Forum Topic

C9 not safe for pedestrians

Earlier today witnessed an extremely close shave between a couple who were crossing the High Rd at Chateau - from the M&S side to the Chateau side - and who were nearly mown down by a cyclist heading in the Hammersmith direction.  The cyclist braked and nearly hit them.  He was extremely apologetic and, as he said, was unaware they were crossing because of the bus queuing in the traffic jam and which was immediately in front of that section of the crossing.Whether the pedestrians understood the layout - who knows? - they could've been new to the area or whatever.  But it demonstrates that the layout of this road is now counter-intuitive for pedestrians and puts them at increased risk.  Crossing from the Chateau side to the M&S side is slightly easier as the cycle lane is immediately in front of you.  But crossing the other way is Russian roulette.  By the time you've navigated successfully across the two motorcar lanes you're committed and at the mercy of anyone using the cycle lane.  And of course, whether they can see you or not.

Marie Power ● 1616d71 Comments

Yes the c9 is definitely not safe for the elderly and blind people are definitely not safe -

Helen Bamberger ● 1616d

Glad the cyclist was on the ball - sounds like it could have ended up with a more serious outcome if he hadn’t been.

Andrew Jones ● 1616d

I had exactly the same experience yesterday. A bus stopped for me on the Eastbound carriageway, and a car on the Westbound. I stepped into the cycle lane and only then realised that an Eastbound cyclist, who was some distance away but travelling at speed, had no intention of stopping, or even slowing. I paused, and he passed in front of me, almost running over my toes, followed by another Eastbound cyclist travelling at speed close behind. The fact that the cycle-lane is two-way makes it singularly dangerous. When you have crossed from the North to the South side of CHR, you have to look carefully to your left for cyclists that you may not have seen, and may not have seen you, particularly if there's a bus stopped at the crossing. You don't expect to be  taken out by a cyclist approaching from the other direction, with a clear view of you.

Robert Fish ● 1616d

The High Road is dangerous to pedestrians, though it does seem to be improving slightly as the number of motor vehicles on the High Road has fallen. Four pedestrians have been reported slightly injured since C9 opened, all involving collisions with motor vehicles. In the same period four years ago, seven pedestrians were reported injured in collisions with motor vehicles, two seriously. By far the largest threat to pedestrians continues to be from motor vehicles. Clearly crossing the road is more complicated with the additional two-way flow of bikes, but with more people choosing to cycle with C9 and fewer motor vehicles, the drop in the number of injury collisions reported suggests the High Road is actually becoming safer overall for pedestrians.

Tom Pike ● 1616d

This was always going to be the trade-off with the cycle lane. More collisions between cyclists and pedestrians are inevitable when you are effectively asking them to share space. However, there should be a reduction in the number of collisions between cyclists and motor vehicles to off set this.As yet the data is not giving a clear picture how this is working  with some indications that collisions have risen between cyclists and vehicles on C9. However, it needs to be remembered that a new design has been put in place with a view to reducing collisions and, as far as I am aware, there has not been one single serious collision between a pedestrian and a cyclist on C9.A lot of this is about perception, cyclists feel safer on C9 even though they may not actually be so and pedestrians, particularly the partially sighted and elderly, feel more at risk even though any increase may be very marginal.

Mark Evans ● 1616d

A couple of months ago I had to grab a Chiswick School boy by his blazer collar by Chateau, he had looked right but not left and if I hadn't grabbed him he would've been hit by a head down bum up cyclist who was doing c.20mph.

Loraine Pemberton ● 1616d

"More collisions between cyclists and pedestrians are inevitable when you are effectively asking them to share space. However, there should be a reduction in the number of collisions between cyclists and motor vehicles"So that's ok then. More pedestrians can get hurt but less cyclists will get hurt. Quid pro quo?

Steve Taylor ● 1616d

21 reported injury collisions in the four years before C9 opened, five of them causing serious injuries to pedestrians. Four slight injury collisions reported since C9 opened. All of these collision injuries involved motor vehicles.

Tom Pike ● 1616d

When driving I try to be hyper aware of zebra/pedestrian crossings.  It is best to approach them with the ability to stop.  If a cyclist cannot see the whole crossing then he/she should slow down in anticipation. Isn't that what the Belisha beacons are for?

Vivienne Cox ● 1616d

"A lot of this is about perception, cyclists feel safer on C9..."So why do cyclists, in large numbers, still persist in using pedestrian pavements ?

Loraine Pemberton ● 1616d

I do wonder based on Tom stats whether there are 2 possible issues:1. Near misses between cyclists and pedestrians are not going to be reported any more than near misses between cyclists and cars before C9 was implemented, so we have no idea whether the near misses are going up, going down or about the same.  Even if there is a collision between a cyclist and a pedestrian, if no one is injured (apart from pride and made a bruise or two) are these being reported.  The statistics can only ever be as good as the information provided.2. It could be an issue more of perception than reality.  Pedestrians do not feel safe crossing the cycle lane whereas on the main part of CHR they do feel safe either because they are crossing at a zebra crossing or the traffic is at a standstill.And finally this could just be a situation that improves with time - pedestrians are getting used to the idea that the cycle lane is 2 way when they may have been expecting it to be one way only, westbound just like the nearest vehicle lane to it.It really is very difficult to judge the safety or not of C9 given how little time it has been in operation, even after opening parts of it have had to be closed for changes etc.

Justin Stephenson ● 1616d

If this crossing point is a zebra, then as others have suggested, cyclists in their lane should anticipate the possibility of someone stepping onto it and be ready to stop. As if...! On a non-segregated road this wouldn't be such a problem, as cyclists would be alongside motor traffic travelling in the same direction and already stopping at the zebra, and they'd be more likely to realise that hurtling past could be dangerous - and the zig zags would make such an action illegal. Maybe the cycle lane should have zig zags?

Peter Evans ● 1616d

It’s really not difficult to reject the claim that the High Road has become more dangerous on the basis of the pedestrian injury figures to date. But it’s just as true that’s not going to stop people claiming C9 presents a danger to pedestrians. Of course any rational policy, whether it be on COVID, transport or climate change, should be based on the available evidence. One would hope our local politicians at least accept that in principle.

Tom Pike ● 1616d

Unfortunately the people who instigated and implemented this don't give a toss.

Claire Moran ● 1615d

I agree a rational policy should be based on available evidence.  But as someone else in this thread pointed out, relevant near misses are not recorded.In a risk assessment it is perfectly legitimate to look at near misses as well as actual accidents - I think this happens in the air transport field for instance - as near misses are indicative of a problem just as much as actual accidents. The factors leading up to a near miss or accident may be identical,  it is just the outcome which is different.So it’s not enough to rely purely on accident figures.  It also comes across as rather patronising to bang on about perception and imply that it’s all in our minds, we’re just making it up.  I saw the incident today. It was dangerous. It was just luck and the quick reaction of the cyclist involved that prevented the accident.

Marie Power ● 1615d

Maybe cyclists should adopt the CAT mantra, drummed into me as a learner driver...Caution,Anticipation,Tolerance.

Keith Iddon ● 1615d

CAT strategy - I was never taught that but it seems eminently sensible.  All concepts that don't appear not to be understood by many today.

Philippa Bond ● 1615d

Yes, near misses are critical to understand in air transport the occurrence of incidents leading to deaths and injuries is very rare. That is unfortunately not the case for motor vehicle injury collisions on the High Road.  A high number of near misses which did not translate to actual injuries would strongly suggest that pedestrians and cyclists are much more able to take evasive action than pedestrians and vehicles. I’m not fit a moment denying that in both cases a near miss will be frightening for all concerned, but only one of these interactions is leading to the vast majority of pedestrians being injured. A rational approach would be based on the overwhelming evidence that motor vehicles, not bikes, pose the largest risk to pedestrians, and the best way therefore to reduce pedestrian injuries would be to reduce the flow of motor vehicles on the High Road.

Tom Pike ● 1615d

“ and the best way therefore to reduce pedestrian injuries would be to reduce the flow of motor vehicles on the High Road.”Your logic is laughably childish. How about; the best way to reduce cyclist injuries is to reduce the number of cyclists. Make them stay at home!

Steve Taylor ● 1615d

The CAT strategy I was taught when learning to motor cycle was:  if a dog or fox runs in front of you it’s better not to brake because you will probably skid and slide and come off. If you hit the animal to will probably ride straight over it and maintain your balance and not kill yourself. Although probably the animal will be severely injured or killed. However, it a cat runs in front of you, try your best to avoid it because if you hit it you will probably come off because the cats skin is much looser / pliable so your front wheel will probably slip on it and you will inevitably come off. Fortunately I didn’t have the opportunity to test either. I did have the frightening experience of having a gull fly into my chest whilst I was accelerating at about  100mph on a slip road to join a motorway. That was pretty scary but, although winded, I managed to maintain control of the bike!

Steve Taylor ● 1615d

Frightening indeed, but when did it happen? The national speed limit's been 70mph since December 1965. I hope you're not just another law-breaker who thinks rules are for the little people!

Robert Fish ● 1615d

Of course I was a law breaker. Find me a single motor cyclist with a bike more than  250cc who doesn't break the law. I rode bikes from 650 up to 1240cc. No point having a motor cycle if you aren't going to live a little dangerously!  Obviously when I had a family I had to calm down and act more responsibly.

Steve Taylor ● 1615d

"Of course I was a law breaker.... No point having a motor cycle if you aren't going to live a little dangerously!"On the High Road, 10 out of 26 pedestrian injury collisions in the last five years involved motorcycles, and half of all serious injuries to pedestrians. Motorbikes amount to less than 5% of the traffic.

Tom Pike ● 1615d

What about other peoples families you were risking?

Vivienne Cox ● 1615d

I must admit I was bit worried when the local active travel campaign lost its most useful ally on the forum. I thought nobody could surpass him in portraying the abhorrence of the opposing movement when his so-called friends got the irascible baker banned. So it has been quite gratifying to see Taylor and Dodge do such a fine job of stepping so determinedly and frequently into the breach during his enforced absence.Thank you for all that you do. You make it so much easier for politicians to make the right decisions and for voters to elect them.

Paul Campbell ● 1615d

So Tom the solution to reducing pedestrian injuries is obvious - ban motorcycles!!TBH I am not really surprised that motorcycles cause a disproportionate number of injuries, especially severe injuries.  Along CHR especially the key shopping area between TGT and Acton Lane the 4 or more wheeled traffic often moves slowly (and sometimes not at all) but the 2 wheeled traffic can still be pretty quick both motorbikes and pedal powered bikes and I think we have all seen motorbikes veering onto the wrong side of CHR to overtake slow moving vehicles at times which look absurdly dangerous.IMO transport policy must not be based solely on statistic, important as those are, but also needs to take into account the limitations of stats and public perception.To give a simple example if a junction is redesigned such that pedestrian injuries are reduced by 90% that would seem to be a triumph of transport design because that is the obvious conclusion of the stats but if the reality is that the public has decided the junction is an even worse death trap than before and have all changed their routes than it has been a failure of transport policy. I am not saying that such an example applies to CHR merely that it shows the limitations of the statistics.In the case of C9 and pedestrian fears my own view is that the public perception may change over time as they get used to a 2 way cycle lane in a place where previously they only had to consider traffic flowing one way (at least until they got to the middle of the road).  But I could be wrong and the public fears do not ease at all - generally the cyclists in C9 will be moving noticeably faster than the traffic used to flow on CHR.

Justin Stephenson ● 1615d

I don’t think the scenario you are suggesting is being realised. Footfall is up on the High Road, and vacancies are down. I’m certainly not claiming that’s specifically down to C9; rather an increase in local shopping from changed working patterns as well as the success of the Sunday markets has reinvigorated retail on the High Road. But the cleaner air and lower traffic on the High Road can only have helped.

Tom Pike ● 1615d

"...when his so-called friends got the irascible baker banned."Paul but we heard it was you and some of your chums who complained to Nnet, didn't realise you guys were friends of 'the irascible baker' 😉

Loraine Pemberton ● 1615d

Nope. The irascible baker has been the second most important representative of the opposition for the supporters of the cycle lane and traffic management schemes in Chiswick. Most of the opposition has been very helpful but he has played a decisive role in our success. He is an ally, albeit an unwitting one, of active travel campaigners. I did not complain about his post and I don't know anyone who did. In fact I am the only person on this forum who appears to have noticed his absence and mourned the loss. His mistake was turning his unique style of debate on his allies over non-cycling issues such as Will Smith's slap and Brexit. They warned him and he ignored their warnings. We all know who gets people banned as they have been unable to resist boasting about it.

Paul Campbell ● 1615d

"We all know who gets people banned as they have been unable to resist boasting about it."Paul, my only comment about being suspended, Nnet don't ban or bar, is that you should know more than anyone !

Loraine Pemberton ● 1615d

Steve Taylor deserves a special commendation for his unwitting efforts. He has stepped up the plate with unbridled enthusiasm on this thread, throwing all caution to the winds. His wild swinging might fail to connect, but his enthusiasm is undiminished, with neither moral nor mathematical consistency limiting his play. A worthy substitute for the missing baker indeed.

Tom Pike ● 1615d

C9 does not exist.C4.5 would be more accurate for this half finished "temporary" project.How many years is it now since the first spade hit the tarmac? Seems like decades and even after all this time there seems no end to its construction.Costs, congestion and disruption have all spiralled so surely even the die-hards must be appalled by the crass incompetence of the people responsible.

Adrian Irving ● 1615d

I have never been suspended by NNet. Clearly you are a great deal more knowledgeable than me on its workings.

Paul Campbell ● 1615d

The double standard is astounding.  This person is complaining about the behaviour of others,  while admitting online to breaking the law to a level where they would instantly lose their license.

Nora Watkins ● 1615d

I was observing the bus island outside the Eye Studio and a high proportion of pedestrians wander into the cycle lane without looking both ways. This tends not to matter as cyclists are generally not travelling particularly fast and seem to be alert to the danger. Most faster moving cyclists remain on the main road.It may be time to recognise the inevitable and designate this section as shared space with speed limits signed and pedestrian priority. This would help increase the perception of safety at this point for people with visual impairment and the elderly.

Mark Evans ● 1615d

Or Mark, we could stop endlessly tweaking it and admit it was planned and installed  by cycling fanatics, with little care for the issues it throws up. They are so desperate to increase cycling numbers they’ve got Mr Boardman giving all the reasons helmets should not be worn, again! https://road.cc/content/news/111258-chris-boardman-helmets-not-even-top-10-things-keep-cycling-safe

Maggie Dodge ● 1615d

“I was observing the bus island outside the Eye Studio and a high proportion of pedestrians wander into the cycle lane without looking both ways. “I can well believe it, Mark.  It is completely counterintuitive to look both ways. Many people will be expecting cycle traffic in only one direction and that direction to be the same as the nearest car lane.  This knowledge gap may get smaller over time as people become more used to the layout.  But it doesn’t help anyone unfamiliar with the area.  It is a fundamentally stupid idea and puts pedestrians at increased risk.  C9 may or may not have made the world safer for cyclists - it seems that even the cycling fraternity are not united on that yet - but it has done so at the cost of making life more stressful and less safe for pedestrians.  Let’s not forget that the latest revision of the Highway Code puts pedestrians at the top of the “at risk” heirarchy, followed by cyclists, horse riders etc etc  And of course there are a lot more pedestrians than cyclists.  It’s therefore a pity that pedestrians weren’t put at the top of the priority list when the road layouts were being revised.

Marie Power ● 1615d

Roads have never been safe for pedestrians.  Chiswick High Road is no different.  The consequences of being hit by a car do tend to be worse though.  That does mean that everyone needs to be more careful. Overtaking cars, and bikes, motorbikes and mopeds weaving between the traffic makes it worse.  Making sure that speed limits have to be adhered to helps.

Philippa Bond ● 1615d

“Roads have never been safe for pedestrians.”That is why we have mitigation measures like central refuges.Or had.Not any longer,

Marie Power ● 1615d

Pedestrians tend to walk in cycle lanes whatever direction they are in.  I've seen them walking 4 or 5 abreast on the one on Constitution Hill and completely blocking it.  I've also seen a pedestrian walking in the one on the Embankment.One of the major reasons that the A4 is a better route than the high road for cycling is the lack of pedestrians.

Al Webber ● 1615d

People who want the Cycleway ripped up right now need to accept that this probably won't be happening so changes which could enhance its safety need to be considered.Advocates for both sides of the argument claim that data on congestion, usage, pollution and collisions supports their case but the reality is much of the statistics on Cycleway 9 are obfuscated by the pandemic and it is difficult to reach a firm conclusion on its impact.A huge amount of money has just been spent on it and a newly elected Labour administration, probably with an even bigger majority, is unlikely to take the drastic step of digging it up unless some startling new data emerges which is unlikely.It therefore seems likely that the trial period for both the CHR and King Street sections will be allowed to run their full course i.e. at least a year. Probably only crystal clear data that shows delays to bus services will be the only thing that would result in its removal. In the meantime it makes sense that it is tweaked to increase safety.

Mark Evans ● 1615d

Also look at the way that bikes, motorbikes, mopeds and cars swing around corners at speed in residential streets when there is no way that they can see around those corners.

Philippa Bond ● 1615d

"Advocates for both sides of the argument claim that data on congestion, usage, pollution and collisions supports their case but the reality is much of the statistics on Cycleway 9 are obfuscated by the pandemic and it is difficult to reach a firm conclusion on its impact."It's quite true that comparisons are more difficult to make due to the shift in travel patterns with the pandemic. However, we do have a measure of the change in bike counts following the closure of the stretch of C9 from Chiswick Lane to Goldhawk Road. That produced an immediate drop that is difficult to attribute to anything other than the closure of C9. The camera the junction of the High Road with Goldhawk Road showed a 25% drop in bike counts for the week after the closure compared to the previous week. Selecting a two or three week period either side gives very similar results. In contrast car counts hardly shifted, increasing by 3% over the same period.I think this is the most reliable measure of the increase in cycling as a direct result of C9, a boost of one third (which produced a subsequent drop of a quarter on closure). The figures also show that the biggest change with C9 open was from daytime, not commuter, cycling. Once C9 reopens and with the new stretch along King Street and around the gyratory, it's reasonable to expect a further increase. You're correct that TfL pay particular attention to bus delays. Putting bus stops in line with the traffic, as occurs with the bus islands on both the High Road and King Street, significantly improves bus performance as there's no delay in setting off into an empty road ahead and the bus will be first in the queue at any subsequent signalling. This comes at the expense of increased delays for private vehicles but those are lower down in TfL's priority list.

Tom Pike ● 1615d

Footfall is up because Covid restrictions have been eased.  As for vacancies being down I hope you have the statistics to prove that because to me it looks, at best, a marginal improvement but I count charity shops as effectively vacancies because landlords allow them to avoid having to pay empty property rates.It is certainly possible that the success of Sunday markets is helping, I am not convinced it is a big help - but as the saying goes every little helps.  Overall CHR still looks rather sad for itself, not even as close to how bad it looked in the early 1990s, but still poor.  I do not blame C9 and the LTNs for that, although I am sure some shoppers have moved because of that, the reality is that Covid has made many people change their shopping habits and most high streets in the UK are suffering.  I am not sure the high street will ever fully recover

Justin Stephenson ● 1614d

Chiswick was ranked in the top 25 of HDH 2022 retail vitality index of Great Britain, an improved ranking from 2019.http://hdh.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/HDH-Vitality-Rankings-2022-Commentary-and-Methodology-with-Top-100-1.pdfThe big local loser this year was Richmond. It was 6th in 2019, and is now 75th. Its vacancy rate increase by 19% last year. While some criticising the traffic restrictions in Chiswick have said they have switched to driving to Richmond, they are clearly not representative of the general trend.

Tom Pike ● 1614d

TomMaybe because all or the majority of collisions between a car and a pedestrian/bike IS reported to the police but a collision between a bike and a pedestrian IS not normally reported?

Nik Solomon ● 1614d

These are injury collisions, so would be reported to the police irrespective of whether a vehicle could be identified or any insurance claim made. There will inevitably be some measure of under reporting, particularly for slight injuries, but there's no reason to think that level will have changed simply because of C9.

Tom Pike ● 1614d

“ Also look at the way that bikes, motorbikes, mopeds and cars swing around corners at speed in residential streets when there is no way that they can see around those corners.”Yes, those on bikes, motorbikes and mopeds are clearly very stupid or have a deathwish.

Steve Taylor ● 1613d

Simply looking at the drop in cycling during the cycleway closures isn't going to tell you the amount it has increased cycling by because many cyclist will not be using other modes of transport and switching to other routes.As I've said before I do think it has boosted cyclist numbers in the area but many commuter cyclists are now avoiding CHR because of the relatively slow passage along C9. They are however still cycling so looking at cycling numbers on the cycleway alone will understate the benefit.I'm not really convinced about your argument on buses benefit from bus stops being in line with traffic. The bus at the stop may get a marginal benefit from a brief free run when it pulls off but on CHR which has a lot of routes there will be other buses stuck in the queue behind. These previously would have been able to pull into the stop at the same time as the bus in front as the other traffic over took.Buses are a nightmare at the moment because of all the diversions so hopefully we will get a clearer picture when the cycleway is complete but my concern is that it will effectively become a roadworks lane - rarely fully open because utility companies will now find it easier to get permission to dig up the road where there is a cycleway.

Mark Evans ● 1613d

See this update .Police look like investigating LBH and their LTN schemes.You should write to Police with details of what happened here as its obvious no proper risk assessment was done.See the link to the Police and write in... https://chng.it/VhDgLppG

John Jones ● 1613d

Bullshit

John Hall ● 1613d

Hilarious. What next - European Court of Human Rights maybe?

Paul Campbell ● 1612d

Cressida Dick has been at a loose end for years. Hence the disarray of the Police 'Service'

Steve Taylor ● 1612d

Whilst we were walking down a LTN today a speeding cyclist, riding on the wrong side of the road, actually had the audacity to scream at my wife for being in HIS  way. There's just no stopping the arrogance of these despicable  morons.She just laughed at him which made him even more angry. Do these clowns actually leave home frustrated and angry? They should try having a cold shower BEFORE setting out.

Steve Taylor ● 1612d

Ah, the snowflake generation 

John Hall ● 1612d

Sorry the link to see the petition and report matters to the Police and assist their  investigation ishttps://www.change.org/p/stop-hounslow-council-destroying-chiswick-stop-streetspace

John Jones ● 1612d

Seems like the anti-cycleway brigade are pulling the same trick as the anti-vaxxers. They made a report to Hammersmith Police station claiming that the vaccination programme is illegal requiring the officers to issue them with a crime number. They then went round claiming that the police had launched an investigation which they hadn't. It makes you wonder if the same people aren't behind this stunt - it would partly explain the anti-vaxxers obsession with Jeremy Vine.

Mark Evans ● 1612d

You’re right, an increase in counts on any one route does not necessarily correspond to the overall increase in cycling. However, it does demonstrate that the route has attracted more cyclists. Looking at the breakdown by time of day, the increase with C9 open is greatest for the period from 10 am to 4 pm, but there is also a smaller rise in the morning and evening. Hence I don’t see much evidence that commuters overall avoid C9. There have been utility works deliberately scheduled at the same time as the C9 upgrade prior to the resurfacing. However, that doesn’t mean utility companies will be more inclined to dig up a road just because there is cycle lane on it.

Tom Pike ● 1612d

“ Seems like the anti-cycleway brigade are pulling the same trick as the anti-vaxxers.”What a stupid analogy!

Steve Taylor ● 1612d

Both groups have made a report to the police for the sole purpose of generating a crime number and then used that to make false claims that an investigation is being launched. Can you explain why you think the comparison is 'stupid'?

Mark Evans ● 1612d

Mark is correct. It’s straight out of the antivaxxer playbook, and just as inane this time round. Who would want to be publicly associated with such a move? https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/covid-vaccine-police-probe-antivaxx-b2020747.html?amp

Tom Pike ● 1612d

I included cars in the list of vehicles swinging round corners and you missed them out.  They are the most dangerous.  The drivers together with their eyes are seated a long way back from the front of the car.  The way they behave you'd think the headlights did the seeing.

Philippa Bond ● 1611d

“ Can you explain why you think the comparison is 'stupid'?”Yes of course I can; because the Vaccination Program isn’t illegal!!

Steve Taylor ● 1611d

The anti vaxxers were well aware that they were wasting police time because it was 100% clear that Covid vaccination is not illegal. It is not clear that LTN and cycle lane implementation is legal so it is reasonable that some may want the police to investigate. I don’t necessarily agree with it but that is only my opinion.

Steve Taylor ● 1611d

I’d certainly back a call for auditing of the accounts. In all boroughs . £20k for a parklet. Which is basically wooden pallets with a bench and a few plants. Which quickly becomes a large rubbish bins should never have been signed off, when money is scarce. It’s not even active travel , it’s just”let’s nick a couple of parking spaces” vindictiveness towards motorists.

Maggie Dodge ● 1610d

The same people who have been into understaffed hospitals demanding the overworked staff stop treating patients no doubt.

Philippa Bond ● 1610d

Looks to me as if CS9 isn't safe for anyone. Except maybe Uber.

David Lesniak ● 1609d

Do we definitely know the police aren’t investigating? Is there a Health and Safety investigation into C9, specifically or including floating bus stops? If people claim rightly or wrongly that it’s unsafe is there a duty on the part of the people installing it, to investigate? I don’t know how these things work

Maggie Dodge ● 1609d

Troubling, too, Maggie, is this morning they were jackhammering the brand new bit just outside the Best Western.Why?To install a missing/overlooked signal pole at the cross walk. So that error is from the drawing onward or, at the very least, a mismanagement on site. Fingers crossed that isn't the only one.

David Lesniak ● 1609d

People like this causing trouble:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10114013/amp/Disgraceful-moment-anti-vaxxers-turn-Colchester-Hospital-accusing-medics-plandemic-crimes.html

Philippa Bond ● 1609d

David, I can’t even raise an eyebrow. The level of ineptitude  makes me think of the saying, can’t organise a party in a brewery. Originally, it was “quick get the cycle lane in while there’s a pandemic in”. Whats the excuse now? Abd how much more money ?

Maggie Dodge ● 1609d