Forum Topic

Petition to get rid of cycle lanes King St/Chiswick High Road

Reposted as title  from OP was vaguePetition to get rid of cycle lanes King St/Chiswick High Roadhttps://chng.it/WcfTxQ6YrQMight be of interest might be contentious.

Tessa Russell ● 1683d16 Comments

Might be contentious 😂

Maggie Dodge ● 1683d

This might sound better, petition To get rid of cyclists inHammersmith and Chiswick

James Dow ● 1682d

Cyclists are welcome, entitled to cycle. Just not at the expense, expense being the operative word, of everyone else.

Maggie Dodge ● 1682d

Two things you should bear in mind.A petition submitted before the cycleway is fully implemented will be ignored as part of the evidence submitted during the trialLiam Downer-Sanderson, who describes himself as a member of the Conservative Team in Ravenscourt Park, and is the originator of this petition, says that the cycleway has been imposed by a Labour Council, neglecting to say that this is with the enthusiastic support and ample funding of a Conservative government.Don't get distracted by these petitions. Wait until the cycleway is fully operational and then make a substantive comment to the local authority.

Francis Rowe ● 1681d

Sorry, Francis. I disagree.We have seen changes made to the cycle lane that do not abide by the drawings and LBH falling over itself trying to explain it. How many times has this happened? Surely it will continue if left unchecked. I'd say continue to be a bee in the LBH bonnet. If we do as you say, it will be far too late with far too much revenue wasted. One reason why TfL fares are being increased if you were to join the dots.

David Lesniak ● 1681d

Speaking of wasted money. What happened to the £40k collected by the OneChiswick anti-cycling task force?

Will Watson ● 1681d

Fair to complain if public money is wasted, but do what you want with your own money!Any funds not used go to Chiswick charities.Yawn, OneChiswick isn't anti cycling.

Nick Jenkins ● 1681d

David, if you read the officer reports on previous feedback exercises for ETOs anything submitted before the measure was operational was disregarded. The money has already been allocated and the way the public sector works that is never going to be clawed back.On the other hand if there has been deviation from any designs submitted with the ETO you could crack on with an objection because its not dependent on the operation of the scheme.

Francis Rowe ● 1681d

"We have seen changes made to the cycle lane that do not abide by the drawings"Presumably you mean the drawings of the revised design that is currently being worked on?  David, could you give an example of such a change that has concerned you?

Richard Jennings ● 1680d

Sure, Richard.The pavement outside the Best Western is specified to be 2.4 metres wide.It has been built at 2 meters wide. That is an overall reduction of more than 2/3 the original pavement width.How many other examples are there?Why conduct a consultation based on false information?

David Lesniak ● 1680d

The information for the 'consultation' won't actually be false because it is meant to be a feedback operation on how it is working when live. Therefore it would probably not have any effect to say that the plans differ from the reality but you could object on the basis of the pavement being to narrow at that point if you can come up with good arguments why this is the case.It's not clear if you are asking us if there are other examples of inaccuracy in the design and this is the only one you have found or if you have other examples to share. Just one error, even quite a significant one such as this one, is probably not going to provide and leverage to get the scheme stopped.

Francis Rowe ● 1680d

I've asked Hanif Khan and Jefferson Nwokeoma for a tally of inconsistencies. I've never asked for anything to be stopped, merely to adhere to specifications. The pavement in that location now is unfit for the Chiswick demographic. It is ostensibly a one-way path where you have to step aside to let others pass, particularly if they are walking abreast or with a pram loaded with bags (and child, of course) or those with dogs. All valid. Just now they can't co-exist.

David Lesniak ● 1680d

https://www.idgo.ac.uk/design_guidance/factsheets/width_footways_footpaths.htm

Guy Lambert ● 1679d

Hi Guy -Nice to see you're paying attention. Please could you tell us all if the garbage trucks in the cycle lane is a good idea? You chose to put the grit bins on the south side of the High Road vs the north side so it is inevitable the system was doomed from the beginning.As for guidance vs actual specifications being ignored, I'll leave that to you to square the circle when contract terms are not met.

David Lesniak ● 1679d

Wondering if you're read your own reference, Guy. I know a lot of times people like you don't and then get extra irritated when people like me quote from it. A bit like this:"It suggests that in lightly used streets, the minimum unobstructed width for pedestrians should generally be 2000mm, and that is areas of higher pedestrian flow the quality of the walking experience can deteriorate unless sufficient width is provided"Raise your hand if you think CHR is a lightly-used street?No? I thought not.Plenty of other interesting bits in that information, Guy, all of which go ignored by LBH when implementing these measures.It always seems a bit like the doctor telling you a glass of red per day is fine whilst they open a third bottle just for themselves.

David Lesniak ● 1679d

Yep.  And let’s not forget the recommended minimum width is the unobstructed width ie not including  lampposts, street furniture, trees etc etc.  Does the design (either as planned or delivered) take that into account?

Marie Power ● 1679d