Forum Topic

The cycle lane (again)

I have just had a difficult experience crossing Chiswick High Road on the zebra near M&S. I got stranded in the middle (there is no island) when a car failed to stop. To be fair to the driver, it is very hard to see pedestrians on the zebra when the traffic is queuing in the other direction. I was then startled by a cyclist passing me at high speed and feet away from me on the zebra. The cyclist was on the main carriageway, not the cycle lane. There is no doubt in my mind that the cycle lane has made CHR less safe for pedestrians. I also think the cycle lane is not very safe for cyclists with all the intersections with side roads and proximity to oncoming cyclists. I suggest (probably in vain) that the cycle lane be taken out and replaced with two wider lanes for all road users with a 10 mph speed limit. That would be safer and probably on average faster for all. Before anyone accuses me of being anti cyclist, I walk, cycle and drive in Chiswick in roughly equal proportion.

Philip Hodgson ● 1187d55 Comments

You forgive the motorist who, didn't stop for the zebra crossing and, caused your difficult experience.Your suggestion to improve CHR safety is to remove the bike lane.Surely the more logical solution would be to remove the car lanes.

Will Watson ● 1187d

I remember a similar suggestion for Fishers Lane: the logic went something like this: cyclists are lured into a false sense of security by the Fishers lane restriction on cars; if a driver ignored the restriction they could hit an unwary cyclist; therefore the car restrictions should be removed so that cyclists are constantly in danger and more aware of it as a result.Motonormativity - reward drivers and punish cyclists for the actions of law-breaking drivers.

Paul Campbell ● 1187d

The se is me answer is that all cyclist must use the cycle lane. I have had similar experiences myself with cyclists using the road, it isn’t wide enough now with buses, lorries,  vans etc. for cyclists to use the main road. What’s the point of a cycle lane if cyclists don’t use it, crazy scheme which makes everything harder for pedestrians which we should be encouraging. We walk everywhere in chiswick.

Jayne Thorburn ● 1187d

I have often thought the answer is to remove the cycle lanes and just have two wider lanes for all traffic with a speed limit of 10 or 15 mph. It would genuinely make everything fairer and safer I feel.

Chris Blackwell ● 1187d

For your information, the motorist apologised; the cyclist did not. I have tried to make a workable, practical suggestion. Have you?

Philip Hodgson ● 1187d

Previous post was in response to Will Watson. That probably was not clear.

Philip Hodgson ● 1187d

Totally agree, Philip.  I have had similar experiences.  I only go into Chiswick now when absolutely essential (dentist, optician).  It's no longer a pleasant thing to do.

Claire Moran ● 1187d

Paul make a sensible workable suggestion ?

Madeleine Hazard ● 1186d

Fine I will. You all just accept the cycle lane is here to say and move on with your miserable lives by finding something else to whinge about. And then we put a bus gate in on Chiswick High Road and take away all the useless through cars clogging up the road anyway. After we've taken many more parking spaces and sorted out the absolute pit that Turnham Green Terrace has become and the wasted opportunity for the masochistic traders on Devonshire Road. And then we out loads more cycle lanes in to connect to C9. And when we have a Labour government we take the roads away from the Royal Borough of Kensington and fill the gap for C9 so that people can cycle with no interaction with cars from Hounslow to Greenwich. And take a lane from Chelsea Embankment for a massive cycle lane there too. And able-bodied people stop driving to their workplaces in London when they can get PT or cycle. How's that for starters?

Paul Campbell ● 1186d

Sounds like a master plan, Paul. Which Disney film did you step out of?

Elle Jones ● 1186d

I doubt it. What a bogus concept “Motornomativity”. I bet it comes from some academic paper that the Grauniad picked up on once.

Russell Pearson ● 1186d

I think the future I have described has a far higher degree of probability of actualisation than the one Chiswick's miserabilist velophobe luddites fantasise about. Especially because the Evil Cycle Lobby calls the shots.

Paul Campbell ● 1186d

Philip, I'm intrigued about how it is excusable for the driver not to stop for you, but not for the cyclist.Wouldn't they be affected in the same way by the stationary traffic blocking their field of view? Wouldn't it a lot worse to be hit by a car, than by a cyclist? I've been hit by both and in my experience, it is.Others who said that cyclist must only ride on the cycle lane forget that, due to its peculiar design, it's pretty hard to turn north from the lane and, thus, if one is to just do a short journey on CHR before turning north, using the cycle lane isn't useful, or even advisable. For instance, I often go up on Clifton Gardens, coming from Turnham Green, and using CHR isn't feasible (or safe, for no one will give you right of way), so on CHR I go.

Francis Sheehan ● 1186d

I think Philip was trying to be fair minded but there simply is no excuse for the driver. Moving forward over a zebra without having sight of who might be crossing is dangerous driving.The problem was a bad cyclist and a bad driver. They are always going to exist no matter what the road configuration.He is however right about the experience for the pedestrian crossing the High Road being more stressful since the cycle lane was put in place. The problem is that this is very difficult to quantify. Minor collisions between bikes and pedestrians are occurring regularly, I've seen several over the last year plus dozens of close shaves but data is not collected on these unless someone is seriously injured which, thankfully, has not happened yet.The data we do have so far is showing that the Cycleway has made CHR and King Street much more dangerous for cyclists although a large proportion of the injuries are occurring in Hammersmith rather than Chiswick. The collision rate for Chiswick seems to be more or less the same as before. As far as I am aware H&F Council has yet to act on the problematic junctions at Weltje Road and Rivercourt Road which seems extraordinary given the carnage. There simply isn't the money available for a radical alternative such ripping up the cycleway and instituting a lower speed limit so for now the best that can be hoped for is that councils look to improve the safety of the existing infrastructure.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1186d

“The collision rate for Chiswick seems to be more or less the same as before.”Incorrect. Numbers maybe similar but not rate due to the impressive increases in cycle journeys on the cycle lane, which you will see in due course.

Paul Campbell ● 1186d

The cycle lane is also very slow.  The light phasing is awful for bikes.  I try to avoid the High Road on my bike (although I did that before the lane went in) and use the slightly less bad A4 path, or use Bath Road.Unless you want to get somewhere on Chiswick High Road itself, the High road is just not a good route for cycling, and never has been.  There are lots of junctions, which is where problems normally happen, and also make it slow with all the lights.If anyone from the council is reading, please do something about providing facilities on the A4, where they would be far quicker and also far safer because of the lack of junctions.

Al Webber ● 1186d

That’s TfL not the Council. And they need to comply with LTN 1/20 if they put a cycle lane on the A4 and that will make it a mega engineering project.

Paul Campbell ● 1186d

"..Paul..Which Disney film did you step out of?"I think Humpty Dumpty appeared in Alice in Wonderland.

Richard Greenhough ● 1186d

A bit more information on the incident. The driver's behaviour was clearly accidental (albeit careless/dangerous). The cyclist was travelling far faster and in the opposite direction and could see me. His behaviour appeared deliberate and sadly, in my experience, typical of the disregard with which a minority of cyclists treat other road users.

Philip Hodgson ● 1186d

I think cyclists are using the main carriageway because they find it faster and safer than the cycle lane.

Philip Hodgson ● 1186d

Al, I personally think that the A4 is the least appropriate place for having a cycling infrastructure in Chiswick. Indeed I can't remember of a single place, in the cities where I lived and where bikes are used, where a cycle lane has been built next to a motorway.The A4 hasn't got any offramps, and thus drivers are forced to turn off it without slowing too much. They don't have time, or space, to see pedestrians, or cyclists, and slow down. To suggest the A4 is a good place for cycling infrastructure is NIMBYsm in my opinion.

Francis Sheehan ● 1186d

I think it is a very profound error to try and explain away the rising toll of cyclist injuries by referring to growth numbers which are only impressive you are willing to accept the rather dubious limited data released by TfL which is likely bears little resemblance to the true picture.There may be sections of the cycleway where collisions are down but overall the number of people being seriously hurt is clearly rising much much faster than the rise in use of the cycleway.The use of spurious data to explain rising injuries away is enabling council inaction (particularly H&F) and has resulted in nothing significant being done about the most dangerous junctions.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1186d

Hi Philipthanks for clarifying, and apologies for having misunderstood you. I wasn't there, obviously, so I'll take your word for it, and I agree with you that there are some, in the cycling community, who ought to be fined when events like this happen.

Francis Sheehan ● 1186d

Paul clearly doesn’t live in the real world 😂😂😂 the truth is the cycle lane wasn’t put in for speed but to encourage people to cycle in a ‘safer way’. Cyclist like cars have to stop at junctions, lights, pedestrian crossing etc. the reality is very different I constantly see cyclists speeding across pedestrian crossing when people are actually on the crossing or about to step onto the crossing. This has happened to me so many times on the CHR. The reality is that our infrastructure doesn’t accommodate wide enough streets to segregate all road users. Everyone has been affected by the cycle lane and not for the better. At least before cyclists, pedestrians, cars, vans etc. had to be very Road aware the cycle lane seems to have negatively changed this awareness. There are some polite cyclists and I always say thank you when they stop 😂😂😂

Jayne Thorburn ● 1186d

I was quite right to correct your error in using the word “rate” for Chiswick. As you well know. The rise in numbers using the lane is very impressive and collisions per kms travelled is the standard industry measure in the real world regardless of how often anti-safer streets campaigners try to use absolute numbers instead on social media. The delays in fixing the problems at Weltje and Rivercourt Road are not due to the Council not acknowledging the issues. Cycle campaigners above all have ensured they are well aware. It is due to the institutional fear of Officers and Councillors of the angry reactions of drivers to the inevitable changes. Sadly the car lobby continues to put cyclists lives at risk by delaying action for their very selfish reasons. Nonetheless action is finally coming on both roads.

Paul Campbell ● 1186d

Well you will be quick to acknowledge that the vastly higher numbers of cyclists using the cycle lane instead of the main carriageway is testimony to them finding it to be much safer then.

Paul Campbell ● 1186d

No the cycle lane was not put in to encourage cyclists to cycle in a safer way. That is more motonormativity in action. It was put in to protect cyclists from bad, aggressive and illegal drivers and thus encourage much higher numbers of people to take up cycling for their local journeys. Which is exactly what is happening as the cycle lane is hugely successful. Drivers are the cause of cycle lanes.

Paul Campbell ● 1186d

Sadly, there are bad, aggressive and illegal cyclists too. In my experience there are more of the two wheeled variety than the four wheeled. It is not often I see a car dangerously cross a red light.The purpose of my post was to suggest that the cycle lane has made it more difficult and dangerous for pedestrians, has caused much congestion for motorists and is not particularly fast or safe for cyclists. Maybe, just maybe, there is a better solution.

Philip Hodgson ● 1186d

Absolutely. In fairness to Al, he has always advocated the A4 in Chiswick but I don't think he realises just how few people actually use it and how little probability there is of anything being done there. The A4 was never used by more than a few hundred people a day but the latest DfT traffic counts from the A4 east of Chiswick Lane show that since C9 was built, numbers cycling on the A4 have collapsed to just a few dozen people a day. Usage is about 1% of numbers cycling on C9 along Chiswick High Road. TfL published their updated cycle action plan two weeks ago and the focus of investment for outer London boroughs will be routes connecting with town centres. The A4 in Chiswick doesn't do that, it's a bypass. Improved cycling along the A4 in Chiswick will be at the bottom of the list of priorities for TfL projects in Hounslow as it it really only for a very small number of commuters. Calls for a cycle path along the A4 from some people have really just been a coded way of saying "just get those cyclists on Chiswick High Rd away from me so I don't need to see them" but I certainly don't put Al in this category.

Michael Robinson ● 1186d

Clearly in good weather there is an increase once the weather turns the cycle lane is empty except for a few die hard. Cyclists need to learn that they have to follow the Highway Code and stop & wait when necessary not charge through which too many do. That is the cause of accidents not bad drivers most of the time.

Jayne Thorburn ● 1186d

Paul said "It was put in to protect cyclists from bad, aggressive and illegal drivers and thus encourage much higher numbers of people to take up cycling for their local journeys. "But who is going to protect pedestrians from bad, aggressive and illegal cyclists? Hate to say it Paul but your Orwellian mantra of '4 wheels bad, 2 wheels good' is at best lazy and at worst dismissing the fact that MOST cyclists are aggressive, dangerous and entitled morons.

Chris Blackwell ● 1186d

Jeremy, reported slight injuries are included in the collision data. Also, the overwhelming threat to pedestrian continues to be from vehicles on the roadway not cyclists on C9, with still no recorded injury collisions involving bikes since it opened in December 2021. We now have two full years of collision data for the stretch of C9 that has remained mostly open since 2021, between Heathfield Terrace and Chiswick Lane: there have been four injury collisions to cyclists while in the previous two years there were nine. It’s simply not true that the number of collisions has stayed flat - they are down, and the rate will have fallen even further once the increase in cyclists is taken into account. In contrast, if the standard recommendations for junction treatment are ignored,  protection for cyclists is compromised. This was seen between Chiswick Lane and Goldhawk Road when C9 was first opened, with four injury collisions in the first seven months. After it was upgraded there has been possibly one, though the location is unclear.Clearly similar changes need to be made on the King St stretch, but your “radical alternative” to return to the status quo ante will just reverse the significant increase in the number cycling, as well as the reduced collision rates we’ve seen on C9 where it has been more properly implemented.

Tom Pike ● 1186d

"MOST cyclists are aggressive, dangerous and entitled morons."That is absolutely not true. It is aggressively bigoted is what it is. The vast majority of cyclists are just ordinary people - mums, grandparents, hospital workers, children, cleaners, service workers going about their business. The dehumanising of cyclists by people who get cross about cycle lanes is transparent and very wrong on every level. The people who do it should be ashamed of themselves as this rhetoric encourages hate and even violence against our fellow citizens.Pedestrians have got pavements. Cyclists have cycle lanes, although not nearly enough, drivers have their carriageways, although far too much space devoted to them.Luckily sensible and courageous politicians like the Mayor and our local Cabinet members don't listen to the nasty rhetoric of the velophobes and they will continue to cater for their needs on our roads.

Paul Campbell ● 1186d

Last night I was amongst a group of people crossing CHR at the lights at the junction with British Grove.  We had crossed the cycle lane and were standing on the island.  Just before the lights changed a bus moved so as to straddle the crossing blocking us (which included a woman pushing a buggy and a small child). That made it difficult to cross as we then had to change direction to go around the bus and cross the rest of the road - and as we rounded the back of the bus we came face to face with a group of other pedestrians also trying to cross in the opposite direction.I have always thought it was better crossing at the lights BUT not this time.There is just not enough space and consideration being given by other road users particularly drivers to pedestrians!

Philippa Bond ● 1186d

I think Boris was major who dreamed up this ridiculous scheme 😂😂😂

Jayne Thorburn ● 1186d

Chris, you surprise me with your comment (especially as I know you cycle yourself, so it must be frustrating for you seeing the rule breakers)"MOST cyclists are aggressive, dangerous and entitled morons"SOME cyclists are aggressive, dangerous and entitled (I'll leave out the word moron as I don't know what most people understand by the use of the word, and I also associate the use of the word moron with posts by Steve Taylor).When walking or driving around Chiswick, I see far more considerate cyclists than the the bad cyclists.

Andrew Jones ● 1186d

Yes Boris’s vigorous championing of cycling and his guidance to other politicians to ignore the angry minority who oppose cycle lanes was, along with his support for Ukraine, a rare instance of him being a principled and determined political leader. Cyclists in London have a lot to be grateful for from him.

Paul Campbell ● 1186d

Jeremy, you are using the classic ruse of claiming data is "spurious" because it does not support your opinion. It isn't TfL data.  It is police data (called STATS19) completed when they attend a collision. The absolute number of collisions involving cyclists along the Chiswick High Rd section of C9 has not increased.  With the data publicly available it is difficult to do an in depth analysis as the police don't release the exact details of the collision, such as the direction each vehicle was travelling in and their assessment of the cause.  However TfL and Hounslow will have access to the full data. Also sections of C9 were open and closed throughout 2021 and 2022 so there isn't data for a prolonged period of time with the current implementation. However the facts are that there hasn't been an increase in the number of cyclist collisions along  Chiswick High Rd and as there has been an increased number of people cycling, the risk in terms of collisions per km cycled has reduced. This is not the same for the LBHF section of the route along King St where there HAS been an increase in collusions at certain junctions.  This was discussed on this forum previously.  LBHF have implemented none of the design features that were consulted upon originally at these junctions . LB Hounslow has implemented these design features along the CHR section.

I understand LBHF should be starting works within the next couple of weeks to implement junction design features while other plans to close Weltje and Rivercourt at the A4 are being progressed.

Really, you are trying on the same tactics tried by the Daily Telegraph articles on this subject by claiming collision figures at some specific junctions in LBHF apply to the entire route.

LB Hounslow won't need to do anything as there isn't any evidence of safety issues along the section of the route they are responsible for.  LBHF will likely (eventually) close Weltje and Rivercourt at the A4.

Somehow I think that the people behind the Telegraph articles won't be welcoming Weltje and Rivercourt becoming Low Traffic Neighbourhoods despite the improvement in safety and environment for residents on those streets.

Michael Robinson ● 1186d

Philippa ...the bus won't have blocked you if there was a Bus Lane there.Oh wait!

Nick Jenkins ● 1186d

Oh dear Phillipa! As for the naked cyclists.  Now when children spot a man with his bits out, they will need to ask is he a flasher or a cyclists mummy?  Mummy will say, does he have a bike between his legs, darling? Yes he does, oh its fine he's just a cyclists,  thats legal apparently, and nothing to get upset about.

Maggie Dodge ● 1186d

I thought we're past this by now...  there are poorly behaved people in all forms of transport & life, pedestrians, cyclists, drivers.To suggest that MOST of any type are poor is clearly nonsense and unuseful bigotry.We all have a duty to look after each other, whether that is walking, cycling or driving.  But as the highway code states there is a hierachy based on vunerability - this is common sense. FWIW - I am a pedestrian, driver and cyclist - I routinely see's issues with errant members of each group however the consequences are not even.Just remember the majority are decent people going about their day.. don't get sucked in to making statements like Chris.

Roger Hox ● 1186d

Not in town perhaps but there is a cycle lane along A3.  It is full of road debris and I have never seen a cyclist in it.  I wouldn't use it with vehicles thundering past at 70mph.  It has all the problems at junctions you suggest would exist on A4.What about making inside lane of A4 a bus lane?

Christopher Shea ● 1186d

Michael, there are far more than just a few dozen per day using the A4.  If those are the stats you are using, then nbo wonder bad decisions are being made.

Al Webber ● 1185d

Interesting to see Boris being lauded in such quarters. Are there other closet supporters? We might just yet see enchanted numpties asking ‘What did Boris do for us?’. And then a thread with him being cheered on for being a “vigorous champion” in so many quarters, but one.

Russell Pearson ● 1185d

''Pedestrians have got pavements. Cyclists have cycle lanes, although not nearly enough, drivers have their carriageways, although far too much space devoted to them.''Odd that, when I see cyclists bolting onto the pavement (frequently, I shall add) and they proceed to aggressively shout/swear and stick their fingers up at the pedestrian and bullying them to move so they can make way for the entitled, narcissistic, lycra-clad ass cyclist, on the, yep you guessed it, pavement!  Who is aggressive now?Thoughts on this, Paul?''That is absolutely not true. It is aggressively bigoted is what it is. The vast majority of cyclists are just ordinary people - mums, grandparents, hospital workers, children, cleaners, service workers going about their business. The dehumanising of cyclists by people who get cross about cycle lanes is transparent and very wrong on every level. The people who do it should be ashamed of themselves as this rhetoric encourages hate and even violence against our fellow citizens.''You mention that cyclists are ordinary people. Motorists are also ordinary people going about their daily routine and life.Your thoughts again, Paul?I agree with Chris, here that the majority of cyclists are entitled morons and seem to believe that they are Saints on wheels.

Elle Jones ● 1185d

My thoughts? How exciting for you to be so proud of being a bigot. Good luck with it.

Paul Campbell ● 1185d

“What about making inside lane of A4 a bus lane?“Still waiting for all the recently converted bus fans to take you up on this practical suggestion to prioritise bus journeys over car journeys …..

Paul Campbell ● 1185d

Paul is sounding very much like a politician - not grasping the question, nor being able to answer in an honest, direct way.

Elle Jones ● 1185d

“Why don’t the people who constitute the groups I openly and proudly hate, abuse and demonise  indulge my hateful bigotry and debate with me? Must be because I asked really clever questions they can’t answer.”

Paul Campbell ● 1185d

Will Watson:The problem for drivers is that they can't see anyone using a zebra crossing if traffic is backed up on the other east/west bound lane. (As it invariably is because of C9.) So there are obvious mitigating circumstances for a driver nearly colliding with a pedestrian. Whereas cyclists almost never stop at crossings & in this instance they should have been in the cycle lane. Remove C9 and license cyclists. Hounslow Council should stop telling porkies and accept & act on the views of the majority of residence who oppose C9 and LTNs.

Stephen Edwards ● 1185d

Just because you vote for a particular party does not mean you have to reject everything th opposition puts forward that's the reason we get nowhere.  I never voted Labour as you are all aware but if they come upwith an idea I agree with then I say so and support it.

Janice Evans ● 1185d

Agree Janice, those that can only tow the party, cycle lobby line need to learn to think for themselves.

Maggie Dodge ● 1185d

Oh, dear, Maggie, in identifying a penis with a man I fear you may be expression a transphobic view which is a hate crime.

Stephen Edwards ● 1183d

Yeah, what am I like Edward.

Maggie Dodge ● 1183d

No, the cycle lane was being used and the bus should have stopped at the  lights - whatever colour they were - instead of blocking a crossing particularly when the driver would/should have seen the large group of pedestrians waiting to cross at the lights on the driver's side at least...I'm surprised that such a lot of knowledgeable posters didn't pull me up on the fact that WE PEDESTRIANS were probably ALL trying to cross the road at a LIGHT CONTROLLED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING on what is probably technically King Street at that point!!!I can't but presume therefore that as drivers you would also be just as inconsiderate, selfish and thoughtless on the road.  No wonder there is an attempt to share roadspace more equally between users and autonomous cars are being designed!!!

Philippa Bond ● 1183d