I wanted to offer brief comments because this location seems to offer great scope for a step change in provision. I support the aims of the Junction Review Programme: some of the designs being developed within it are promising, but I am also concerned that (as here) opportunities are being missed to develop game-changing solutions for cycling.
Here, the large amount of available space indicates it would be easy to implement either Danish or Dutch-style solutions, and I am surprised that this is not proposed. In my view, the Dutch approach would be most desirable because Dutch infrastructure provides space between cycle and motor vehicle infrastructure, creating a more pleasant experience for cycling. The Danish approach (wide segregated cycle tracks that are next to motor vehicle lanes) is less desirable but could be implemented with very little loss of motor vehicle capacity.
However, the approach chosen is very British – shared pavement space plus narrow on-road lanes. This model exists in some other UK cities that I have studied, but while it may be better than nothing, in my view it is not the standard London should be aiming at. Cyclists must choose between speed and safety, whereas the Danish and especially the Dutch designs provide both together, creating infrastructure that is attractive to all cyclists and provides space for the fast and the slow alike. Wide Dutch-style infrastructure with separate lights at junctions is entirely practical here. Let’s create infrastructure to make cyclists in those other countries jealous, rather than a British compromise that compels cyclists to choose between safety and speed.
A24 London Road Consultation
Bookmark the permalink.