Back in October, I responded to TfL’s Lambeth Bridge Northern Roundabout Consultation, criticising their plan to make cyclists and pedestrians “share” the pavement at this busy and awkward junction, and encouraging them to put in place a proper, Dutch-style junction with segregated cycle lanes.
Well, today’s my birthday, and it seems TfL have prepared a little surprise birthday present for me.
I first heard about it through a few tweets from Mark Treasure:
I then opened my emails to find this message from TfL:
Dear Sir or Madam
Thank you for responding to our consultation on the proposed early benefit scheme for cyclists at Lambeth Bridge northern roundabout. Following consultation, TfL has decided not to proceed with this scheme.
The scheme was designed to provide improvements for cyclists, whilst also allowing TfL to continue exploring further, more radical improvements to improve facilities at this location. The proposals were developed following careful analysis of casualty statistics at the roundabout and a thorough review of the current physical road layout. However, having considered responses to consultation, and following concerns voiced by Westminster City Council, we have decided not to proceed with these planned initial improvements at Lambeth Bridge northern roundabout. Instead, we will concentrate our resources on developing more substantial improvements that meet the expectations of Westminster City Council and other stakeholders.
Some of the measures suggested by respondents, such as a segregated cycle track around the outside of the roundabout with cyclist priority at slip roads, would be new features on London’s roads, and therefore require off-street trials. We have started building the infrastructure for these trials at the Transport Research Laboratory in Berkshire, and we will work with our stakeholders to ensure their views are considered as part of this work. Suggestions made as part of this and other consultations will be considered by the team planning the trials.
A summary of the consultation and TfL’s response to it can be found online at https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/streets/betterjunctions-lambethbridgenorth.
Yours sincerely
Oliver Birtill
(The full consultation report gives more details of the responses, as well as details of future proposals, and is well worth a read.)
What I find significant about this is that not only have they agreed not to make the situation worse, but they are working on off-street trials which should in future allow them to make the situation much better. On top of the (for the UK) revolutionary plans for the Bow–Stratford extension of CS2, this suggests that TfL are really listening to the voices of cyclists and experts in cycle infrastructure.
What is particularly gratifying is the feeling that we spoke, and TfL listened to us. As a cyclist in London, and indeed as an ordinary person in our modern plutocracy, you get inured to the attrition of powerlessness, so to find that just for once your voice is being heard is like seeing a shaft of sunlight through a storm cloud.
It is also instructive to see how the consultation report accounts for the responses given: for each element of the scheme, the responses for, partially for, and against are added, but those that do not mention this feature are not taken into account. This suggests that in responding to a consultation like this, it is well worth specifically mentioning that you support a particular feature—raised zebras, for example—, rather than just mentioning your criticisms.
So, some final thoughts:
- Respond to these consultations: we everyday people on bikes will be listened to as well as the experts.
- Be specific, cover all points in the proposal, and be positive about the good points: this will make it into the report.
- If we keep up the work on this, there is every chance we can make London’s roads safer and more pleasant for cyclists, pedestrians and even drivers.
This final point is vital: we must remember why we are doing this. First, 14 cyclists died on London’s roads last year, and hundreds were seriously injured. This has to change. Second, for cycling to take off as a serious means of transport around this city, we need to make it pleasant and convenient for everyone, and we can only do this with infrastructure that respects the needs of ordinary people on bikes; today’s news suggests that this has just got a step closer.
Matthew Butt 