ISLINGTON COUNCIL'S CYCLING PROPOSALS FOR JUNCTION ROAD, N19
Improvements to the cycling experience are certainly desirable and would help green this noisy part of Pooterland if properly designed, but Islington Council’s latest proposals for Junction Road, N19, have drawn objections from cyclists and pedestrians. The Better Archway Forum have only just been alerted to the contemplated changes to the layout of Junction Road which are intended to encourage more cycling. The consultation has officially closed but BAF understands is still under consideration and it is well worth responding . Comments should be sent to MinYee.Cheung@islington.gov.uk.
A review of the proposals by Cyclescape and plans can be found here: http://www.cyclescape.org/issues/2047-junction-road-cycle-improvement-scheme
Better Archway Forum’s analysis is here:
Comment from Those Who Cycle
Islington Cycle Action Group has commented that the scheme would not improve the cycling experience or feel safe, and indeed, if built the proposals would only cater to existing commuter cyclists as those who are risk averse would continue to avoid the route.
10% of Junction Road motor vehicles are reported to be HGVs. The proposed cycle route is between parked vehicles on one side, with the risk of collision between cyclists and car doors, and on the other side the HGVs. Those who cycle prefer safer designs running between the pavement and parked cars.
The Scheme Needs to be Improved
As a healthier and less polluting form of transport more cycle routes are to be welcomed. But rather than reducing the impact of motor vehicles, the scheme is at the expense of the majority (up to 48%) who travel on foot who also travel healthily.
The number of those walking in London is rising (see http://content.tfl.gov.uk/travel-in-london-report-6.pdf fig. 3.22). At the same time, with all the new residential development, so is the population of Archway, so it is important that we don’t lose walking space.
Under this scheme pedestrians would lose pavement space to both the cycle route and pavement parking. Additionally, traffic islands would be removed without any proposal to add additional pedestrian crossing points. It seems that it would benefit from a complete redesign.