Forum Topic

No easy route to overturn judgement on illegal London Streetspace Plan!

Appears that the legal team are in a real struggle to find a legitimate legal challenge on the recent judgement.  Appears that Mrs Justice Lang meant what she said.  Time will tell, but rumour is it is proving troublesome.

David Riley ● 2092d52 Comments

Good!!

Steve Taylor ● 2091d

even if they do find a way - and they are on the hook for £500K for the lost case in the City anyways - surely theyve got to see that the battle they called and caused is lost, and they should withdraw and come up with a compromise solution that involves everyone, not just a few Mamils. I dont think many are against the principle, just the shoddily and ill-thought through implementations, all across the capital

Tim Garfoot ● 2091d

I ride around Chiswick most days of the week, usually somewhere between mid-morning and late-afternoon. When I'm out MAMILs are but a small minority of bike riders.

Ken Munn ● 2090d

"When I'm out MAMILs are but a small minority of bike riders."So who are the majority? Kids or old ladies on Sit Up and Beg bikes?

Steve Taylor ● 2090d

I'm not sure there is a majority. It's just a real mix.

Ken Munn ● 2090d

Interesting to note Ken is not out during rush hours. I wonder what he'd see then.

David Lesniak ● 2090d

My small sample today from a shop. So around 9.30 heading east, from Heathfield to Goldhawk, total of 4 cyclists on CS9. Coming back 20 mins later, one cyclist on CS9. Four heading eastound not using CS9, one on the pavement. I passed a double decker with more people than the total number of cyclists out, even with its limits on numbers.To be fair to Ken though, only one was lycra clad.

Paul Green ● 2090d

You're really sad.  We are in lockdown, lots of people are working from home and children are being home-schooled.

Philippa Bond ● 2089d

Hi Philippa. I assume you are referring to Tom P, as he has been posting dodgy data claiming that LTNs generate no extra peripheral traffic. But as you say, we are in lockown and kids at home, so his data cannot possibly prove anything. However, this morning when I made my trip the High Road was pretty busy. Lots of pedestrians, people on buses, quite  few cars, taxis and trade vehicles. Just very few cyclists. How strange, as Tom has been telling us how the proportion of journeys made by bike on the High Road were going up. This afternoon, the High Road was busy enough to create a mile long queue of eastbound traffic.

Paul Green ● 2089d

My wife certainly likes to pop up and down on her sit up and beg bike. But if I were to call her an old lady I'd be in trouble wouldn't I.

Simon Pedley ● 2088d

Seems to me the right comparison is with a city in Holland, or Japan. Go and count how many bikes they have going up and down. And realize that we could be like that too if a few people would be more willing to change.

Simon Pedley ● 2088d

Why are you trying to dictate to other people what they should be willing to do?

Alex Shpinkov ● 2088d

I love it when people try to compare London with Amsterdam, zero comparison......Amsterdam is small by comparison so journeys are much shorter, cycle lanes are wide, flat and well managed. None of this applies to  London which is a large sprawling city, roads are not wide enough to accommodate cycle lanes other than at the expense of bus lanes which is absolutely madness.

Jayne Thorburn ● 2088d

Yep, its crazy, Amsterdam is tiny compared to London and many European cities were built with wide boulevards, with new developments being much better planned and with transport key to the design. We were recently told to look at Oslo. A city where improving transport meant extending bus and train routes, lower fares and more frequency, alongside more cycling routes. No other cities would subject buses to the appalling queues they currently face along the High RoadThe problem in Chiswick is not and never has been a few locals preferring to drive to the shops than cycle. Its the mass of through traffic that Chiswick sees reflecting its geography with the A4, north and south circular plus key river crossings all in close proximity. If proponents keep ignoring these facts that there will be no middle ground. Final point, I was really surprised at just how empty CS9 was yesterday.

Paul Green ● 2088d

If you look at the actual facts, you will see that the total area covered by London compared with the total area covered by Amsterdam is largely irrelevant when it comes to journeys by bike. The Netherlands government report on cycling published in 2017 used data from 2016: the average bike journey in Amsterdam was less than 4km and not noticeably different to elsewhere in the country. Bicycle use had grown by 20% across the country as a whole between 2005 and 2016. In that same period over half the growth in leisure trips was by the 65+ group, largely due to increased ownership of e-bikes. For this age group the average distance travelled by e-bike for leisure purposes was around 7km - so about the same distance as from Turnham Green Station to Kew Gardens' Elizabeth Gate and back. Not exactly a vast distance, and certainly not hilly.  By 2016 there were 2 million e-bikes in the Netherlands, today the figure is undoubtedly much higher. A trend that is starting to catch on in the UK.It will be interesting to see how any increase in bike use plays out when schools, colleges and universities in the UK open their doors again, particularly colleges and universities, where students have to pay to use public transport. Weather conditions will doubtless also play a role - there are already plenty of summer-only cyclists. Doubtless there will be more who will feel encouraged by safer routes.

Sue Rowe ● 2088d

Through traffic is a fair point. My modest proposal is that any vehicle entering Chiswick High Road via Chiswick roundabout or the Hogarth roundabout and existing less than 15 minutes later should be charged £10.The only thing they are contributing to our area is pollution.

Carl Wynne ● 2088d

Thanks for that information, Sue.

Ken Munn ● 2088d

Many cyclists do not consider  CS9 a safer route.

Claire Moran ● 2088d

I agree, Paul has always been right about both reducing through traffic and prioritising public transport over private vehicles. Another even simpler suggestion would be to make the High Road just to the west of the junction Chiswick Lane bus and bike entry and exit only. I’m not sure you would even then need a bike lane along the High Road west of that point as it would just be local traffic. It would also stop at a stoke congestion along the High Road due to through traffic, to the benefit of locals and especially bus users.

Tom Pike ● 2088d

Oh dear Tom, here we go again. Firstly intentionally misinterpretting other people but insisting on the same failed strategy of failed road closures. We have had 30 years of LTNs, bus lanes etc etc. So why has traffic not evaporated as you keep claiming? Simple question, can you supply a simple answer.So lets close central CHR as you suggest. Few issues:* we see when FL and TGT were closed the huge congestion at either end of CHR, up Acton Lane and around Turnham Green. Since then the capacity along CHR and at the Chiswick Lane junction specifically has been cut massively by new new gate, light phasing and loss of left turn down Chiswick Lane. So congestion even worse* How do retailers feel about this, how and when are they supplied? What about local deliveries from butchers, garden centre etc?* How about residents and shoppers who need motorised transport cope?* How do people access the main tube station in the area? Black cabs may be allowed but restrictions currently discriminate against UBer etc* What happens to bus reliability when they queue for miles in the westbound queues back into King St and up Goldhawk rd?The key issue is that these moves condemn thousands of residents to permanent congestion and even more pollution. This is not a sacrifice people should make to push through your pet schemes. You will find the law in any case is now moving firmly against you.What happens when traffic recovers, as it will. Local stadiums, with thousands of cars heading into W4 for Brentford, or many more along the A4 to Chelsea? When LHR is back to full capacity as it will be. We need coherent, joined up solutionsThis is what I found most upsetting about your posts and your attitude, which seems to typify the lobby group. I am OK, it suits me, everyone else should live with it, even those who suffer more pollution. At least residents in leafy Bedford Park with no through traffic are OK.

Paul Green ● 2088d

Do you know many cyclists, Claire?

Ken Munn ● 2088d

Ken, I know plenty, and cycled a lot myself. My regular obsevations show many eastbound cyclists ignore CS9 completely.As I responded to TOm's latest hair brained scheme above, we need holistic solutions not random piecemeal solution that funnel traffic onto ever more concentrated routes. Still, as someone who lives on a nice quiet road with no through traffic you dont really care, do you? Nor are you  a tradesperson with tools or equipment, nor a regular bus user. So again, your OK.

Paul Green ● 2088d

Oh I dunno, Ken, you don't need to know any cyclists to venture a guess as to why those not using the cycle lane refuse to do so.Case in point: on CHR just outside the new cinema the westbound lane was restricted in width due to construction. This location is already a pinch point with CS9. Made pinchier with the restriction. And yet the bike lane remained clear and empty while cyclists insisted on staying in the westbound lane of traffic to the detriment of everyone, themselves included. So if they aren't using safer cycle infrastructure, who should be held to account in the case of an injury at a location such as this?I did think about stopping to introduce myself simply so I could tell one Ken Munn that I know this cyclists, but I was too busy avoiding him pass me on the left.

David Lesniak ● 2088d

First of all, the evidence is entirely that traffic does reduce overall with LTN's. The traffic counts during the six-week trials of LTN's in Wandsworth showed overall traffic dropping from 102% of the London average before, to 73% during the trials and returning to 92% after. I should thank David Riley for supplying the link to the relevant data. There was no increase in pollution levels on the main road along the perimeter of these LTN's during this period. This is in line with all the other published evidence.As to your objections:* With the removal of through traffic, which we all agree is most of the traffic along the High Road, congestion along it will fall. * No premises will be blocked off by this closure - access will be maintained just as it is to all the houses along Wellesley Road despite its closure to cars at the South Circular* As above, all residents can access the full length of the High Road, and travel along it will be much faster for all modes of transport* The tube station will not be blocked either* With the removal of through traffic along the High Road west of Chiswick Lane, travel times for buses along that stretch will be considerably improvedIt's true that those who want to continue to use the High Road as a through route will no longer be able to drive through. And yes, I have the advantages of not living on a through road, as do many in Chiswick. In fact it would be hypocritical to live in an area where roads have been closed to through traffic and then oppose the chance for others to do the same. That includes a good portion of the streets in Chiswick which might explain why only a minority are actively opposing these changes.

Tom Pike ● 2088d

Here we go again. Same simple question, after 30 years of road closures and LTN, why has traffic not evaporated. Please answer. Limited studies in exceptional circumstances such as lockdown tell us nothing. Those who actually travel around the local area can see first hand the congestion these schemes call. To be very clear, you insist on discussing traffic volumes, not congestion. I have pointed out if you close two lanes on a motorway, traffic volumes fall, but congestion goes through the roof. You rely on one localised 6 week count to claim the opposite of what we all have seen for the last 20 years. So where does all the through traffic go? As I said, much is funneled onto the already busy roads like Acton Lane, Goldhawk etc. The A4 in normal times is over capacity at peak periods, as is the Hsmith gyratory. Also what is through traffic? Someone north of the tube lines going to the medical centre or Sainsburys? Someone from Richmond going to a restaurant on King St? Someone in Grove Park seeing a friend up Acton Lane? A local resident heaing to LHR?Again, your very particular nice circumstances blind you completely to the need of others. So when Netheravon Rd and others were blocked from the A4 to become LTNs, how come all this through traffic did not evaporate, as you insist it will? It is so boring pointing out the completely myopic failings in your analysis.

Paul Green ● 2088d

No actually I meant you Paul.  Have you got your foot fixed yet?  It took me four years to stop limping after a fall on a damaged pavement.  Cars and lorries driving up and over the kerbs cause a lot of damage.  Not everybody gets up again after a fall or gets back to full health.  There is a lot of self-help info online now - although it was a physio who got me back walking well again. I was too busy working to stop and didn't know where to go.

Philippa Bond ● 2087d

Yes I do, and I also see many posts to that effect on Twitter and Facebook. Perhaps you don't know any other cyclists or read comments on social media,  including this site, Ken?

Claire Moran ● 2087d

Kenn you know full well . Your on groups where experienced cyclists list their concerns.

Maggie Dodge ● 2087d

Going back to the original subject of this thread: I have twice asked Hounslow Council (on behalf of local residents and my fellow Chiswick Cllrs) to issue a statement about the implications for residents of this borough of Justice Lang's judgement. I have been told that Hounslow will be unable to respond until there has been a ruling on TfL's right to appeal.There is a real danger that the baby will be thrown out with the bath water. My colleagues and I stand ready to work with residents and the the administration to save those elements of the streetspace schemes that have merit and public support.

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 2086d

Which elements are we likely to be asked to support. Anything that will bring some calm to the area will be welcomed

Maggie Dodge ● 2086d

"Which elements are we likely to be asked to support."Wrong question, Maggie. You should be asking 'Which elements do I support?'Independent thought and all that jazz.

Ken Munn ● 2086d

"Independent thought and all that jazz"And once again, the irony of it is completely lost on Ken.Never have I seen a survey where an independent thought is welcome. The very nature of the beast is to tick one of the pre-determined boxes. That response somehow, through the miracle of "analysis" becomes fact.

David Lesniak ● 2086d

The sooner many of the schemes are removed the better. Chiswick High Road is backed up to the Goldhawk Road junction  at the moment and we're in a lockdown. Poor delivery driver just came to my door (with a package that wasn't actually for me) and was upset that he didn't know where it should have gone as he said 'I have just sat in the traffic on the high road for ages' poor chap..

J Morse ● 2085d

Various councils of all political persuasions used to hold consultations with their tenants and ask them to vote on a proposal.Needless to say not many voted and these were,more often than not,against the the council's proposal.All the non-votes were counted as being actively for it.Democracy at work.

Ben Gemmingen ● 2085d

Whereas in Belarus and Myanmar they have a far more sophisticated voting system, whereby they weigh the votes by the sack-load rather than count them individually.They then use a complicated modern algorythm to produce a result.  If one sack-load weighs 10 kilos that's usually rounded up to represent 8960 votes to the government and 1040 votes to the oppositions.Very efficient and obviously fair.

Stuart Kerr ● 2085d

Ben - responding to a consultation is not voting. I have cut and pasted Hounslow's consultation charter below. You will see that no where does the council commit to doing what the majority of those responding to a consultation wish them to do.When this was passed at Borough Council I asked the Lead Member (Theo Dennison) if this meant that the council would on occasion ignore the wishes of the majority and impose its own preferred option and he replied that the council reserved the right to do just that. Consultation Charter1. We will normally decide to consult residents and other stakeholders whenever a decision will directly affect them and when they might have a reasonable expectationthat they should be involved.2. Consultation plans for all major consultations will be subject to consideration by a Consultation Advisory Panel to be chaired by the Lead Member for Citizen Engagement.3. All our consultations will be published on the council’s website so that residents and stakeholders can easily see what is up for decision and how to participate.4. We will provide a named contact for each consultation and include their details on theconsultation documents so that residents and stakeholders know who they can speak to.5. Consultation plans will be produced for all major consultations. They will include what we are consulting about, and why, who we are consulting, how we will consult them, the timetable for the consultation and who will make the final decision.6. Whenever practical, the Council will involve key stakeholders or representatives of them in shaping what we will consult on or how we will consult.7. Where the Council has a preferred option, we will clearly state this in the consultation documents and explain how and why that preference was chosen. Where specific options have been rejected, we will explain why we do not consider them practical.8. We will allow enough time for consultees to consider and respond to the consultation and the information we have provided.9. Where groups of people with characteristics protected by the Equality Act 20101 may be particularly affected, the consultation plan will identify who they are and how they will be involved, and an Equality Analysis will be included in the final report.10. Consultations will conform to all statutory requirements and, where relevant, to thoseset out in our Consultation Framework, Statement of Community Involvement and the Hounslow Compact.11. Minor consultations will meet all statutory requirements and the ‘Seven Standards ofInforming, Engaging and Consulting’ set out in our Consultation Framework.12. All members of the public and other stakeholders are welcome to respond to a consultation whether or not they have been specifically invited to do so.13. We will carefully consider all responses to each consultation, and publish the results, detailing the responses received, and explaining how we have taken these into account in arriving at a decision.14. Any complaints about the consultation will be published so that decision-makers can assess the effectiveness of the consultation before making their decision.

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 2085d

Sutton Council have decided the game is up and are removing their low traffic neighbourhood and school street schemes.https://www.suttonlibdems.org.uk/low_traffic_neighbourhoods_updateI have asked Hounslow for a statement.

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 2085d

It seems though that Sutton is being dragged kicking and screaming by removing their LTN's."We are angry and hugely disappointed as some schemes were working well, but we have no choice given the legal judgement."That statement doesn't bode well for democracy does it? I would have thought that even if the schemes were working well, democracy would 'dictate' that if the consultation shows that the constituents don't want the schemes - so be it. The schemes must be scrapped.

Steve Taylor ● 2085d

The schemes must be scrapped.You said it Steve!

Jeffrey Cope ● 2085d

Why is Sadiq Khan appealing the Courts decision? Does he not believe in anything that doesn’t give him the answer HE wants .

Maggie Dodge ● 2085d

Usually decisions are appealed because one party feels them to be wrong.See 'Guildford Four' for more details.

Ken Munn ● 2085d

Some of the propaganda that is coming out from councils on twitter is highly amusing. They are saying that LTN's are successful and loved by all. They say this because of the consultations/surveys where they asked - loaded questions: 1. Do you want quiet roads 2. Do you want less pollution and 3. Do you want less cars going past your door. Obviously, we all want that, and majority of people probably answered Yes to these questions and then the councils suggest LTN's and other measures are a success! What I would like to know is how many people would have answered 'No' to all of those questions and instead essentially proposed 'I'd love more pollution and a really busy road outside my house'

J Morse ● 2085d

Even the weak and wet Lib Dem’s accept the decision.

Steve Taylor ● 2085d

"Could that perhaps be because a lot of people aren't smart enough to realise that they and their anti-social habits are the problem."  Well that was written about smoking and we managed to get better solutions there.

Philippa Bond ● 2084d

There are better solutions and they can and should be arrived at by public debate and a full public consultation. You do not obtain "buy-in" by imposing your solutions on others. Instead you create, resentment, push-back and deep cynicism about the motives of politicians.  Richard Attenborough understands the implications for public policy better than most;"We have to treat people we share our community with, with respect. Disturbing peoples lives to such an extent that people cannot go about their own business is a serious thing to do and could disenchant an awful lot of people from the actions we are talking about." You ask Phillipa "Could it perhaps be that a lot of people aren't smart enough to realise that they and their anti-social habits are the problem."  How deeply condescending, patronising and anti-democratic.Remind me Phillipa who are our Local Council and TfL supposed to be working for?

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 2084d

Sam, I am aware of this charter but I am talking about a specific instance where there was a vote and what I said does happen ,did.Namely this was when Hounslow Homes was formed in 2002.Hounslow Council tenants received a letter which in essence said that if the council's proposal was voted for then 200mwould become available to upgrade the housing stock.If it was voted against then it wouldn't.Certainly many estates needed repairs and upgrading but a lot of tenants wanted to remain being council tenants as ALMOS already had a bad reputation.I'm going to be vague about where I'm referring to but things deteriorated when HH took over.The caretaker who had his own flat on this estate and who kept on eye on things ie anti-social behaviour,repairs etc  was evicted and his hours cut.I believe this happened throughout the borough.There was little continuity and coordination during the upgrade and this place became insecure and open to anybody.This resulted in a serious fire which burnt out two ground floor flats,lifts and up to the first floor.No fire alarm went off.This wouldn't have happened if the caretaker had still been there.It's fortunate one flat was empty and the tenant from the other flat was away.On another occasion HH was informed that the roof structure was becoming detached ie some bolts had sheared off.Nothing was done so one cold and windy day a few tons of sheet metal fell directly into the playground below.Again pure luck no one was killed as it was usually full of children.HH were incompetent and put its tenants lives in danger.I see someone did an FOI request in relation to the contract between HH and Hounslow Council :'Please provide a copy of the contract which was in place between theCouncil and Hounslow Homes (before services were brought back in-house)'.'The company used was dissolved and terminated over three years back.  Wedo not have the copy of the contract to hand.'And that was it,nothing more.Open government mmm...I'm aware that LBH has quite a few buildings which have Grenfell type cladding.It wouldn't surprise me if most of that ,if not all,was fitted when HH were the 'arms length management organisation'.Anyway HBC's housing is better run nowadays.The goings on in local government seem just as murky as thenational variety.

Ben Gemmingen ● 2084d

I would be very much in favour of local referendums on important over-arching issues such as low traffic neighbourhoods. The downside is that they are expensive to run.  The Localism Bill of 2011 contained a provision for local referendums if 5% of the population signed a petition in favour. The Local Government Association lobbied successfully to have this provision removed. There is a vestigal power to call a referendum if the rate of council tax increase is deemed excessive (in certain circumstances it is compulsory).It became very clear that there were significant amounts of fraud occurring within Hounslow Homes. Ultimately much of the senior management left or were fired. No one was ever prosecuted.It should however be said that the nature of the frauds was not exclusive to ALMOS. Poor management controls are poor management controls. Fraud within direct labour organisations has gone on for hundreds of years. Back copies of Private Eye make instructive reading.

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 2084d

Thank you for your reply,I agree re Private Eye.Perhaps some of those involved will appear in it one day.I do think there should've been an open and transparentinquiry about what happened.

Ben Gemmingen ● 2084d

I doubt if Richard Attenborough understands any such thing, Sam, as he died several years ago.

Claire Moran ● 2084d

Apologies - David not Richard Attenborough. Hounslow lacked the skills to properly investigate a major internal fraud and the police apparently refused to take the case on because the initial investigation was so badly handled.

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 2084d

@ Sam Hearn  You did not read the quote properly.  It was about smoking.  It showed how there was a change of mind on a subject.  How long was it before we found out the truth about smoking that was being hidden from us for the sake of marketing tobacco? https://truthinitiative.org/research-resources/tobacco-prevention-efforts/5-things-tobacco-industry-didnt-do-until-it-was

Philippa Bond ● 2084d

Ah, there you have. Years of propaganda and people are not willing to "change", not to mention those that are not able. There has been a massive 100% increase in the percentage of people cycling nationally - from 1% of the travelling public to 2%. How much money has been wasted to achieve this, recently at a time when TfL is struggling to avoid bankruptcy and claims that it cannot afford to repair Hammersmith bridge, provide step-free access at stations and has yet again backdated the signal improvements that would enable the vast majority of people to have a better tube service.How many shop owners will be rejoicing that cyclists have been shown to spend the least of any transport user in town centres especially if they find that their road has been closed to cars and delivery vehicles....and I'm sure that those majority who will never cycle under any circumstances will rejoice when yet again, fares are increased by more than the rate of inflation to pay for all this feather-bedding of cyclists who feel so unable to manage to cycle in the road as it is.

Charlotte Kasner ● 2081d