Last night, at the invitation of a vocal Harleyford Road
resident, I attended a meeting between a handful of residents and Transport for London
about Cycling Superhighway 5 between New Cross Gate and Victoria via Vauxhall
Bridge.
TfL proposes to turn one of the three lanes of one-way motor
traffic on Harleyford Road, between the Vauxhall end of the cricket ground and
the Royal Vauxhall Tavern, into a two-way cycling track. A number of properties
face onto the road and some residents have concerns about the proposed track.
The meeting was for Transport for London to present their
current plans following a previous meeting about a year ago. Members of the
Cycling Superhighway design and consultation team were there, and, lest there
be any doubt that TfL are taking this seriously, Andrew Gilligan, the Mayor’s
Cycling Commissioner, and Nigel Hardy, TfL’s Head of Capital Development came
to meet the half-dozen residents.
For those who don’t know the area, Harleyford Road is a TfL
controlled strategic ‘red-route’ that runs up from the Oval towards Vauxhall
Bridge. As this map, from this great resource, of 1831 shows, it has been a major road carrying people and goods between south and north London since the first Vauxhall Bridge
was built in 1812.
In Victorian times I imagine it was frequently congested;
noisy due to the clatter of horse shoes and rumble of wagon wheels; liberally
splattered in horse poo and pee. The coming of the motor vehicle, which could
do in one trip what it previously too six horses and carts to do, may have seemed
a huge relief to the residents at that time.
As time went by however motor vehicle numbers and trips
soared resulting in the noisy, polluted, race track that is Vauxhall as we know it today.
At first glance one may doubt the sanity of anyone who
chooses to live on such a motorway, but the traffic will presumably have
altered to a degree over the years (e.g. I believe the red-route controls were
implemented in 1998), and the large houses are centrally located, well
connected to public transport, and cheaper than ones facing onto a quieter
street. And there are off-peak times
The meeting was shouty and jumped around from topic to topic
quite erratically, but I will try to capture the points that were discussed and
some comments and suggestions I have. It’s pertinent to note that all the
residents present seemed to live on the side of the road on which the cycle
track is proposed to be placed (the right hand lane in the photo above, heading towards Vauxhall). One stated that she is a fair-weather cyclist.
Loading and Unloading
– At present the red-route status means that, according to a resident, you
cannot load/unload between 7am and 7pm Monday to Saturday. The concern is
access to hearses, ambulances, refuse trucks, fire engines, supermarket
delivery vehicles, cars used by the infirm and removal lorries during those
hours if one of three motor traffic lanes has been replaced by a two-way cycle
lane.
TfL pointed out that the existing loading bays that have
been provided for most loading/unloading in Durham Street would remain. I
pointed out even if vehicles stopped in one lane that would still leave a motor
traffic lane available going in the same direction for motor vehicles to use. I
also suggested that an off-peak loading bay on Harleyford Road would be worthy
of consideration by TfL, which they took on board as a proposal. I took this photo in the early afternoon today
and you can see that there is no shortage of space despite a broken down car.
A further concern was the ability of people to cross a low
barrier between the road and cycle lane that will prevent drivers from parking
on the cycle lane. I suggested some wheelchair width gaps – insufficient to get
a vehicle into – would permit this. TfL seemed happy to explore this.
An additional issue was that people loading/unloading on
this road (rather than in the Durham Street bay provided) would have to cross a
two-way cycle lane to reach the vehicle. Apparently cyclists travel at 30mph
(and presumably are impervious to injury in a collision as well as being beyond
Olympic racing status) so that would present great difficulties. A TfL observation
that the peak hour tidal flow tended to be in one-direction appeared to be lost
in the general hubbub.
The problems that would arise in the future from two-way
cycling in the future were felt likely to be the same as the current ones,
where people ride their cycles against the traffic on the pavement, the
difference being that they would be
riding on a separate track instead of the pavement.
Pedestrian/Cyclist Interaction
– Some people are rushing from A to C, through B where some locals are
pootling around. Regardless of form of transport there can be conflict in this
circumstance and excellent design plays a massive role in reducing this.
The underlying issue in Vauxhall is how to successfully
balance the needs of a transport ‘corridor’ with a place where people live. We
must not end up with barren streets as exemplified a little further down
Harleyford Road by the sullen wall along the Oval cricket ground. TfL’s urban
designers have done good work in producing the draft Nine Elms cycling
strategy, but there was no indication in the plans presented last night of
place-making being considered here. For
example, could trees be used at places to mark the divide between the road and
the cycle lane, and could a more harmonious colour than blue be used for the
lane. Ultimately, can the movement of goods and people be so improved that
Harleyford Road can become a quiet, pleasant, safe and spacious boulevard
through which thousands of people move?
Inconsiderate road users, regardless of their transport
mode, need to be encouraged to behave differently. Design plays a huge part in
this, but so does education. I hope that
local primary schools St Anne’s and Wyvil will be offering cycle training,
which addresses this, to their pupils this year in preparation for the gradual introduction
of their new routes to school.
Access to Driveways
– There are a handful of permitted driveways and residents are concerned about
accessing or leaving them given a segregated cycle lane to cross. TfL said that
access would be maintained.
Some residents felt it was most unlikely that there would be
a gap in the flow of people riding bicycles sufficient to allow them to turn
into or out of their drive and asked for proof in the form of an existing
example. TfL cited Cable Street which has had such a cycle lane for over a
decade.
Putting out Rubbish
– I don’t know where residents are currently required to put their bins out for
collection. I presume on the pavement. The pavement will remain in place,
albeit with fewer people riding bikes on it. Anyway, it’s a concern that TfL
and Lambeth will need to ensure is checked out.
Air Pollution – It
was argued that providing dedicated space for people to ride bikes may increase
air pollution because where there were three lanes of motor traffic there will
now be only two. TfL said that traffic light phasing would be used to manage
this. No benefits of more people cycling rather than driving or being driven and
the knock on reduction in air pollution were raised.
Banned right turn
from Harleyford Road to Kennington Lane – a small number of drivers
currently make this right turn. To facilitate the efficient, direct and safe
passage of the existing and forecast number of people riding bicycles, TfL
propose that the few motorists make this small part of their journey around the
existing gyratory. I think that it was to do with this point that a resident
suggested it would be a better idea here to maintain the right turn for the few
and a good idea if the thousands of people riding bikes dismounted and walked
their bikes across the road.
My Conclusion
Residents last night didn’t cite any potential benefits such
as cleaner air; the motor traffic being further away from their front door
reducing noise and serious collision danger; a fitter population reducing their
NHS liability; or enhanced mobility options for adults and children in the houses
thanks to a child-usable cycle lane outside the front door. It seemed unlikely
that any of the owners expect a cycle lane replacing a lane of motor traffic
will increase the value of the houses.
Change can be threatening and it is easy to anticipate real
or imaginary problems and focus on these.
This is not to say that the matters that residents raised
were trivial and of no matter. Some are real concerns and, especially at this
early stage of London ‘going Dutch’, they need to be heard and responded to. A
particular concern of mine is that cycle lanes do not become loading bays like
the one outside Tesco on the gyratory, and so sensible loading/unloading
provision needs to be designed in from the outset.
Change is achieved incrementally – a cycling superhighway
here is likely to be a step towards a much better future both for residents and
for those who pass through. I am gratified that the residents are questioning
the process and that Transport for London at a senior level are engaging with
them.
I look forward to seeing pensioners and primary school
children riding through Vauxhall alongside the ladies and gentlemen who commute to work.
