The City sets out concerns about Boris Johnson cycle superhighway plans
|
Version 0 of 1. The City of London Corporation has long expressed support for Boris Johnson’s two most eye-catching cycle superhighway plans in principle, but has also voiced reservations about the designs proposed. Those reservations have now been set out in some detail in an initial report by senior Square Mile planning officers. It includes the striking view that the proposals as they stand would have “a significant adverse impact on the City” and reminds the Corporation’s members that, should they wish, they can “delay or stop” the flagship routes’ introduction. The report, prepared for the City’s planning and transportation committee, expresses significant concerns about “negative impacts” from both the ambitious east-west superhighway and the shorter north-south one on pedestrians, air quality, access for other road users to local streets and the area’s environment in general. It argues that the proposals are not in keeping with Johnson’s declared wish to “create better places for everyone”. Where pedestrians are concerned, the report welcomes most of the ten new, signalised pedestrian crossings proposed for the two superhighway routes, but is unhappy that some of them are “staggered”, meaning people have to cross roads in two stages rather than one. Noting that pedestrian waiting times at crossings have lengthened in the past decade to benefit motor vehicles, the report says the superhighways will make these waits even longer - nearly two minutes in some cases - and “unreasonably excessive” when what is really required is a reduction. The report acknowledges that the plans offer more space for pedestrians overall, but says this isn’t always in the places where it’s most needed. It also argues that the east-west route as presently configured would prevent advantage being taken of an opportunity presented by the Thames Tideway, “super-sewer” project to greatly improve pedestrian access to the City along Puddle Dock. These objections chime with the report’s general take that the superhighway plans are “heavily biased towards cycling” at potentially unacceptable cost to everyone else. It raises concerns about the possible effects of banning some motor traffic movements, such as bringing in no left turn or no right turn rules. These are intended to lessen conflict with cyclists at junctions, but the City report worries about the effects on alternative routes, perhaps through narrow streets, being unacceptable in some cases. There are questions raised too about possible increased road congestion and resulting air pollution and wider road safety improvement. Transport for London (TfL) is asked to consider a list of suggestions relating to the above and also “alternative design measures” to help the road network cope with road works, and a process for managing traffic flows. A wish is expressed for TfL and the City to work together to “achieve an acceptable outcome” which may entail further impact modelling and another extension to the present consultation deadline of November 9. This might all sound like rather bad news for Johnson, the “cycling mayor”. But he’s already said the plans are not “set in stone”. And the report ends by insisting that the possible changes the City thinks should be explored: Are not expected to detract from the mayor’s plans for the segregated cycle routes. They should provide a much more balanced and better outcome for the City and for London. Read the report for yourself here. Your considered comments are, as ever, entirely welcome. |