numbers of journeys on foot, and/or where pedal cycle movements are an important consideration, and this outweighs the disadvantage of longer journey times for motorised traffic’.
Given that the purpose of these proposals is to improve cycling and road safety we would ask the Authority to set a 20mph speed limit on all the roads affected by the proposals: it is the combination of segregated lanes and lower speed limits that maximises the number of people choosing to cycle. In all likelihood this would need to include the roads on the Alderbrook and Lakehouse Estates which otherwise, given that the majority of these roads have 30mph speed limits, will get selected by navigation systems as fastest routes leading to an unintended increase in rat running – this has happened in other Boroughs.
Aldersbrook Road
- The decision to retain the traffic islands for pedestrian crossings and speed cameras and to end the segregated cycle lanes at these islands returning cyclists to the carriageway creates a number of pinch points. LTN 1/20 states
7.2.4 Close overtaking can be intimidating and hazardous to cyclists in free-flowing traffic. Only at speeds lower than 30mph might a minimum clearance of 1.0m be acceptable. No values are given for speed limits greater than 30mph because cyclists should be provided with protected space away from motor traffic (see Figure 4.1).p74
7.2.9 ,,, pinch-points should be designed in such a way that cyclists are neither squeezed nor intimidated by motor vehicles trying to overtake. The preferred option is to provide a bypass or alternatively sufficient lane width (more than 3.9m) so that the cyclist can remain in the secondary position and be overtaken safely. When width is insufficient for a bypass, the carriageway width is restricted to prevent overtaking. This will not be desirable over long lengths unless motor traffic volumes are also very low, as cyclists will feel intimidated by vehicles waiting to overtake. Gaps between kerbs (or kerb and solid white centre line) should be a maximum of 3.2m. As noted above, widths between 3.2m and 3.9m may encourage close overtaking by motor traffic at pinch points and should not be used. P77
Using the measurement app on an iPhone we found the at the pinch point n with junction of Empress Avenue to be 3.3m. We imagine the other pinch points are about the same width. Therefore the minimum clearance for cyclists of 1m for speeds less than 30mph cannot be met. In fact the width of the carriageway, falls within the range pinch points should nit be used. (para 7.2.9).
- We have noted the Borough’s comments regarding speed cushions and that ‘motorists will find it difficult to avoid the speed cushions when travelling in Aldersbrook Road as they are proposed alongside segregated cycle lanes with delineators, or in conjunction with pedestrian islands’ However we are not persuaded. It is the view of the London Cycling Campaign and, we understand, recognised best practice, to instal full width sinusoidal speed humps or tables. Light segregation in the form of cycle lane delineators coupled with speed cushions have been installed on Forest Road between Manor Park Station and Capel Road. It is not very effective in reducing traffic speeds as most vehicles can drive over the cushions a wheel on either side.
- We note the Borough’s intention not to allocate any mini-orcas or orcas-with-wands, at junctions to leave an adequate distance for cyclists to manoeuvre out of/into the cycle lane in a safe and timely manner. In deciding where to a break the line of orcas and wands the Authority needs to bear in mind he range of cycles that exist. LTN q1/20 para 5.4.1 says
‘It is important that infrastructure can accommodate the full range of cycles to ensure routes are accessible to all cyclists’
Turning right from Aldersbrook Road into one of the estate roads is a manoeuvre that will need to be executed with confidence and at a reasonable speed. Experienced cyclists on solo bikes will manage this but less experienced cyclists, children and some cyclists with disabilities and adapted bikes may well not. It is not acceptable if cyclists other than those who are experienced are forced to dismount and cross as pedestrians
- Finally we think that the segregated lane may send a signal to motorists that this is where cyclists should be and so they will not be expecting a right turn manoeuvre – making things worse than they are now.
- We do not understand why there are no segregated lanes between Brading Crescent and Harpenden Road.
Centre Road
Light segregation in the form of cycle lane delineators seems a good solution to the issues this road poses for cyclists. We have only one comments
- Why does the lane going north from Forest Gate towards Wanstead not start where the houses on Woodgrange Road end?
- Looking at the proposals from a pedestrian point of view is a raised speed table with a speed limit of 30mph more or less safe than an island with a 40mph speed limit? Table
In answer to a query regarding the proposed raised speed table an officer told us that the proposed reduction of the speed limit from “40mph” to “30mph” in Centre Road, paired with the kerb-to-kerb speed hump on the approach to the crossing point, narrowing of the lane width available to vehicles and warning signs/ road markings will assist in reducing the speed that vehicles travel in Centre Road and thus, improve road safety for all road users and of those crossing at this particular point. Does the s peed hump on the approach efer to the table as no speed hump is shown in the drawings provided for the consultation. The drawings show a carriageway wide at the crossing that is wide enough for two way traffic which will be approaching at 30mph. will this be safe?
Lakehouse Road
Light segregation in the form of cycle lane delineators seems a good solution to the issues this road poses for cyclists. We can see no specific issues.
Blake Hall Road
We cannot see why the segregated cycle lane in the direction towards Wanstead cannot start at the mini roundabout.
The northbound lane delivers cyclists into the mouth of the left filter lane into Bush Road. Cyclists wanting to proceed towards Wanstead will need to enter the filter lane and get into the straight ahead lane. This lane has no space for cyclists so at some point cyclists must merge into the traffic. A cyclist confident enough to execute this manoeuvre would not need a segregated cycle lane. Conversely a cyclist who would only cycle if able to use a segregated lane is unlikely to be confident enough to safely execute the required manoeuvre and if they is likely to be put in harm’s way.
The timing of the lights at the crossing between Woodlands Road and Belgrave Road should be changed – pedestrians and cyclists have to wait too long for the light to change.
It would be worth considering installing a toucan/parallel crossing where the cycle track that runs parallel to the A12 and under the Green Man roundabout meets Blake Hall Road (just before Blake Hall Road crosses the A12). This would create a useful link.
Woodford New Road
Light segregation in the form of cycle lane delineators seems a good solution to separate cyclist and motorists on what is a very busy road.
. LTN 1/20 states
‘Cyclists must be physically separated and protected from high volume motor traffic, both at junctions and on the stretches of road between them’ One traffic island has been narrowed to accommodate cycle lanes whilst one, at Bunces Road, has not and the cycle lane stops. This does not comply with LTN1/20 the guidance.
Redbridge Cycling Campaign 