Forum Topic

Is a new Chiswick Walking and Cycling Group needed?

I have recently sought to join Hounslow Cycling.  But have decided against having reviewed many posts on this site and from monitoring twitter feeds etc, from many of their members, all clearly identified in what was a letter from so called self promoting important people, clearly misrepresenting their status and importance in their letter to Grant Schapps.It would appear that the general tone is to assert their views as being the norm, when clearly they are not. As a cyclist who has lived in many countries and parts of the the UK when people do this it is because they know they are in a minority and tend to misrepresent facts and their own status. Only in areas where people have respect for all members of society has true change happened.  We can all support that we want better lives in the future that are less polluting and more sustainable and we save the planet for future generations.  People, families and businesses matter as do all Road users, yes all road users.  As such we need to build consensus and we need to do this in ways that allow all parts of society to progress, not to try and divide and conquer as Hounslow Cycling and its members from its posts and comments seem to want to do.That is the reason I am not joining and openly ask the question would a new Chiswick Walking and Cycling group not serve the people of Chiswick much, much better?

David Riley ● 2216d40 Comments

DavidBravo ! An excellent post that's all inclusive, sensible and balanced, well said.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2216d

Thanks David, well said! I've been always saying that the current cycling organisations actually do more harm to promote cycling than good. A new Chiswick Walking and Cycling group supporting sustainable travel, roads-for-all concept and building consensus is a great idea.

Alex Shpinkov ● 2216d

One thing that was suggested over the years in the CS9 debate was to form a Pedestrian Group. It could skew toward urban design and pedestrian amenity and force those issues which would then be presented by a special interest group much the way the special interest group of cyclists have run rough shod over the city.

David Lesniak ● 2216d

I cycle and I don’t feel that the cycling pressure groups speak for me. I take my Brompton to the High Road when I do a light shop and I sometimes feel bullied by faster, younger cyclists, who have little respect for traffic lights and pedestrians.I also fail to see how any of the changes to the road system in Grove Park help me as a cyclist. Furthermore I never saw the point of CS9 when there are quieter more pleasant routes from here to Hammersmith, where I used to work.I feel that the cycling lobby has been hijacked by the kind of people who aim to get to  Central London in 30 minutes. The kind of cycling routes I would value would be completely separate  from the road system and I feel that the failure to use the empty pavements on the north side of the A4 from the Chiswick roundabout to Hammersmith is insane.LBH is talking to the wrong people.

Brendan McCarthy ● 2216d

David. I agree 100% with your post. The current cycling lobby group are divisive and their tactics do noone any favours. They are very coordinated, they flood consultations, so that those that do no verify addresses are worthless. They defend every single meausure to the hilt, no compromise is allowed, regardless of its impact.As we have seen here in Chiswick, they will grossly misrepresent data or even make completely unfounded statements even in letters to the government. At the same time they dismiss contrary feedback as hearsay. They claim to support local business but this cavalier and misleading information disempowers those businesses and endangers the future of many. Even more worrying for democracy is that they have the ear of decision makers, with privileged access to further spread disinformation.Anyone who challenges any scheme is dismissed with straw man arguments about entitlement, not caring about safety etc. Suggested improvements are rubbished. Interestingly, nothing that is not put forward by Hounslow or TFL is deemed acceptable, despite the clear failings of many of the proposals.TFL are a remote and arrogant organisation. They do not know or understand CHiswick, the community or local traffic. They are happy to cut the community in half, cutting people off from local shops and medical facilities. The major problem in all of Chiswick is through traffic, especially the motorway through the middle of us. Until this is properly addressed then other schemes risk merely overloading routes and causing huge delays, as well as pollution for local residents. CS9 was never designed to suit the needs of the local area. Like the A4, it is something that passes through. This is underlined by the complete absence of any other local cycle routes that intersect with it and help journeys that are not from the High Road to Hammersmith. The money wasted on the pointless closure of TGT could have helped here. Removing central islands and loss of bus lanes, plus schemes to throttle back traffic allowed along the central High road, underline this.The utter hyprocisy of both Hounslow and the cycling lobby is shown by the new stadium and plans for 1000 plus cars to park in Chiswick. Any environmental savings from some local people changing some habits are lost to the mass of cars that will flood into the area on match days. Where is the outcry, the demand for an environmentally friendly approach for arriving fans. Not a thing. The closure of two of the three routes across the tube lines was entirely predictable, and predicted. It creates pollution for local people and more congestion, and problems for cyclists. The views of the broader community, including the elderly, those with mobility issues, trades people and non-aligned cyclists need to be heard. The current 'consultations' and schemes have no defined purpose, no criteria for success, no clarity on alternatives.

Paul Green ● 2216d

Brendan, spot on. The cylcing super highway is designed by TFL, who remain obsessed with arterial routes (road and now cycling) that allow long distance commuting. For years TFL were happy to alter lights to bring Chiswick to a standstill in order to help traffic flow on A4 out of central London, or for traffic to flood Chiswick when there were accidents. They did not care.This looks even more outdated as most people are no longer making such commutes. CS9 offers nothing for anyone south of the A4, cycling to Hammersmith along the river is far nicer. I really do not like to add to the lycra bashing as such stereotypes do not help, but as I am observing more the local roads the constant flouting of red lights and crossings is shocking. Drivers and red lights also a big, big problem too!

Paul Green ● 2216d

I have cycled a couple of times recently from Grove Park to Chiswick which is quite far for me these days! It was fine - apart from negotiating the mess created by the various traffic schemes and I can honestly say the only couple of alarming moments were caused by other cyclists cutting me up because I wasn't trying to break the land speed record. Slow down people!

Bruce Hammal ● 2216d

Basically LBH and the Office of The London Mayor are prioritising a minute group of physically fit middle class professional men who are obsessed with cycling and ignoring the real world of people who cycle now and again, and not very far.What is extraordinary is that a Labour council has become beholden to these people when cycling is of vanishingly low salience to most Labour voters.

Brendan McCarthy ● 2216d

"Basically LBH and the Office of The London Mayor are prioritising a minute group of physically fit middle class professional men"Tosh.

Ken Munn ● 2216d

Just google cycling and social class and read the studies.

Brendan McCarthy ● 2216d

Erratum - I meant to say I cycled from Grove  Park to Hammersmith. If I'd been going to Chiswick I'd have walked!

Bruce Hammal ● 2216d

"Basically LBH and the Office of The London Mayor are prioritising a minute group of physically fit middle class professional men who are obsessed with cycling and ignoring the real world of people who cycle now and again, and not very far."Complete nonsense.The MAMILs have no need for cycle lanes or protected space - in fact many I know worry that bike lanes may ghettoise cycling eventually forcing anyone on a human powered vehicle into the lanes supposedly constructed for their use.All the TfL protected space projects are there to encourage those who are currently too timid to mix it on the road with motor vehicles. The objective is to get more people cycling NOT to pander to those who are already perfectly competent.

Will Watson ● 2216d

Even Will Norman, London's cycling commissioner has said that London's cycling community it largely white, male and middle classThere are studies online that Will and others might read. Here's one:https://researchonline.lshtm.ac.uk/1179/1/Cycling_and_the_city_published_author_copy.pdfWhat I assert is a truth supported by evidence. You'll have to do better than say that it is 'complete nonsense'.

Brendan McCarthy ● 2216d

You're talking past, not future. Meanwhile, sit by the side of the high road and take a good look at the people cycling past.

Ken Munn ● 2216d

"All the TfL protected space projects are there to encourage those who are currently too timid to mix it on the road with motor vehicles. The objective is to get more people cycling NOT to pander to those who are already perfectly competent."Well if that is the strategy it is not working.  I used to cycle a lot - including from Brentford into Tottenham Court Rd on a daily basis - and know how to look after myself on a bike.  I've recently had my bike refurbed but I feel intimidated by the speed and the close passes from a sunstantial proportion of other cyclists who take no prisoners. It's a cultural thing which won't be changed by infrastructure changes.  I fear my refurbed bike won't be getting much use after all.

Marie Power ● 2216d

Ken, as ever its best to avoid distractions over side arguments. Yes a wider range of people are cycling, but it seems the vocal lobby groups reflect a limited demographic or health segment that choose and are physically able to use bikes extensively, as well shown by the vocal posters on here. Voices of other cyclists, pedestrians and the eldery/ less mobile are absent.Despite the broad diversity, there are still a large number of aggressive cyclists who use the roads as race tracks and typically, not exclusively, most likely to ignore rules of the road. For balance, running red lights by car is also out of controlThe broader point is the accountability of the self-appointed narrow lobby group who have the ear of decision makers. Who refuse to acknowledge problems or challenges, defend all and every scheme and spread misinformation.There is a lack of genuine consultation with the local community over current measures, which north of the High Road are not designed to help the local community. They are all about forcing the cut price version of CS9 through.

Paul Green ● 2216d

"Meanwhile, sit by the side of the high road and take a good look at the people cycling past."Would that be be before or after they crash red lights, or watching them cycle on the pavement  ?

Loraine Pemberton ● 2216d

Or you could go to Staveley Road and watch BMWs driving on the pavement.

Ken Munn ● 2216d

Some great posts here. Well said!

Nick Jenkins ● 2216d

Ken, re your latest post on Staverly Road. We can keep with the tribal mud slinging, or acknowledge issues and work together for all relevant groups. We have heard of a 'silent' majority in favour of these schemes. But a survey of over 700 local residents finds 75% oppose the closure of Fishers Lane and 9% in favour. Such stats are pretty clear cut. To call the closures of Fishers Lane and TGT a 'scheme' is also generous, given the total absence of planning, consultation, clear objectives, coordination of either Hounslow, Ealing or TFL.

Paul Green ● 2216d

"Furthermore I never saw the point of CS9 when there are quieter more pleasant routes from here to Hammersmith, where I used to work.I feel that the cycling lobby has been hijacked by the kind of people who aim to get to  Central London in 30 minutes."100% correct!

Steve Taylor ● 2216d

"What is extraordinary is that a Labour council has become beholden to these people when cycling is of vanishingly low salience to most Labour voters."Precisely!!  Labour just can't get it right. That is why they are such losers!

Steve Taylor ● 2216d

""Basically LBH and the Office of The London Mayor are prioritising a minute group of physically fit middle class professional men"Of course they are. And that is why they antagonise the general public and cause such a social divide. And the middle class lycra bums are laughing all the way at how easy it has been to sucker these labour half-wits and get therm to spend huge money on things that aren't wanted by the majority of citizens..

Steve Taylor ● 2216d

" Labour just can't get it right."Ahem, it's Tory party policy.

Ken Munn ● 2216d

Ken is right. It is a Tory (for which read Boris Johnson) preoccupation and Labour councils have been suckered into falling for it. The bizarre thing is that it is a policy that matters little to either party’s base. It will not outlast the departure of Johnson/Cummings

Brendan McCarthy ● 2216d

"Ahem, it's Tory party policy."precisely - and Labour are stupidly selling it

Steve Taylor ● 2216d

" For balance, running red lights by car is also out of control"I am not so sure that it is so out of control for cars. There is always the extremely high risk of a camera getting you and a hefty fine being applied but cyclists have little or no chance of being fined. Hence the majority of cyclists will run red lights with impunity. It is extremely rare to see a cyclist waiting at a red light for the whole duration.

Steve Taylor ● 2216d

That was pretty much a few isolated incidents by law breaking idiots who will, hopefully, be prosecuted.Unfortunately a group of 4 lycra clad cyclists at 6.55am today who crashed red lights at HT/CHR junction and narrowly missed hitting myself, Fifi and Barney won't be - and it was my right of way, NOT theirs !I accept that there are law breaking motorists and have always advocated they should be penalised, but Ken do tell me why you don't think the same for law breaking cyclists  ?

Loraine Pemberton ● 2216d

I have to say I think in terms of increasing the number of cyclists on the road, it might be a case of 'Be careful what you wish for' for the more macho and fast moving members of the cycling community. Just now popping out of my house I saw a comparatively young cyclist moving at a rather tardy pace on the road carriageway. Can you imagine a situation where a classic MAMIL type comes up behind a cyclist like that in a narrow cycle lane cordoned off by bollards? Cue extreme frustration at best. In the pre-bollard days, MAMIL man would have been able to have moved out into the road at a safe time and zoomed on, but of course now he won't be able to.

Ian Speed ● 2216d

I would have thought the crossing between Grove Park and Chiswick would have been the most alarming part,  crossing the A4 junction between SCT south and SCT North is about as unpleasant as it comes.  Did you use that junction or did you use the underpasses?

Matthew Swain ● 2216d

"in terms of increasing the number of cyclists on the road, it might be a case of 'Be careful what you wish for'"Yep - its already come to that I think. Especially with MAMILs now having to share the cordoned off lanes with the wobbly e-scooters (used by the youth)  and the ever increasing 'sit up and go' e-bikes (that are used a lot by the more mature riders).

Steve Taylor ● 2216d

Yes, indeed it is a Conservative initiative BUT as I've said before LB Hounslow grabbed with both hands that had go-fast stripes on them, they did not have to accept !However, it's LB Hounslow's ill thought out, conceived and implementation that's the problem.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2216d

That previous post was for Bruce but now have now read subsequent post re going  to Hammersmith.Curious though if you were. to cycle to CHR from Grove Park which route/crossing would you go for on a bike?

Matthew Swain ● 2216d

Matthew, I too would welcome advice on the best route as I'm new to Grove Park! As it happens the first part of the route I took to Hammersmith is the same as the one I would take to Chiswick (High Rd). I rode down Sutton Court Road then walked my bike across the A4 using the surface pedestrian crossing. If I had been going to the High Road I would have probably used the underpass (again dismounting) before continuing along SCR. Here I have to confess that I followed the A4 riding slowly on the empty pavement towards the Hogarth roundabout. I encountered a single pedestrian on my way and got off my bike until we had crossed. As I went I wondered once again why this was rejected as the route for CS9.  Coming back I followed the river route which felt longer but was more pleasant. Whenever I encounter "proper" cyclists and I've dismounted (for example  to push my bike across a pedestrian crossing) I get looks of astonishment as I do when I give hand signals or stop for pedestrians. I wonder, do the majority of cyclists actually know the law as it applies to cyclists and just choose to ignore it or are they genuinely acting in ignorance? Either way it's not an excuse and again I can't help but think that if everybody just left a bit more time for their journey and slowed down a bit many of the problems would go away. Sharing a cycle lane with a "commited" cyclist rather than someone who just happens to be using a bicycle can be a very intimidating  process — a bit like having a BMW driver up your backside flashing his lights when you're sticking to the limit in your Morris Minor....

Bruce Hammal ● 2216d

Would you realy welcome advice Bruce because it looks awfully like you were keen to take the opportunity to take the moral high-ground over cyclists and relight the long-extinguished embers of the argument over where Cycleway 9 should be routed?I'm happy to give you some advice but not to go round and round in circles on these tired old arguments.I'd recommend Burlington Lane to Grantham Road to Pumping Station Road to Chiswick Mall to Black Lion Lane and then go north using the underpass without barriers into St Peter's Square for a more pleasant route to King Street once you've got past the A316.

Paul Campbell ● 2216d

Thanks Paul I genuinely was asking for advice as I couldn't seem to find a usable cycling route mapper. I was also giving my observations on my first cycle ride along this route. I am not seeking the moral high-ground over cyclists -after all  I am a cyclist myself or don't people like me count? I thought I was exactly the sort of cyclist you would be trying to encourage. I report what I see. It would be nice if just occasionally I heard the lobbying cyclists encouraging all on two wheels to respect the law and stop treating their journey like some sort of time-trial of the Tour deFrance. There is never so much as a word. You obviously think that you have some sort of right to set the agenda - I'm afraid you don't. However as you rightly say this is old ground and not worth the effort of raking over again.As to your route....I'm familiar with the last part as I often used to cycle that way from my home in Stamford Brook when I worked in Eyot Gardens. It's the intricacies of the western end that I find a bit confusing but I'm sure I'll get used to it. I used to take the bus for this journey but I dread to think how long that would take at the moment. Again I'm sorry if you find this comment barbed - it is just a statement of fact.

Bruce Hammal ● 2215d

Bruce: on the western end.I cycle from my home, along Fauconberg and Staveley Road to the Park (Stavely Gate); around the Park's southeast perimeter path to the Corney Road Gate; cross the A316 at the adjacent lights: then to Fuller's Brewery and along the river.In the Park it means acknowledging that pedestrians come first, but I've never had a problem.

Brendan McCarthy ● 2215d

Thanks Brendan, that’s very useful. I’ve only been on this side of the A4 for about a year. My GP is still in Hammersmith though and I’ve taken to cycling over there as I need to know how long the trip will take - unfathomable with traffic as it is. I’ve developed a dodgy hip so walking there and back is a bit too far. A rickshaw service would be handy!

Bruce Hammal ● 2215d

I’m a cyclist too, think this is a great idea. A tiny group of anti-car zealots is misrepresenting what ordinary cyclists need. We need a group that allows us to have our views heard. Otherwise the ‘Lycra Lobby’ will just close roads and we won’t see much benefit for those people who just want to get about a bit more on our bikes.

Russell Pearson ● 2215d

"Otherwise the ‘Lycra Lobby’ will just close roads and we won’t see much benefit for those people who just want to get about a bit more on our bikes."Precisely!  Well said.

Steve Taylor ● 2215d