Forum Topic

Zebra crossings on the High Road

This topic may have been discussed before - if so, apologies.The new cycle lane down the High Road has made pedestrian crossings extremely hazardous. Is there a plan to reintroduce painted zebra crossings right across the road (not just across the vehicle part of it) from Waitrose, from Lloyds Bank, and from Snappy Snaps (and the cycle shop opposite)?I can't understand why cyclists are apparently exempt/excluded from these crossings. Surely pedestrians always have right-of-way?

Robin Knight ● 2046d37 Comments

None of those crossings you've mentioned are zebra crossings - they're Pelican crossings where users' movements are guided by the lights.What I would like to see return is the pedestrian refuge on the zebra crossings (e.g. at Tesco's, The Crown, Leyland SDM, etc) so that pedestrians have a safe space to stop when crossing, especially as more often than not, they're having to peer around a van or bus to see if there's oncoming traffic.

John Hannon ● 2046d

There has never been Zebra crossings at the places you mention.The Zebra crossing in front of The Crown goes right across the road.

Chris Lucy ● 2046d

All right - crossings for pedestrians! Have you tried to cross the road from the RC church to Lloyds or from Chestertons to Snappy Snaps or from Near Waitrose to the other side of the road since the cycle lane was installed?

Robin Knight ● 2046d

"I can't understand why cyclists are apparently exempt/excluded from these crossings."They're not exempt. The light-controlled crossings (not zebras) that you mentioned have a green phase for pedestrians while all the other lights including for the cycleway are on red.

Richard Jennings ● 2046d

That's why these new traffic lights are so tiresome for everyone, because each category of user in each direction seems to have their own individual allocation of time, plus the extra how many seconds between each option.  Before, for example, east and west bound traffic could move at the same time, including cyclists, so everything flowed much better - which I assume is what the new arrangement is intended to stop.  And before, pedestrians could judge when it was safe to cross from when the main traffic flow was on red. Not so now, as it's impossible to work out what's going on, and for the first time pedestrians are seriously expected to abide by their own lights. It'll never catch on!

Peter Evans ● 2046d

Anyone have any thoughts on the pedestrian crossings on the Chiswick/Brentford side of Kew Bridge? This was always a scary place to cross even before TfL re-imagineered it and even they had two stabs at the re-design.

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 2046d

What I find really scary is the 'mini-zebra' for pedestrians wishing to reach the bus island by the 'Police Station' stop. it is painted on the cycle lane, but perhaps many cyclists don't know it's there and ignore it. 'All you have to d is look both ways', I will be told. But if it's dark? If the bus you want is arriving and you have to be quick? I'm sure there will be a collision there soon.

Arnold Saxton ● 2046d

Nope

Simon Temple ● 2046d

Last Thursday I did a shop at M&S left with a bag of shopping in each hand, got two thirds across the nearby crossing to see a cyclist hurtling towards me, so I stopped hoping he would do the same 🙏. No chance, he just shouted at my to get out of the way but not that politely  !The refuge islands need to be reinstated asap, and cyclists need to learn the Highway Code asap.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2046d

Completely agree Lorraine. The refuges should never have been taken out. People are afraid to cross the road now, particularly if they are slow, and there is no-where to rest. The High Rd must be properly policed now and people breaking the law - cyclists and car drivers crossing zebras whilst pedestrians are on them - should be fined and points given.

Mandy Waters ● 2046d

The other stupid thing they have done is to change the surface of the cycle lane where it crosses a junction to a dull beige which is barely distinguishable from the rest.It needs to be bright yellow reflective strips to highlight the potential of a collision both to help the cyclist and motorist.

Adrian Irving ● 2045d

It's a horrible setup. More often than not, your line of sight to the other side of the road is obstructed by traffic, so you have to hope the vehicle that stopped for you will wait while you pause halfway across.Putting my cyclist helmet on, I've noted pedestrians running blindly across the cycle path to catch a bus, or treating it as an extension of the pavement when crossing the road (not at a crossing). As you say, a collision is inevitable. We've already had a cyclist knocked off their bike by a car reversing out across the cycle lanes. I've seen multiple occasions where a car has turned into CHR from a side road and ended up in the cycle lane!

John Hannon ● 2045d

I cross here from SotG to get to Sainsbury's Local.  If you wait for the lights it is impossible to cross all three carriageways in the time allowed - unless you're Usain Bolt.  These need adjusting.

Catherine Steele ● 2045d

The pedestrian phase length at these lights is probably largely dictated by the need to avoid queues on the South Circular reaching back up to Chiswick Roundabout and causing gridlock on the A4. A secondary requirement would be to reduce queueing on Kew Green. The introduction of a phase for cyclists squeezes the available time for other modes of transport. I believe it is unlikely that you will be able to get the pedestrian phase times extended.

Paul Corcoran ● 2043d

Seems simple to me - Kew Bridge all the way to King Street is just too narrow a space to cram all this in!  Revert back to admitting Bus Lanes are essential to keeping public transport alive and kicking, remove the segregated two-way cycle lane altogether, there just isn't the room for it.  Buses carry far more people than a cycle!  Other alternative would would definitely destroy the High Rd - make the whole length a pedestrian/cyclist only route.  Bugger the buses - they'll have to move elsewhere - forget delivery vans etc - not permitted.  Only in life or death situations would emergency vehicles be allowed.  All the businesses now unable to trade can be sold off and turned into homes - our Chiswick Hi Road will be no more.

Jennifer selig ● 2043d

How much longer until the trial is over? Is it a done deal that this temporary cycle lane will be removed.  It seems not only disliked, but dangerous for all, pedestrians, cyclists and motorists.

Maggie Dodge ● 2043d

The 'temporary' status of the CHR installation suggests that it should either be removed altogether or replaced by the original 'proper' scheme. It would be unsatisfactory for many reasons if we were to be left with the present half-baked, compromised and unsatisfactory arrangements.

Peter Evans ● 2043d

Is it dangerous?  There was the bike that hit the car backing into the lane a few weeks ago.  Have there been more accidents?

Ed Saper ● 2043d

Published data held by LB Hounslow shows 20 reported cycle/vehicle accidents in 5 years to 2020, basically 4 per year and many due to vehicles turning into side roads.  It is not reported whether the cyclists of the vehicle was at fault and it cannot always be assumed that it is the latter. This level of accidents on the High Road is considered a "black spot" by LB Hounslow in their justification for the C9 cycleway.  In the 5 year period traffic levels were at the normal high levels which has not been the case while the temporary cycleway has been in operation. There is certainly more potential for conflict between cyclists and turning vehicles with the cycleway in operation due to the close proximity of the cycleway and the main road carriageway, unprotected side road entries and exits and no hard or wide physical segregation of the cycleway from the vehicle lanes. An independent safety audit has concluded that the temporary arrangement creates unsafe conditions.

David Kerr ● 2043d

Thanks David.  Can you point me in the direction of the 20 cycle/vehicle accident data?  I had a look at the TFL Safety Report for CS9 - just a skim (!) - but it looks like the full design will be substantially safer than the temporary one.Most of the recommendations are based on the same risks you've stated.I expect the independent safety audit says the same - any chance you can post a link to that?I saw this article by Edward Seaton:https://hounslowcycling.org/cs9-injuries/He's got 162 cycling accidents over 12 years with 5 being bike / pedestrian collisions.  Doesn't say how many are bike / vehicle.Same website - but larger area:https://hounslowcycling.org/a315-collisions/They're suggesting that "A cyclist is injured in a collision with a motor vehicle on Chiswick High Road or King Street every 5 weeks, on average."I realise their data is to 2005-2017 and yours is 2015-2020 - but is it basically the same data and the rate has dropped substantially in the last 3 years? 

Ed Saper ● 2043d

Where is this independent safety audit David? I’ve not heard of it. It feels very much safer to me, still not zero risk, but very much safer than before which perhaps explains its increasing popularity. Also turning from Fishers onto CHR feels an order of magnitude safer. I wouldn’t have cycled with the children on CHR before.

Edward Seaton ● 2043d

Hi Ed. Information on road accidents reported to police is captured at STATS 19 data and freely available. A good visualisation of the data is on the https://www.cyclestreets.net/collisions/ website. It produces a rather disconcerting map of stars indicating road accidents and fatal road accidents. It looks rather like one of those bomb maps from WWII. Chiswick High Road appears like it’s been flown along by several squadrons of Junkers. You can click individual stars to find out how someone was hurt. Take a look at the (old) Fishers/ Dukes bit for a start.

Edward Seaton ● 2043d

EdwardThe trouble is that accidents/near misses are frequently not reported between Cyclists and Pedestrians. On Monday morning at 7.15 I walked with my 2 JR'S along Barley Mow Passage from the Business Centre towards Dukes Avenue a cyclist hurtled towards me and as it's a narrow passage I stopped and put put my dogs on very short leads, and called out for him to slow down and told him that cycling on that stretch was forbidden as per the sign erected by LBH clearly shows.His shouted abusive esponse ? I always cycle down here so F off ! Do you think that's acceptable  ?

Loraine Pemberton ● 2043d

David, I'm not sure why you consider an independent safety audit to be of any import as you told me that the temporary cycle lane would be removed by April as a result of the Bishopsgate ruling. So it has a max of 7 days lifespan remaining right?

Paul Campbell ● 2043d

Thanks Edward!  I hadn't realised this data was available.I've used the lane with my kids as well and felt pretty safe - we'd otherwise be on the pavement with bikes....or in the car.However, David's point that there are safety concerns with it must be valid - it doesn't have anything like the safety features for cyclists, pedestrians and vehicles of the full implementation.  I think the question then is whether it is better (and safer) than nothing - or more dangerous as per Maggie's point.

Ed Saper ● 2043d

I don't - he sounds like a bit of a dick to me.

Ed Saper ● 2043d

5 days left for the cycle lane David? Tick tock. Tick tock.

Paul Campbell ● 2041d

Ed regarding The comment "I think the question then is whether it is better (and safer) than nothing - or more dangerous as per Maggie's point."  Better and safer for whom - it seems to me that's just from the cyclists point of view.  What about all the hundreds more other people using C.Hi Rd?  They bring far more business to the High Rd than the odd cyclist.  Nose to tail sparsely occupied buses does not bode well either.

Jennifer selig ● 2040d

For everyone. But it is usually the cyclist who comes off worse in a collision with a car. 

Ed Saper ● 2040d

David, two more sleeps left for the cycle lane according to your prediction on when the "illegal" Cycleway 9 would be removed.Does the news of today's grant of appeal for TfL and the Mayor against the High Court's Bishopsgate ruling give you any cause to revise your prediction? You'll never get a better opportunity to wriggle out of it.

Paul Campbell ● 2037d

Must say I'm bemused that people who don't cycle in the cycle lane declare categorically that it's dangerous for cyclists, whereas the cyclists using it disagree. Odd that.

Ken Munn ● 2037d

It's a bit like burglary, Ken. I think it's a bad thing - but I've never tried it. Does not having burgled anyone make my opinion wrong?

Joanna Biddolph ● 2037d

Sheesh!

Ken Munn ● 2037d

Except, Ken, maybe the guy in the cycle lane who was hit by the car backing out at a blindspot we all knew would be created.

David Lesniak ● 2036d

Not hit by a car, hit by a car driver.

Ken Munn ● 2036d

"It's a bit like burglary, Ken. I think it's a bad thing - but I've never tried it. Does not having burgled anyone make my opinion wrong?"

Ken Munn ● 2036d

Did the driver get out of the car and throw a punch?

David Lesniak ● 2036d