Forum Topic

Strategic Cycle Acton-Chiswick - missing detail?

Reading the front page story, I looked at the details on Ealing's website again.  On the design drawing showing the Toucan crossing on South Parade, there is an inset 'refer to drawing 20138-MET-GEN-DR-002 for details' where cyclists would join or exit Fisher's Lane by the underpass. As a regular user of the underpass path, I think this detail is very important.  The gap between the existing Fisher's Lane pedestrian crossing and the start of the underpass is short.  The underpass path is very busy and narrow with pedestrians often having to wait until it's clear to walk through.  I cannot see how pedestrians and cyclists can comfortably or safely pass each other at this point.Has anyone found the detail for this section of the Strategic Cycle route?

Mary Oppe ● 2152d8 Comments

If this to be a 'quiet route' for cyclists who don't feel up to turning left into South Parade and right into Fisher's Lane, I'd have thought they'd be happy to dismount at the end of Rusthall Avenue and wheel their bikes across the existing zebra crossing and continue on their way across Acton Green rather than navigating what's now on offer. The proposed route involves crossing the route of traffic turning into Rusthall, and making a 90 degree turn on a section of narrow shared pavement, before being able to ride across the Toucan crossing. This installation also seems to need a proliferation of eight extra traffic signs in the Conservation Area.There's also the other bottleneck to negotiate where the proposed cycle path across Acton Green meets Fishers Lane - a place often busy with pedestrians and children.  If the path across Acton Green is to be specifically indicated as intended for cyclists, can we assume that the other unmarked paths across the Green are not so intended, bearing in mind the recent court case based on a dog/bicycle conflict in this very location.

Peter Evans ● 2152d

I agree that the linkage with the Fisher's Lane underpass hasn't really been thought through and directs cyclists to what is essentially another blind turning if you assume when approaching from the west they stay to the right of the zebra crossing. Even if cars stop ignoring the restriction there still will be buses emerging from the tunnel. It is arguable that it would be safer to stay on South Parade and approach the underpass from the mini-roundabout which would give you a clear sight line through to the other side of Fisher's Lane. On the other hand my experience has been that the speed of motorist approaching the mini-roundabout from the east has increased because they are not anticipating a vehicle turning right coming from the other direction. This has made it a bit more difficult to negotiate particularly as many motorist seem to think cyclists don't count when turning right on a roundabout. The South Parade crossing does present some signficant issues which are well demonstrated by the photo in the article even without the parked Tesco delivery lorry. Encouraging cyclists to join South Parade on this blind corner will lead to collisions assuming there is any sort of level of use of the route. The design seems to be aimed for parents cycling with children. My lot are older now but I used this crossing with them on their bikes when they were little. Almost universally motorists and pedestrians regards supervised children cycling on pavements as pedestirians and there was never any issue using this or any other pedestrian crossing on bikes with them. There is no reason why this couldn't continue rather than introducing a potentially dangerous modification to the route. I say almost universal because the only incident I ever had when cycling with small children around this area was a couple of times when the now deceased 'lady in the car' came at them wailing like a banshee. It was very upsetting for them but to be fair to Ann Smith, there does now seem to be an issue as to whether cycling across common land is illegal. We never saw the detail of the judgment which found Felix the cocker spaniel guilty of dismounting a cyclist but part of the defence was reportedly that cycling was not authorised. Ealing may be in the process of encouraging cyclists to act illegally!

Andrew OSullivan ● 2151d

When in Kew recently I noticed some small reflective round blue shared cycling path/footpath signs attached to bollards on the corners of roads particularly near crossings.  This was better than the high up stuck in the greenery signs I've previously seen in some random situations.  Mind you I had thought that it was now fashionable to have less street furniture...  The idea being that everyone would take greater care!  I think we need to know how we stand.

Philippa Bond ● 2151d

Peter talks about a place busy with pedestrians and children. It certainly is; the same can be also said about the corner of Rusthall and South Parade to be shared with the cycleway. Even worse it is right next to the doctors surgery and a considerable number of the elderly and disabled use that pavement corner.

Jane Kirby ● 2151d

Anyone else notice how many times the words “not thought through” crop up in connection with road closures and cycle lanes. Yet the Councils both Ealing and Hounslow in this area, carry on making bad decisions. Whoever is advising them is not fit for purpose, like many of these schemes.

Maggie Dodge ● 2151d

While not disputing the safety issue about the proposed design I'm reluctant to condemn Ealing Council over this as they do seem to be taking a more granular approach to increasing cycling rates as opposed to Hounslow's view that a monumental schemes are all that is needed.The poor linkages between Acton Green Common and Bedford Park/Acton Green have annoyed me for years. However, I'd be interested to hear how people think they might be improved. I've thought about this a lot and have some sympathy with the borough traffic engineers. Their proposal might have flaws but I don't think there is some amazing alternative that they have missed.The other problem, which is not their fault, is that this East Acton to Chiswick cycleway is essentially a dead end. It comes tantalisingly close to linking with C9 but doesn't. Belmont Road still has the cycling unfriendly traffic humps and they have achieved what many people believed impossible in making the Fishers Lane junction more dangerous for cyclists.The closure of the Fishers Lane underpass doesn't really provide a net benefit to cyclists in the area in my view because the offset has been that South Parade/Acton Lane has become more busy. It used to be that only at certain times of day you would have to wait any appreciable time to join these roads but now nearly every journey I have to wait for traffic to pass. The irony is that the closure of the underpass has made a safe crossing point for cyclists on South Parade more necessary.

Mark Evans ● 2151d

Mark, part of the problem is that Ealing and Hounslow refuse to talk to each other. And the local councillor for W4 in both those areas are in opposition and stuggle to get their voices heard. A bad solution is really not better than doing nothing. Routing bikes onto busy footpaths with blind corners is madness. There may be some junctions where cyclists need to dismount. Is that really out of the question?

Paul Green ● 2151d

It does seem to me extraordinary that ward councillors have been kept out of the loop in both boroughs. This doesn't seem to be a function of them being in opposition as the reaction of many Labour councillors to measures in their area in both Ealing and Hounslow shows.I agree that there will always be points at which cyclists will need to dismount. If we are talking routes for inexperienced cyclists including children then this is probably going to have to be accepted as the bar for what is navigable is very low. There is no reason for most cyclists to dismount at the junction of Rusthall and South Parade.However, even as a relatively experienced cyclist there is little choice but to get off your bike when joining CHR from Fishers Lane. When this is happening I believe priority should be given to sorting it out.

Mark Evans ● 2151d