Hackney Cycling Campaign response to the proposed changes to A10 Stamford Hill and Clapton Common junction
· This junction sees tens of thousands of motor vehicles daily, including hundreds of HGVs and the junction has one of the highest collision rates in the borough.
· In our view, the proposed scheme prioritises capacity for private motor vehicles, at the expense of cycle safety and comfort. This scheme is considered to be unambitious, ineffective and outdated.
· The large junction envelope, with six lanes of motor traffic on some of the alignments can comfortably accommodate protected space for people cycling without the loss of bus-priority or significant loss of pedestrian space.
· We reject the proposed scheme and ask that an alternative, which allows people cycling to move through the junction in their own time and/or space, is considered instead.
The Stamford Hill Broadway junction, located at the boundary between Hackney and Haringey on the A10, is dominated by through motor vehicle traffic. The junction envelope is very large and it is the site of numerous collisions.
The group has traditionally supported the removal of plug islands /slip roads and the squaring up of the junction to lower vehicle speeds and provide easier crossing for pedestrians. It was suggested that the space available at the junction could be used to support additional commercial activity.
This junction sees tens of thousands of motor vehicles daily, including hundreds of HGVs and, as stated in the consultation overview, the junction has one of the highest collision rates in the borough. Indeed there has been more than one serious collision in the last few weeks.
In our view, the proposed scheme prioritises capacity for private motor vehicles, at the expense of cycle safety and comfort. Whilst we regard the removal of two slip roads as a minor improvement, and welcome a trial of continuous footways across two side roads, in the main, this scheme is considered to be unambitious, ineffective and outdated.
We consider Advanced Stop Lines completely insufficient to make junctions safer: they do not protect people cycling from left-turning motor vehicles when the lights are green; additionally, Advanced Stop Lines offer no protection to being hit from behind by drivers. Right-turning cyclists will be expected to cross multiple busy motor traffic lanes and risk ‘right hooks’.
Having considered the proposals using the Junction Assessment Tool, we believe that, of the 12 possible movements, at least 8, and possibly all 12 would be categorised as ‘red’. All straight ahead movements have major left and right hook risks, and all right turn movements involve cyclists having to cross multiple lanes of motor traffic. Possibly the four left turn movements could be classed as ‘amber’, just about, but none would be green. The junction would then score between 0/24 (if all movements are ‘red’) and 4/24 (if more generously, 4 of the 12 movements are marked as ‘amber’).
Furthermore, the proposal scores a number of ‘critical fails’ using the Cycling Level of Service assessment. These include: ‘Heavy streams of turning traffic cut across main cycling stream’, ‘>1,000 vehicles/hour at peak (cyclists not separated)’, ‘Frequent, close interaction with HGVs’.
Finally we object to the staggered pedestrian crossings, and the additional parking located on the pavement.
The large junction envelope, with up to six lanes of motor traffic can comfortably accommodate protected space for people cycling without the loss of bus-priority or significant loss of pedestrian space. We suggest that an alternative is considered, specifically one which allows people cycling to move through the junction in their own time and/or space.
Improvements are being made to junctions across London, which provide safe space for cycling. For instance, we understand that Waltham Forest are proposing ‘single stage’ crossings for cyclists and pedestrians, with ‘green scramble junctions’ in their scheme along Lea Bridge Road, and we would like to see such designs given consideration in a modified plan for the Stamford Hill Broadway junction. As a minimum, we would expect JAT and CLoS assessments to be carried out on any new junction design (indeed, in our view, these should be carried out as a matter of routine for all schemes). Moreover, we would like to see any modified scheme take account of, and link to, any alterations to Seven Sisters Road, (which was recently the subject of a separate recent consultation). In particular, we would welcome protected cycleways running along Amhurst Park to Seven Sisters Road and Finsbury Park.
The group therefore rejects the scheme as proposed, because it is unambitious and it does not provide a safe and comfortable environment for cycling. We request that the scheme is completely redesigned.