May 20, 2024
  • 9:06 pm FREE Cycling Activities and rides
  • 1:46 pm Draft Brent Active Travel Implementation Plan 2024-2029
  • 3:24 pm Wembley Central to Willesden Junction Cycleway: A Significant Opportunity for Better Walking and Cycling in Brent
  • 6:59 pm Wembley to Willesden Junction walking and cycling changes
  • 10:00 pm AGM 2023
  • 12:31 pm Climate Ambassadors

This is the response of Brent Cycling Campaign to this consultation. We are the local group of the London Cycling Campaign in Brent and represent directly around 200 members who live in the borough. We also attempt to represent the interests of all who cycle, and would like to cycle, in Brent.

We do not agree with this scheme, as, though we support the idea of making these roads a 20mph zone, we do not think the measures proposed will be effective enough in slowing vehicles, and we believe they will create more problems for cyclists.

The London Cycle Design Standards (LCDS) does not recommend speed cushions for use where people may be cycling. It warns further to avoid situations where three cushions are aligned so as to induce motorists to straddle the central cushion, leading them into the path of oncoming cyclists, or situations where the gaps would place cyclists in the door zone of parked cars.

The propsed implementation on Stag Lane, with three speed cushions in most locations and unrestricted parking, is likely to lead to both these issues arising.

We strongly oppose the use of speed cushion traffic-calming on this road. We also strongly oppose the addition of more central islands on this road. These cause conflict and intimidation for cyclists when motorists overtake just in advance of them, or even at them, forcing cyclists towards the kerb and passing with dangerously small clearance. Such islands do not provide priority for pedestrians crossing, and should be replaced with zebra crossings.

We are concerned that the plans supplied are based on incorrect data: they do not show all the existing traffic islands:

(1) An island just north of the junction with Princes Avenue is not shown;
(2) An island just south of the junction with Princes Avenue is not shown;
(3) An island just north of the junction with Goldsmiths Lane is not shown;
(4) An island by the Oshwal Ekta Centre (incorrectly called ‘Jewish Community Centre’ on the plan) is not shown.

These islands, in conjunction with parking, already create a dangerous obstacle course for cyclists. They should be removed.

The measures we would recommend for Stag Lane and Roe Green would be:

1) Speed tables at junctions, similar to the speed table already in place at the junction of Stag Lane and Princes Avenue;

2) Single-stage zebra crossings on speed tables, in preference to island refuges;

3) Tightening and re-designing junctions with side roads. In particular the following should be addressed:

A) The configuration of the Mollison Way / Stag Lane junction is higly dangerous for pedestrians. It is almost impossible to cross the mouth of Mollison Way because of fast traffic swerving in from the northern part of Stag Lane, traffic from Mollison Way accellerating into Stag Lane (northbound) without giving way, poor sight lines, and lack of any pedestrain crossing facilities. In addition, the canting-up of Stag Lane on the curve some time in the past has left a weird, messy arrangement of double railings on the west (LB Harrow) side.

B) The configuration of the Stag Lane / Holyrood Gardens junction is dangerous for pedestrians. It encourages vehicles speeding and not giving way to pedestrains at the junction: pedestrains have to have 360 degree vision to safely negociate these curves. Also the placement of the bus stop on an island is unsatisfactory. We suggest one of the branches of the junction should be removed, and the other re-aligned, with the bus stop moved.

C) The configuration of the Stag Lane / Beverley Drive / Holmstall Avenue junction is dangerous for northbound cyclists. It is very hard to avoid getting ‘cut up’ by traffic from the southern part of Stag Lane turning left into Beverley Drive because of the shape of the junction.

In addition to all this, as the concerns this scheme is supposed to be addressing include ‘high volumes of traffic’, the scheme should be focussed on reducing traffic volumes by removing rat-running through the area, both north-south and east-west. In this connection it should be noted how:

  • Holmstall Avenue to Beverley Drive is a major rat-run between the A5 and Queensbury;
  • Carlisle Road is a rat-run between the A5 and Stag Lane;
  • Holyrood Gardens and Mollison Way are rat-runs between Stag Lane and Queensbury;
  • Holyrood Gardens and Beverley Drive both connect Stag Lane to the same roundabout at the junction with North Way – it is inappropriate they are both open to through-traffic;
  • The Stag Lane / Roe Green corridor itself is widely being used as an inappropriate alternative to the A5 and A4006 (Kingsbury Road) by heavy vehicles. At the very least there should be a system to enforce the lorry ban on Stag Lane.

Viewing a wider area, it is regrettable that a rat-run between this area and Wembley still exists via Slough Lane and the north section of Salmon Street – the through-traffic using this tiny road should be re-directed to Fryent Way (A4140) or Church Lane (B454). A good way to achieve this would be to create a ‘No entry’ to Slough Lane at the junction with Kingsbury Road. This should somewhat reduce the traffic on Stag Lane and Roe Green as well.

Overall, we cannot support this scheme because the measures proposed are too weak to lower speeds significantly or reduce traffic volumes, and they will create additional problems for people cycling. We would support a 20mph zone scheme with better measures.



This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.