Ideas Board

We need separated cycle lane in both locations, not just painted lane. People need to see that it is safe. There is also alternative (tow path)along the canal from Alperton. Neglected and in bad condition. Could you please remeber about that one as well?

Look at other tfl consultations to decide what to consult on, eg Park Lane. Cover the expected impact on bike riding to schools, how bikes will be separated from lorries, how it will take cars off the road and ease congestion, which means faster bus journeys which take cars off the road, cover the ease of wayfinding for cyclists (don't force cyclists onto sidestreets with many turns: cyclists don't have navigation like cars do), explain how many more people will now be a safe 10 minutes from a tube station, explain where dangerous junctions are today and how they will be improved for acitve travel. To encourage participation, put posters with large qr codes on lamp posts along the route for pedestrians, cyclists and car passengers to find.

Please don't build a two-lane cycle lane on one side of the road, please build one-way segregated cycle lanes on each side of the road. They also must continue at junctions with priority given to cyclists and pedestrians crossing. Dutch-Style junctions and roundabouts are ok however do not force two-stage right turns with cycle traffic lights - it's proven in holland that single stage right turns are possible if cycles use the natural priority given by Rule H2 of the highway code - even if traffic has a green light at a junction they should still give-way at an off-set crossing point without lights. Please also remove the dog-leg pedestrian islands common across the UK and give pedestrians and cyclists the option to cross multi-lane roads in a single light cycle.

It would be good to know more about timescales and the dates of the next update in this scheme, as it seems to have paused several times, and dates are helpful to know whether things are on track and still taking place, or whether the plans have been ditched or are going nowhere. Promoting the consultation: please contact Brent cycling campaign who would be able to spread information about the consultation through their network of followers, similarly Mums for Lungs too. Harlesden Neighbourhood Forum have a dedicated air quality representative and councillor Mary Mitchell is Brent Council's active travel champion - they would both be good people to contact. It may also be worth contacting bike shops in the area to display posters or information about the consultation, and post details up at bus stops and tube stations too. There are also community noticeboards around Harlesden town centre and local parks where notices for the public can be displayed - these might be a good location too (though these noticeboards are often overlooked so the information would have to be bold and clear). I doubt whether it would be useful to use social media or 'next-door' forums to publicise the scheme as any 'normal' question or consultation like this has become highly politicised and ends up being 'complaints corner', rapidly going off-topic into conspiracy theories. So you may want to avoid that. Regarding what you should ask, it would be interesting to hear about people's challenges with active travel in this area are at present, and what prevents and what the blockers to making more of it happen. It would be interesting to know what people would do and how they would react should there be more active travel opportunities and how it would affect their lives (for better or worse I suppose). I feel these sort of consultations tend to give very binary responses of support, whereas hearing new cycling routes would make it quicker to get to work, or there's worries over delays to public transport because of road changes would give you some ideas on what issues there might be with the scheme to address them and iron those out - making it more successful in the long run. more descriptive answers also gives you an idea of how 'bothered' people are - someone could be negative about the scheme, but not actually mind whether it happens or not as they wouldn't use it. This would be recorded as an 'against' in the consultation, presumably? Other questions to ask: what active travel routes or infrastructure do people use already? I fear people who design the scheme may forget the (meagre) facilities we already have such as Church Path cycle route, Cyclehoop repair stands and bike hangars, pedestrianised zones, plus walks through our high quality local parks and canal routes. I wonder if this might throw up some 'hidden gems' of infrastructure and provide some options you could easily build into the scheme to make it more effective and have greater impacts? Also: what routes do people need and use already, and how they manage these, and ideas for routes through this area. It's all well and good looking at maps and traffic flows in the area, but like above, people have the knowledge of the area and can help identify roads that are suitable and pleasant for walking and cycling. For instance, if you are planning cycle routes through Harlesden Town centre to take people towards central London and Notting Hill, it looks obvious to go down Craven Park Rd and the High Street. However, going along Church Path, Roundwood Park and a potential Quietway along Doyle Gardens, you could be towards Kensal Rise and Ladbroke Grove without seeing much traffic by using routes closed to motor vehicles. But this may not be obvious from just looking at maps, and local knowledge could be really useful to identify steep roads, crowded roads and narrow pinch points, poorly maintained pavements, busy periods etc. Please bear this in mind! Good luck with the scheme. We need it.