Forum Topic

Oh look Paul Campbell and Michael Robinson as if by magic appear to trash a vocal opponent of the crazy local schemes. I have no view on Cllr Biddolph and perhaps the analogy was inappropriate, but hardly a crime. As others have said, TGT and DR are like London during the ring of steel or indeed today. Having been into the City recently its similar, devoid of life or activity.Look at all the Glebe estate residents who now struggle to access their homes and face long diversions. Again, a scheme could be modified to address this. TGT closure remains a solution in search of a problem.You both signed a letter containing clear falsehoods that was sent to a govnt minister. Paul seems to think its a laugh that people including myself ask him for evidence. I am sure the traders who face losing their livelihoods are not laughing. It is extraordinary at these times that you think this is acceptable or responsible behaviour. It is a long record now of gross misrepresentations and falsehoods from the cycling lobby.What about the 75% of LOCAL residents who oppose the closure of Fishers Lane. Note local people, not lobbyists from afar.AS for Cllr Lambert, he similarly inhabits a fantasy world. If he thinks there is no congestion in Chiswick he should have been trying to get to an appnt at 9am yesterday. Turnham Green was gridlocked with long queues on all roads leading to the High Road/ Acton Lane junction. As predicted, the pointless new bus gate has created long eastbound queues on the High Road back to the business park. Remember, thousands of people live on these roads are now suffering even worse air quality. What a laugh, Paul.

Paul Green ● 2213d

When I first read the opening post on this thread, suggesting that Joan Biddulph had compared Chiswick to Belfast during the troubles, I was outraged at the stupidity of such a remark. However, I then followed the link that Michael supplied and read the whole speech. In fact, I found it to be a reasonable and cogent outline of what has happened in Chiswick as a result of the council ignoring the views of local residents and imposing an arbitrary array of road closures and, to use her word, 'draconian' regulations on local neighbourhoods. She did not say that Chiswick was like Belfast, but merely quoted, en passant, what one individual had said. All-in-all, I think she put the case for Chiswick, its residents and its business community very well (though I will be surprised if Curran and his apparatchik cronies pay attention to a single word of it). This is a small section of what she actually said, including the infamous 'Belfast' quote: 'Residents and traders value the fact that what Chiswick offers has widespread appeal, that it brings shoppers, diners, heritage visitors, river lovers to our town to spend their leisure time and their money here. Your group does not. Why spoil it? As one resident said last night, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. Your group has broken Chiswick. Driven by envy? Lack of ambition and aspiration? Your group could raise standards across the borough. Instead it chooses to lower them in Chiswick, turning the character and attractiveness of our town, and neighbourhoods within it, into what one resident described as “Belfast during The Troubles” and another “the barricades of Berlin”.Your draconian ill-thought out schemes are putting our traders on Chiswick High Road, Devonshire Road, Fishers Lane, Turnham Green Terrace out of business. Your draconian ill-thought out schemes have divided our town geographically north-south and east-west and within wards. Our email inboxes are overwhelmed with complaints.'

Colin Jordan ● 2213d

"Come to think of it can anyone think of any specific policies the councillors have supported or proposed locally to encourage active travel?"Thanks for asking. The detailed Cycling Policy of the Conservative Cllrs Group was published on 18th May 2020.Our new policy is based on clear principles, locally applied. These include:• cycle lanes should go with the traffic flow wherever possible;• cyclists and pedestrians should be kept separate, with road space used to create cycle lanes and pavements reserved for pedestrians, not least to maintain social distancing;• cycle lanes must not come to a sudden end or disappear at junctions;• local councils must fill potholes within two working days of them being reported on all roadswhere cycle lanes are installed; if potholes occur in cycle lanes they must be filled within one working day after they are reported to ensure they remain usable and safe;• cycle lanes should be clearly marked in ways that ensure the safety of riders and reduce conflictwith vehicles and people;• civil enforcement officers should be empowered to apply the law to the minority of cyclistswho flout the rules, freeing police officers to deal with more serious issues including traffic. offences;• changes made because of the pandemic should be temporary and only made permanent once the current crisis has passed and following proper consultation with residents, road users, traders and businesses as well as cyclists.• Consistent with our belief that the government’s initiative needs to be applied locally, according to theneeds of each area and community, we will be contributing to Hounslow Council’s consultation on these measures. We are particularly concerned that this consultation process and its outcome respect all the differing needs of the different areas and communities in the borough. Hounslow Council should adopt the following principles in its approach to traffic calming, bike lanes and other measures designed to promote walking and cycling:• all changes must be consistent with the council’s liveable neighbourhoods strategy and its climate change emergency action plan;• all types of cycling should be encouraged, including local and family cycling throughout the borough with an emphasis on making roads safer for all users;• cycle measures must include north-south roads whilst recognising that some are essential routes for buses, commercial and domestic deliveries, and local car journeys;• there must be full, open and unbiased consultation in our local communities;• the needs of local businesses should be at the heart of the council’s policies; the pandemic has benefited large, national online traders often at the expense of local shops; this is inconsistent with tackling climate change and promotes congestion;• there must be vehicle access to all shops for collections and deliveries, including retaining popular stop and shop parking schemes that are a lifeline to many people and vital to traders in all our town centres (Brentford, Chiswick, Feltham and Hounslow);• steps need to be taken to protect traders and businesses during construction works, includingbike lane work; this will be essential if the Cycleway 9 works go ahead;• we would like the Santander bike scheme to be extended beyond zone 3 but, if that is not possible, Hounslow Council should look at establishing its own docked bike hire scheme, with private sector support such as with Brompton, to replace dockless bike schemes;• there should be more secure bike parking and storage all around the borough, at railway andtube stations and in residential areas;• we should encourage more bike clinics and maintenance courses throughout the borough;• there must be more opportunities for adults and children to learn to cycle safely throughout the borough in conjunction with local schools and community groups, including by adding cycling proficiency training to the curriculum;• the council must run education and awareness raising courses, and widely distribute guidance, about the rules of the road and safe cycling.The government’s announcement of extra funding for walking and cycling schemes is an exciting opportunity to build a worthwhile legacy from the tragedy of the pandemic. The principles we have set out for government and for our own borough would promote greater walking and cycling and in doing so raise the quality of people’s lives in Hounslow and elsewhere. We hope they will be adopted in full

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 2210d

In the early part of the 21st century the so called ‘Troubles’ broke out in west London. A minority of the population that were adherents of Chiswickism felt they were being oppressed by a Hounslowist majority supported by their paymaster in Westminster.The Hounslowists held those that followed Chiswickism in contempt seeing them as backward looking and unenlightened with their ancient rituals such as driving to the shops. The members of the Loyal Orange Lycra Lodge were particularly hostile to them and caused conflict by insisting on their right to hold Cycle Marchway 9 through predominantly Chiswickist areas.Resentment grew as Hounslowists had control of all decisions for the area due to the way boundaries had been drawn which gave them an inbuilt majority and no power to the Chiswickists. The latter also were inflamed by living under the jackboot of the RUC (Really Uncompromising Cyclists).Initially a civil rights movement grew up in which more effective representation was demanded but this quickly escalated to armed conflict with the mobility scooter the favoured weapon of the hardcore extremists of the Park Road area.However, thwarted by the much greater resources of the Hounslowists and their ability to get out of bed early, more extreme forms of resistance proved futile and the Chiswickists were forced to gather round their Agas of an evening singing rebel songs such as Four Green Fords, Come Out Ye Delivery Vans, Boris Johnson’s Motor Car and the Men Behind the Wheel.

Paul Corcoran ● 2210d

MichaelThat is why the Grove Park piazza proposals are on hold.But didn't your Club Membership take part in the consultation?Because they had plenty to say about the Chiswick Plaza on your club website.https://hounslowcycling.org/grove-park-piazza/Grove Park Piazza scheme SummaryHounslow Cycling members cannot support the Grove Park Piazza scheme as a standalone proposal. We would, however, support it (with minor modifications) as part of a bolder overall scheme that significantly reduced the volume of traffic crossing Grove Park Bridge.What we likeWe welcome the reduction in car parking spaces and the improved management of those spaces. The proportion of shoppers using cars should reduce over time, in line with the Mayor’s vision, but there will always be some who cannot reasonably be expected to adopt active travel or public transport.We like the new trees and greenery, and the other design details that are illustrated in the consultation document. These will materially improve an area that currently feels rather like a car park.We like the deep pavement in front of the parade of shops. This will keep traffic noise and fumes away from the shoppers and create potential space for the coffee drinkers.What we dislikeHigh volumes of traffic speed through Cavendish Road, Bolton Road and Grove Park Bridge to get from/to the A316 to/from the A4. We believe that the design as proposed will make the rat run more attractive by smoothing out the route for through traffic. That will make the area more dangerous to pedestrians and cyclists and so, of course, less attractive. Pedestrian access to the Piazza from the West (Grove Park Road and Grove Park Gardens) will be particularly unappealing.The proposal was originally developed with existing travel habits in mind rather than the new habits that the Mayor and Borough are trying to foster. Some forward-looking improvements have been incorporated (e.g. the inclusion of charging points for electric vehicles) but these seem timid. Most seriously, it appears that the number of parking spaces is intended to be sufficient to support current levels of short term parking. This is incompatible with the Mayor’s vision of greater use of active travel and public transport.SuggestionsWe feel that the piazza is unlikely to become a focal point for the community without better provision for families and children. We suggest that the three EV parking bays are moved to Spencer Road, freeing up a quiet corner of the Piazza for a play area and benches.Could the kerb line to the West of the Old Station House be remodelled to create a geo-fenced Mobike parking zone next to the loading bay? Mobikes clutter up the pavements, which is an irritation to most pedestrians and a hazard to some.We believe that vehicle traffic to/from Spencer Road through the Piazza could be reduced, while maintaining egress for the 272 bus. This should be considered along with low traffic measures for Bolton Road.We accept that the Council cannot unilaterally block the access for cars along Station Approach Road. LCC Infrastructure has, however, advised us that a similar problem was resolved at Aubrey Road, E17 with the collaboration of private landowners.ConclusionThe Liveable Neighbourhoods project consists of a range of schemes that aim to increase the number of trips made by foot, bike and public transport, while improving public space. It is not clear how this proposal fits with the other schemes in the project.On the one hand, this proposal would not contribute to the overarching aim of the Liveable Neighbourhood as a standalone scheme. It is too timid and cosmetic, in itself, to materially change anyone’s travel habits.On the other hand, we know that the Borough will be bringing forward other schemes to address the issues of rat run traffic more directly. This design would work very well in conjunction with a modal filter on Cavendish Road or an ANPR bus gate on Grove Park Bridge.Would the Council confirm that consultation on all schemes in the project will be completed before a final decision is made?Who we areHounslow Cycling is the borough group of the London Cycling Campaign. We campaign for better cycling facilities in the borough, offer training, rides and generally provide a focus for those interested in cycling locally.Grove Park Piazza Consultation.Original post: March 27, 2020

Bernard Allen ● 2209d