diamond geezer

 Thursday, January 19, 2012

Last week TfL announced they'd be making cycling-friendly improvements at the Bow Roundabout. Nothing too intrusive, they said, because they didn't want any "knock-on disruption" which would lead to "significant additional road queues on the east and westbound approaches". A couple of potential options have been proposed, each supposedly to aid cyclists' safe progress. Yesterday I looked at option 1. Today, let's look at option 2.
Reducing the Bow flyover from two traffic lanes to one in both directions, with new dedicated cycle lanes.
On the face of it, this sounds like a great idea. Allow cyclists safe passage across the Bow Flyover, and then they won't have to go anywhere near the killer Bow Roundabout. Indeed, it seems that's what the majority of cyclists do already. According to TfL, "Currently around 60 per cent of all cyclists that travel through the area use the flyover, which provides a straight line from Bow Road to Stratford High Street." That's a serious indictment of current cycling policy hereabouts. TfL and their friends at Barclays have spent thousands of pounds adding Cycle Superhighway infrastructure to the Bow Roundabout, yet most cyclists deliberately choose to completely avoid it.

There would seem to be plenty of room across the Bow Flyover to create a dedicated segregated cycle lane. Eastbound the two lanes of normal traffic could easily be cut to one - there are rarely sufficient vehicles to justify two lanes, and the narrowing might slow down speeding cars a bit. Westbound there's already only one lane of traffic, so shifting it across for a new cycle lane shouldn't be a problem. Some cyclists might be put off by the incline, but it's not that severe, merely atypical for contour-free east London. Still sounds like a great idea, But, alas, there is a majorly impractical problem at either end.

The Bow Flyover veers off from the right hand lane of traffic, whereas the existing cycle lanes run to the left. This means, for any cycling improvement to be truly safe, some means has to be found of linking the two together across all the intermediate lanes. And that's not easy, when TfL's express desire is not to hold up the flow of traffic for other road users. At the moment 60% of cyclists are negotiating this lane change by themselves, pulling out diagonally in front of cars and buses and lorries, and risking life and limb in the process. It looks bloody dangerous to me, watching from the pavement, and if the flyover is to be the new safe route then it can't continue.
Traffic signals could be installed at either end of the flyover to make access safer for cyclists.
TfL's proposal is for four additional sets of traffic lights, one at each end of each side of the flyover. They'd be toucan crossings that only work when a cyclist presses the button, which means no chance of sailing through without stopping. I'd imagine this'll be especially annoying when riding (wheeee!) down the far side of the flyover, speeding downhill and then having to stop at the bottom to change the lights. But that's not the really stupid thing. The really stupid thing is TfL claiming they want to avoid "significant additional road queues on the east and westbound approaches", and then installing four new sets of traffic lights.

If option 2 goes ahead, one of the new sets of traffic lights will be installed here on the eastbound approach to the flyover. Cyclists will get to wait at a new toucan crossing, roughly where the bike is painted, then ride out diagonally to reach the end of the flyover. Other traffic using the flyover won't be halted - the lights won't affect them. But buses, cars and lorries attempting to reach the roundabout will be halted, approximately 100 metres after the last traffic lights (pedestrian crossing, Bow Church) and approximately 150 metres before the next (traffic lights, Bow Roundabout). It may be unintentional, but this cycling improvement adds further delays for the motorist and bus passenger, possibly as bad as installing a special cycling phase at the roundabout proper.

On the far side of the flyover, the new set of traffic lights would be just beyond Marshgate Lane, which is the main entrance to the Olympic Park. It'll have to be designed in conjunction with the existing set of traffic lights, but that's not going to be in any way efficient and will result in slowing down all traffic. The third set of lights would be across on the westbound approach to the flyover, this time narrowing the carriageway to one lane rather than two, which won't help smooth the traffic flow either. And back over on the Bow side of the flyover, still westbound, would be the fourth and final set. Again, these would interrupt traffic flow 100 metres after the previous lights (Bow Roundabout) and 150 metres before the next (pedestrian crossing, Bow Church). In total there are already six sets of traffic lights in the half mile from the Bow Flyover to Bow Road station - this new scheme would add a seventh.

So that's option 2. A safely segregated ride over the flyover for cyclists. But also four new sets of traffic lights at either end to slow down the traffic. And still every possibility that cyclists won't opt to pause and push the button, but will instead continue to divert across the traffic to reach the flyover as 60% of them do now. Oh, and still absolutely bugger all to help us local pedestrians cross safely. Sorry, I'm still not impressed. Two substandard options, both falling short of accessible practicality, are no success at all.

» TfL consultation - Bow roundabout
» TfL press release- design proposals to further improve cycle safety at Bow roundabout
» Plan showing potential design for dedicated cycle lanes on Bow flyover

<< click for Newer posts

click for Older Posts >>

click to return to the main page

...or read more in my monthly archives
Jan19  Feb19  Mar19  Apr19  May19
Jan18  Feb18  Mar18  Apr18  May18  Jun18  Jul18  Aug18  Sep18  Oct18  Nov18  Dec18
Jan17  Feb17  Mar17  Apr17  May17  Jun17  Jul17  Aug17  Sep17  Oct17  Nov17  Dec17
Jan16  Feb16  Mar16  Apr16  May16  Jun16  Jul16  Aug16  Sep16  Oct16  Nov16  Dec16
Jan15  Feb15  Mar15  Apr15  May15  Jun15  Jul15  Aug15  Sep15  Oct15  Nov15  Dec15
Jan14  Feb14  Mar14  Apr14  May14  Jun14  Jul14  Aug14  Sep14  Oct14  Nov14  Dec14
Jan13  Feb13  Mar13  Apr13  May13  Jun13  Jul13  Aug13  Sep13  Oct13  Nov13  Dec13
Jan12  Feb12  Mar12  Apr12  May12  Jun12  Jul12  Aug12  Sep12  Oct12  Nov12  Dec12
Jan11  Feb11  Mar11  Apr11  May11  Jun11  Jul11  Aug11  Sep11  Oct11  Nov11  Dec11
Jan10  Feb10  Mar10  Apr10  May10  Jun10  Jul10  Aug10  Sep10  Oct10  Nov10  Dec10 
Jan09  Feb09  Mar09  Apr09  May09  Jun09  Jul09  Aug09  Sep09  Oct09  Nov09  Dec09
Jan08  Feb08  Mar08  Apr08  May08  Jun08  Jul08  Aug08  Sep08  Oct08  Nov08  Dec08
Jan07  Feb07  Mar07  Apr07  May07  Jun07  Jul07  Aug07  Sep07  Oct07  Nov07  Dec07
Jan06  Feb06  Mar06  Apr06  May06  Jun06  Jul06  Aug06  Sep06  Oct06  Nov06  Dec06
Jan05  Feb05  Mar05  Apr05  May05  Jun05  Jul05  Aug05  Sep05  Oct05  Nov05  Dec05
Jan04  Feb04  Mar04  Apr04  May04  Jun04  Jul04  Aug04  Sep04  Oct04  Nov04  Dec04
Jan03  Feb03  Mar03  Apr03  May03  Jun03  Jul03  Aug03  Sep03  Oct03  Nov03  Dec03
 Jan02  Feb02  Mar02  Apr02  May02  Jun02  Jul02 Aug02  Sep02  Oct02  Nov02  Dec02 

eXTReMe Tracker
jack of diamonds
Life viewed from London E3

» email me
» follow me on twitter
» follow the blog on Twitter
» follow the blog on RSS

my flickr photostream