A new consultation is out on changes to Cable St, including some improvements to Cycle Superhighway 3. Whilst we would like to see the scheme go further, there are some good proposals here, in particular a major improvement to the confusing junction with Sutton St and a new parallel pedestrian/cyclist zebra crossing and contraflow cycle lane at King David Lane.
We would like to see as many users of CS3 as possible reply to this, supporting the good stuff but asking the borough to go further in creating a low-traffic neighbourhood around Cable St. We have put together a suggested response below. Your response is likely to have the most impact you go to the consultation page and scroll down to the bottom to fill in the webform (and it’ll have even more impact if you put the text sections into your own words), but if you are in a hurry you could just email the suggested response to towerhamlets.consultation@projectcentre.co.uk as that should still count (just make sure you include your name and address).
The consultation closes this Sunday (21 January).
SUGGESTED RESPONSE:
Question 1
Not sure.
Question 2
It is not clear that banning vehicles from entering Martha St from Watney St will necessarily reduce traffic in this area, as under these plans Tarling St will remain open for eastbound vehicles. Watney St has very high pedestrian flows and would benefit enormously from a significant decrease in motor vehicle movements. I therefore ask for a more ambitious approach here to reduce traffic on Watney St: the streets around Watney St could be made no-through roads to motor vehicles with the aim of keeping through traffic on Commercial Rd, and Watney St itself could be made walking and cycling only (with out-of-hours access for deliveries).
If this banned turn does go ahead, I ask that there is an exemption for cyclists.
Question 3
Agree.
Question 4
I broadly support the pedestrian improvements here. However, I ask that the pedestrian-only zebra crossing outside Shadwell station is changed to a parallel pedestrian/cyclist zebra crossing to allow convenient cycling access between CS3 and Dellow St. I am also concerned that, assuming the newly one-way Dellow St permits contraflow cycling, the widened footway at the junction with Cable St will increase the risk of head on cyclist/motor vehicle conflict. A pedestrian refuge set into Dellow St with a contraflow cycle lane running behind it would offer similar benefits to pedestrians whilst avoiding this problem.
Question 5
Not sure.
Question 6
Agree.
Question 7
Given that the Dellow St – Lowood St – Bewley St loop is already access-only, it is not clear how making these streets one-way would necessarily achieve the objective of reducing traffic. If this one-way scheme is to go ahead, these streets should permit contraflow cycling.
I strongly support the replacement of gates with bollards at the end of Dellow St to improve walking and cycling permeability. This also underlines the need for Dellow St in particular to permit two-way cycling, in order that the full benefits of this improved cycling link are realised. I ask that other similar gates on estate roads in the vicinity are considered for replacement by bollards, to improve cycling permeability across the area. I also ask that the link from the end of Dellow St to Wapping is considered for improvement for cycling, including the possible conversion of the crossing on The Highway to a toucan crossing.
Question 8
Not sure.
Question 9
It is not clear how this proposal will necessarily reduce motor traffic in the area, as Martha St will remain open for westbound vehicles. Similarly to question 2, I ask for more ambitious measures to reduce traffic in and around Watney St.
If this banned turn does go ahead, I ask that there is an exemption for cyclists.
Question 10
Agree.
Question 11
–
Question 12
Agree.
Question 13
Agree.
Question 14
I strongly support the proposed pedestrian and cyclist priority over Sutton St, as the priorities at this junction are currently confusing and counter-intuitive.
I strongly support the proposed parallel zebra crossing of Cable St and a contraflow cycle lane on King David Lane. I suggest that to minimise cyclist/pedestrian conflict on King David Lane, demarcation blocks should be installed to separate the contraflow cycle lane from pedestrian space, and the cycle lane should be painted a different colour from the pavement. I also suggest that King David Lane should be subject to some form of traffic management scheme (perhaps a bus gate, or a banned turn from The Highway) to reduce motor vehicle movements in King David Lane itself and also on Cable St.
Question 15
Cable St and its environs are currently dominated by motor vehicles, with a great deal of antisocial and dangerous driving. Given that only 38% of households in the local area have a car, it seems likely that many of these vehicles constitute through traffic. To build on these proposals, I would support the introduction of a more extensive traffic management scheme in order to make the entire area between The Highway and Commercial Rd access-only to motor vehicles. This approach would be hugely beneficial to local residents, pedestrians, and cyclists using CS3.
Several of the proposed interventions would increase car parking spaces. This would make it easier to drive to and from the area and thus contradicts the overall aim of reducing motor traffic. I ask that, where proposed changes lead to additional kerbside space being made available, this space should be used to install bike hangars, as there is currently very little secure residents’ bike parking in the area.