Forum Topic

Shifting Cycleway 9 to the pavement

My first take on these proposals is that they are probably making the best of a bad job even though it is laughable to describe them as a safety measure.Most cyclists will ignore the proposed cycleway route and stay on the High Road approaching the Heathfield Road from the east or west. Those approaching from the south may find it helps to use the new pavement bit by turn onto it in front of the Lamb but, other than that, most people using it will be less confident cyclists, who will pose very little threat to the relatively small number of pedestrians in this area.The interesting thing here is why it is being forced through so quickly without proper consultation. The likely reason is the continued drop in bus speeds on the High Road - can't think what else would have prompted this sudden change.

Mark Evans ● 7d47 Comments

There is nothing quick about the implementation.They are the essentially the original plans consulted on in 2017 then updated for a second consultation in 2019.  Implementation was impacted by Covid so the current design is essentially the "temporary" design.The plans were published again in 2023 when C9 was made permanent.So about 10 years from initial consultation to implementation.The delay between 2023 and 2026 is basically because of negotiations between Hounslow and TfL to provide funding and availability of the funding.In 2023 Hounslow also proposed removing the bus gate at Acton Lane as well as the cycle lane upgrade but bus gate removal was vetoed by TfL as their assessment was it would increase bus journey times, not improve them.

Michael Robinson ● 7d

This is a total waste of money. All for a glorified left turn that is safe already. At the expense of pedestrians crossing on the south side of the High Road near Turnham Green.The ridiculous bit by the Vodaphone on the north is patently absurd. Simply watch what happens in Hammersmith. On the north side of the gyratory that bit of cycle infrastructure gathers dust. Cyclists stay in the road to either head up King Street on the roadway, or they stay with traffic in the gyratory to head north or east. Further up on King Street there is the shift. That double ess curve when the cycle lane changes from the north to the south side. All too often people just sail along on King Street either with the cars or going through the light and staying on King for a smoother merge. Zigs and Zags are just plain dumb. Plenty of near misses with cyclists who bravely attempt to stay on the cycle lane. Money spent for no return. All that is needed is a change in signal phasing and, at most, more of the waiting area in front of the cars at the light. Given it has been 10 years and the economy is a completely different animal since the 2017 consultation, this is profligate waste pure and simple. Spend the money elsewhere. Or don't spend it. Of course the other option is to charge cyclists for their own safety and stop making everyone else pay the price.

David Lesniak ● 6d

>at most, more of the waiting area in front of the cars at the light.For eight year olds?

Paul James ● 6d

>Of course the other option is to charge cyclists for their own safety and stop making everyone else pay the price.Can you explain this comment?As a council tax payer, I already get charged for this stuff, as well as lots of other stuff I don't use, but I'm good with that as I know others do.

Paul James ● 6d

I think you are missing the point David. The Cycleway is retained but traffic flow should improve around this junction. I presume the removal of the pedestrian refuge by Waitrose and the reconfiguration will aid progress eastbound and a left filter lane is added westbound.One potential fly in the ointment is delivery traffic on Bleak House Lane and the other access point to Barley Mow Passage. I think all cyclists would be safer remaining with general traffic than joining the bit of the cycleway on the pavement.

Francis Rowe ● 6d

> I think all cyclists would be safer remaining with general traffic I'm glad you write "I think" with that! :D

Paul James ● 6d

do you think otherwise? If so, tell us why.

Francis Rowe ● 6d

...that I don't think it's a good idea to mix people on bikes with with "general traffic".That is adults on bikes and kids on or in bikes, and it's best avoided if at all possible.Or, and this will blow your mind, I don't think it's a good idea to show people that think they might might like to cycle that they will have to cycle with "general traffic" instead of on a protected cycle lane.

Paul James ● 6d

>One potential fly in the ointment is delivery traffic on Bleak House Lane and the other access point to Barley Mow Passage.I've ridden past these hundreds of times. Pretty sure I never had to deal with somebody turning in or out of these. Like I know it must happen but it seems vanishly rare thing to say "put cyclists in the road there".

Paul James ● 6d

Francis, the existing cycle lane goes past the Bleak House lane junction so I don't know why you think moving the cycle lane a metre or two  would make any difference. As I have already mentioned, traffic surveys were done for each junction on the route and Bleak House Lane looks like the least used on the entire route with a grand total of 4 vehicles using it during the morning peak.The fact you think people would be safer mixed with the rest of motor traffic where they can be left hooked, clipped, rear ended means I am very glad you have absolutely no influence.

Michael Robinson ● 6d

The reason would be primarily due to sight lines. The access road is the main delivery point for a number of businesses including the auction house so it is in regular use. I'm very sceptical of people who say otherwise. The last time I passed this point was on foot last week just after the falafel stall fire and there was a lorry parked across the pavement unloading. I think I may have mixed up Bleak House Lane with the other one nearer the Lamb which is now closed off.Lorries emerging from here currently have a better line of sight than they would do for a cycle way that would be closer and less well marked than the existing one.Each cyclist can make his or her own choice on their personal safety. There is a short stretch of straight road with one entry point crossing it and good sight lines or the proposed diversion on the pavement which will have a blind spot on entry and exit round the tree meaning a good proportion of cyclist might choose to carry on to Dukes Avenue to rejoin the cycleway. You then have to negotiate pedestrians some of whom will not be familiar with the existence of a bi-directional cycleway plus the previously mentioned blind exit. You then come to a crowded junction with the pavement narrowed by street furniture and rejoin the cycleway. I don't think what is proposed is a bad idea but I won't be using the section on the pavement and neither will most cyclists including ones who are particularly concerned with minimising risk.

Francis Rowe ● 6d

I assume cutting off the paved corner westbound into Heathfield Terrace will allow the main traffic lights at that junction to be simplified.  It's not so clear how eastbound cyclists using the Wellesley Road/Heathfield Terrace section of the cycle route (which, with a few cycles painted on the road, is hardly a protected cycle route at all) will turn right into the new two-way pavement section and onwards along CHR.  And on the official map, what does 'at footway levels' mean when referring to the new 'pavement' section? That the new cycle track won't have segregating kerbs and cyclists can continue to go on the remaining pavement at will as before?

Peter Evans ● 6d

> including ones who are particularly concerned with minimising risk.35 years cycling in London.I can go two ways into town from where I live on my bike1) Up to Uxbridge Road and east along it2) Down to Brentford and east along CS9I almost always choose two as it's far far far, far far, far  far less fraught a journey due to the fact it's mostly protected cycle track, save for the death star style run at High Street Ken.

Paul James ● 6d

Come off it Francis.  The lane will be moving by a couple of metres, is still well away from the frontage of the buildings where the lane emerges and Bleak House lane has minimal traffic using it.While you wait at the signals with all the motor traffic and risk being left hooked by vehicles turning into Heathfield Terrace, I am confident most cyclists will be taking the new route which doesn't involve any signals at all when going to Heathfield Terrace.This design would have been implemented in 2020 if Covid hadn't happened.  You are only clutching your pearls because something is changing.

Michael Robinson ● 6d

A lot of the existing cycle lane is at footway level.  If you look at the section around Netheravon Rd for example, from the frontage outwards it is footway, then low profile kerb then the cycle lane, then low profile kerb, then footway then a right angle kerb down to the roadway.

Michael Robinson ● 6d

I've cycled through the Heathfield Terrace junction all three ways since I last posted and I don't see any reason to change my initial opinion other than a refinement of what will happen from the approach from the south.Eastbound from Dukes Avenue many cyclists already stay on the road to avoid the left turn phase on the cycleway. A good proportion of those that remain in the cycleway, ignore the left turn phase and proceed through the red. It is reasonable to assume these groups will continue on the road until Heathfield Terrace. I'm no boy racer but I would be reasonably confident that with the head start of the cycle phase I could be three quarters of the way to Heathfield Terrace ahead of traffic on the road waiting at the lights. This would mean you could take the command position and safely turn left.However, you will have the option of using the cycleway on the pavement if you see queueing traffic ahead at the Heathfield Terrace lights. These changes should reduce queues at this junction so that may not happen that often.Westbound on Chiswick High Road, cyclists are essentially being asked to loop around to join the pedestrian crossing phase (which will be relatively short) and it is inevitable that only a tiny proportion will do that given that they will be confident on the road. The main options will be to move forward with motor traffic and cross the junction diagonally or continue on the High Road seeking to rejoin the cycleway after the Dukes Avenue junction.Northbound there is a similar configuration to eastbound with cyclists being asked apparently to join the pedestrian phase which most won't do. Possibly an attempt will be made to block entry at the cycleway exit onto Heathfield Terrace but it is hard to see how this would be enforced so cyclists will either stay on the road to turn right or join the pavement cycleway here.Much of this is likely to end up like the design by Turnham Green Terrace which nobody ever uses. I'm sure the engineers appreciate this but there seems to be a bigger imperative behind this. The data on bus journey times must be quite alarming which explains the speed with which this is being forced through at.

Mark Evans ● 6d

>Eastbound from Dukes Avenue many cyclists already stay on the road to avoid the left turn phase on the cyclewayI never see this when I ride though here, it not very often I see people on bikes outside the cycle track, where do they swith to "the road" to do this, the people you see?>I'm no boy racer but I would be reasonably confident that with the head start of the cycle phase I could be three quarters of the way to Heathfield Terrace ahead of traffic on the road waiting at the lights. This would mean you could take the command position and safely turn left.It's not all about you Mark! Think about other people please, as well as people that aren't cycling yet that would like to (and why they might not be doing this)>and it is inevitable that only a tiny proportion will do that given that they will be confident on the roadAgain, I don't see many people on bikes outside a protected cycle track when a protected cycle track is there. Some obviously, but most people stay on the cycel track if possible.

Paul James ● 6d

Mark,  have got some westbound and eastbounds mixed up because some of your descriptions really don't make any sense to me."Eastbound from Dukes Avenue many cyclists already stay on the road to avoid the left turn phase on the cycleway."a) Do you not mean westbound rather than eastbound?b) I've never seen thisFor westbound cyclists approaching the Heathfield Terrace junction, I've seen cyclists in the bike lane ignore the cyclist-specific red lights because there is nothing coming.  I've seen cyclists bypass the lights by cycling on the pavement.  I have never seen "many" cyclists in the road rather than the cycle lane at that location.  This is based upon daily commuting most days since the current C9 was installed and I am at that junction during the evening peak.

Michael Robinson ● 5d

Not missing a point, Francis. The cycleway needn't take the pavement on the south side. For what? A left turn that can already be made safely?Reducing the pavement by Waitrose (good point) is just dumb. High pedestrian traffic plus trolleys and everything else on the pavement. And you think introducing cyclists who aren't mandated to stay in place is a good idea?What about the 8-year olds on the pavement? Remember those?Sorry, Paul. No 8-year old should be cycling during rush hour on a city street. They are dispossessed of the knowledge and judgement required.

David Lesniak ● 5d

You are right - I am getting my eastbounds and westbounds mixed up.Travelling westbound towards the Dukes Avenue junction many regular users of the cycleway will switch to the road to avoid the long phase at the lights. There is no hard segregation here and it is an often a good idea to get out of the cycleway before the junctions with Linden Gardens and Duke Road to avoid vehicles laid across the cycleway. I do this from time to time and there are often other cyclists doing the same. You may not see this at the evening peak because if there is queueing traffic on the road it is more difficult and less advantageous to perform this move.You'll see similar strategies at the Chiswick Lane junction where you can also save good amount of time by switching onto the road.These are all perfectly legitimate moves for cyclists who are not obliged to use the cycleway and I have never had anyone objecting to me doing it. It is also safer than ignoring the red lights which many continue to do.Travelling eastbound approaching the Heathfield terrace a good proportion of cyclists stay on CHR. Many like me are ultimately heading north of the High Road joining the Cycleway would mean crossing the road twice in a short distances but others are seeking to avoid the cycleway at the Dukes Avenue junction because they can more easily get through the lights.

Mark Evans ● 5d

So you seem to be saying, the more motor traffic there is, the more people will use the cycle lane.That is kinda obvious and if taken to an extreme conclusion, if there was no motor traffic, there would be no need to use the cycle lane at all.Cycle lanes are really motor vehicle infrastructure because that is why they are needed.

Michael Robinson ● 5d

>What about the 8-year olds on the pavement? Remember those?It's illegeal to cycle ont he pavement.>Sorry, Paul. No 8-year old should be cycling during rush hour on a city street.1. by rush hour do you mean start of school time?2. they don't have to be on their own3. why not?

Paul James ● 5d

>I have never seen "many" cyclists in the road rather than the cycle lane at that location.Me neither. Is Mark making stuff up to save face?

Paul James ● 5d

It certainly is true that many cyclists will choose the quickest route and a clear road is often the quickest. The important point is that while the cycling infrastructure may be there, there is no obligation to use it. That doesn't mean it is redundant because the kind of cyclist who wants to get from A to B as quickly as possible isn't the kind that cycleways are built for.

Mark Evans ● 5d

>That doesn't mean it is redundant because the kind of cyclist who wants to get from A to B as quickly as possible isn't the kind that cycleways are built for.I see all types of people in these cycle tracks Mark, including full blown roadies in full on lycra, even london dynamo people, and yes, eight year olds, or even younger.On embankment it'#s so rare I can say I simply do not see people on bikes outside the cycle track amd I very rarely see this on chiswick high road. IF I do see this it's often people trying to join he track or leaving it to go north or south.,I used to cycle around hyde park corner on the road, but now the cycle track goes across it I use that instead , in a month I can count on one hand the number of times I see somebody on the bike on the road there.Simple answer is, if you cycle in the cycle track things become MUCH more simple.Why are you trying to make out "many" cyclists don't use the tracks?

Paul James ● 5d

I take it you've never cycled to work along C3 on the Embankment Mark?All human cycling life is there.  Women in summer dresses (in the summer), City boys in suits on Lime bikes with one hand on the handlebars and the holding a phone in the other while they do a deal, Bromptons, and head-to-toe lycra types on their carbon fibre racing machines.According to you, all those people wearing lycra on their Pinarellos and Colnagos should be on the road.  But they really aren't.  There is virtually nobody cycling on the road.The best designed cycle lanes are used by everyone.  When there are compromises made with design of cycle lanes, invariably it is to placate drivers.

Michael Robinson ● 5d

Colour the cycle lanes and make the rumble strips more uncomfortable to wake the cyclists up who just ignore any 'Slow' markings and just continue mindlessly on straight towards pedestrians waiting to cross at pedestrian crossings.

Philippa Bond ● 5d

I cycled east along this section of cycleway 9 eastbound a short time ago. While I was waiting for the left turn phase at Chiswick Lane, three cyclists passed me on the road (legitimately passing through a green light) and two passed me on the cycle lane (ignoring a red light). When I got to Dukes Avenue one cyclist passed on the road and four ignored the red on the cycleway (with three waiting with me). This wasn't an unusual trip.I do wonder Michael at times if you are incapable of nuance or fluidity of thought. What Mark is saying seems to me perfectly logical and uncontroversial. He is not criticising the cycle lanes or saying that people should never use them. However, it is self-evidently true that if you want to get from one end of Chiswick High Road as quickly as possible on a bike, have a relatively clear road and want to adhere to the law, it is better to stay off the cycleway because the traffic light delays are much longer on it. I observe people doing this all the time.

Francis Rowe ● 5d

More anecdotes Francis. That’s really the only thing you’ve got, isn’t it?By “nuance or fluidity of thought” do you mean bullshitting, anecdotes and making things up because that is your stock in trade.

Michael Robinson ● 5d

Have cycled through the Dukes Avenue junction within the hour. Westbound eight cyclists in the cycle lane including me observed the red light with none passing through (perhaps the presence of a cargo bike with children in it had some effect). One cyclist passed us on the road where the light was green. I see good use of available options by cyclists who have different needs. I can't understand why anyone would deny this happens.There will be more of this if the new designs are implemented as the suggested routes for cyclists at the Heathfield Terrace junction northbound and eastbound will be considerably slower. Many cyclists will chose to stay on the road - this is not a problem.

Mark Evans ● 5d

>One cyclist passed us on the road where the light was green. I can't understand why anyone would deny this happens.Nobody here has denied it happens.>Many cyclists will chose to stay on the roadMost, the vast majority, won't.

Paul James ● 5d

>it is better to stay off the cycleway because the traffic light delays are much longer on it.It goes without saying, this is your opinion that many do not share, including me, a long time cyclist in London.

Paul James ● 5d

>He is not criticising the cycle lanes or saying that people should never use them.Very much of the argument here from yourself though is we don't really need the cycle tracks, people can just ride in the road and they'll be fine.

Paul James ● 5d

This is just getting ridiculous now. Nobody is saying any of the things you are suggesting they are. Cycle lanes including Cycleway 9 have been very successful in encouraging more people to ride a bike and the overwhelming number of cyclists do not leave them as they pass through the centre of Chiswick.Many do not because of a variety of good reasons which are not necessarily due to design flaws in the cycleway. I often don't because I am usually heading north and the cycleway is on the wrong side of the road. Many other people who use this route on a daily basis have worked out strategies where you blend usage of the cycleway and the road to reduce journey times.

Mark Evans ● 4d

Thing is Mark, for westbound cyclists on C9 who are heading towards Heathfield Terrace, I can't see why anyone would get out of the cycle lane and wait at the lights which will be red for x% of the time (I don't know the exact %...) if there is the option to stay in the cycle lane and bypass the lights 100% of the time.If heading north on Heathfield Terrace and wanting to visit a shop within a few hundred metres on the north east side of CHR from there (e.g. Campbells Chemists), sure, I wouldn't bother to use the cycle lane.For people heading N on Heathfield Terrace who want to head east on the cycle lane, I can see some people just crossing over to the cycle lane before the lights even though this isn't the intention.

Michael Robinson ● 4d

I think one problem with the discussion is the imprecision and different interpretations of the word "many".It certainly can't be used to describe the majority, or anywhere close to it.  I can dig out the traffic counts from the cameras at CHR/TGT which record numbers using cycle lane and roadway but from memory, well over 90% of people on bikes are using the cycle lane there.  So if it was 95% and 4000 people a day, that is 200 not using the cycle lane each day there. Is that many? It isn't nearly as many as using the cycle lane.  "Some" would be a word that wouldn't be argued with (possibly...!)

Michael Robinson ● 4d

You make a very good point about cycle safety, Michael.Cyclists shouldn't be able to hold their phones distracting them from promoting safety for all road users. Especially those 8-year olds. Don't get me started on the noise-cancelling head phones.

David Lesniak ● 4d

Yet another attack from Michael when he feels cornered. Francis and Mark are both absolutely correct. As opposed to Paul who isn't familiar with what goes on in the area.Motorcyclists in the cycle lane in Hammersmith all the time.Cyclists of all levels weaving in and out of all traffic lanes on both sides of the road.Cyclist of all levels merging on and off the cycle lane at Chiswick Lane regardless of what the light is doing. My favorite is when they mount the pavement near the hotel, cross through the pedestrian crossings and then back on the cycle lane to avoid the light that way. God forbid their journey takes 10 seconds longer by waiting in the cycle lane for a green. But by all means, let's add more and more and more time to make any trip by car.

David Lesniak ● 4d

"It's illegeal to cycle ont he pavement"That made me laugh.We've all seen plenty of 8-year olds cycling on the pavement. Paul thinks we should arrest them or issue a PCN because it is illegal.1.) Yes2.) They are often on their own (parental neglect?)3.) Undeveloped frontal cortex

David Lesniak ● 4d

Agreed, Philippa. Color the cycle lanes as they do in other boroughs. Make them the same color city-wide which they are not at present. More utterly pointless wasted money. We have double red and single yellows lines for a reason. Clarity.I disagree about the rumble strips. I prefer cycling in Hammersmith vs in Chiswick because the surface is more consistent. Chiswick has twists and turns and lumps and bumps. If you do that at any moderate speed it can be unpleasant. If you're an avid cyclist I can understand why you'd avoid that at all costs and use the road instead. Poor design. Needlessly complicated.

David Lesniak ● 4d

200 a day sounds like 'many' to me but I don't want to get into an argument about semantics. A figure of about 5% sounds reasonable for the proportion off moving off the cycleway although it will vary throughout the day. It will be zero when there is traffic and can rise to as much as 50% very early in the morning or at night. I suspect the proportion of riders westbound staying on the road between Dukes Avenue and Heathfield Terrace will be higher than 5% when there is no queueing traffic but we will see soon enough.

Mark Evans ● 4d

As I've already mentioned, for people cycling westbound and heading down Heathfield Terrace, once the new design is implemented I cannot see why someone would get into the motor lane where the lights will be red for a proportion of the time compared to staying in the cycle lane and bypass the lights all the time..

Michael Robinson ● 4d

>That made me laugh.Once again for you, it's illegal to cycle on the pavement."If any person shall wilfully ride upon any footpath or causeway made or set apart for the use or accommodation of foot passengers… every person so offending shall forfeit and pay a penalty".However, when they brought in a fixed penalty notice for it, the advice at the time was: “The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so.“Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required.”

Paul James ● 3d

>If you're an avid cyclist I can understand why you'd avoid that at all costs and use the road insteadI rode all the way along CHR today between Wellesey Road and Hammersmith, twice.I saw probably 150 people on bikes, of all sorts.I saw ONE person riding on the road, on a forest bike heading east, just past Waitrose.I didn't even consider riding on the road myself, 35 years cycling in and all over London, the cycle track is so much better in many ways.

Paul James ● 3d

Some cyclists will ignore the red light if they are turning left and those that don't will be able to cut the corner in front of the Lamb if they are faced with a red light at Heathfield Terrace.I can't remember from the designs if there is a traffic control at the end of the pavement as it joins Heathfield Terrace but there probably should be.

Mark Evans ● 1d

The brown rumble strips which Hammersmith put on the riverside path were deemed to be useless to slow cyclists and I saw the one on the cycle lane near Millbank being completely useless together with the large white SLOW sign painted on the cycle lane the other day.  No slowing down at all - once some/most? cyclists get into their automatic pedalling rhythm - they seem to detach their brains from what they are doing and what is in front of them.  Something needs to jolt them out of it. Why should it be me yelling Slow Down as they hurtle towards all the pedestrians waiting at the lights to cross the busy road!?In fact in Ealing yesterday I must have bemused a motorist who kindly slowed down and stopped to let me cross on a zebra crossing.  I didn't start crossing because I could see and was watching a huge (not fat) wheeled electric bike with a small person perched on it overtaking the line of cars and hurtling at great speed towards me and the crossing.  I was too staggered by the accelerating speed, sight and size of the rider and bike who was was heading towards me and had absolutely no intention of slowing down let alone stopping - if that was actually possible - that I stayed back.  Thank goodness.  It could have been very very messy.  So it is quite obvious that there needs to be far more effort to make sure that those who ride these are old enough to be on them, can actually control them and also know the Highway Code.What happened to not overtaking traffic stopped at a zebra crossing?  I'm not even sure this cyclist knows what a zebra crossing is!

Philippa Bond ● 1d

"I'm not even sure this cyclist knows what a zebra crossing is"Regulation would help. Proficiency exams would help. Licensing would help. Not rocket science.

David Lesniak ● 1d