Forum Topic

On your question of light traffic, this is a subjective one. Traffic on a residential road always feels more intrusive but my impression is that at most times of day the flow on Barrowgate Road is light. I'm unlikely to be there at the morning or evening rush when it is going to be much busier but at other times there is fewer than one vehicle going both ways a minute.I'm a bit confused about your points about the 'sheep pen' crossing at SCR. There is ample space to turn even for a tandem bike and there are pedestrian phase signals. We have already heard from a mobility scooter user on this thread that he can use the underpasses and the access at this crossing is much wider. I don't see any basis for your claim that non-standard cycles would find this crossing unusable but it would be interesting to hear from user of non-standard cycles.Your hints that there is a plan to introduce a cyclist phase on the A4 appear to have been quite carefully worded. As far as I can tell from the opaque language used a non-detailed plan has been drawn up by an unnamed consultant in which this suggestion has been included and this has been copied to TfL but TfL has given no indication that it is under consideration. Every other indication is that TfL regards the flow of traffic along the A4 as something that should be protected as a primary aim of policy and that therefore they would be extremely unlikely to cause even a marginal delay for what would be a very questionable net benefit to cyclists. Is there any design or policy document from Hounslow Council or TfL that you can point to that shows a cyclist phase here is under active consideration?

Jeremy Parkinson ● 10d

This just an observation of new newly designed Kew Bridge Junction.I have one of the largest mobility Scooters on the market at the moment.But I’ve tried four or five times to cross this junction from Thames Road/ SOTG.Which ever direction you pick the scooter cannot negotiate the up slope and turn at 90% right, then in two scooter lengths along the island turn  90% left to the down slope. So basically the islands are not wide enough to to enable a large mobility scooter to cross safely. I would imagine it would be the same for the cargo bikes to cross this junction in any safe manner and like me would hav to resort to using the road as a means to get from SOTG to Kew Bridge station .I have altered my route to cross at the Wellesley Road cycle crossing towards  Capital Interchange Way, which does get me across, but with a slight problem at the slip road into CIW. Because of the steep slope at the that corner I have to slow down to a snails pace in order to negotiate the slope and turn onto the pavement, by this time the cycle lights phase times out and it’s bit concerning When the vehicles waiting to turn into CIW start pulling away when your only Halfway up the slop.I haven’t tried SCR crossing yet as I can use the underpass to cross this junction, when I exit I turn towards the Chiswick roundabout as there are no barriers at the top of this slope.So in trying to make travelling safer, so far it’s made it more dangerous for me, Or though for some it maybe ok.

Bernard Allen ● 11d

This is a fascinating discussion. So a cycle only traffic light phase is 'in the design'. Which design is this, who asked for it? Because noone other than some small group seem to be privy to this. Who paid for the report, who was consulted on it? Noone seems to know. TFL have installed new lights recently with the promise of better managing traffic, but as we saw with the roadworks what that means is they use the lights merely to shut down SCR more regularly.So a cycle only phase means less green phase for vehicles, both those north-south route where the green phase is already inadequate and the north stretch of SCR is overloaded and gridlocked. Which in turn means the Heathfield (CS9) and SCR junction is horrible and dangerous. The reason SCR green phase is too short is that TFL prioritises the A4. So are they going to stop this? Of course more queues on A4 mean that inbound traffic uses the rat run up Heathfield Gardens, again onto CS9 and more dangers there. Or more queues westbound and delays at the Hogarth roundabout/ A316, already polluted and congested and harder for residents and trade to reach GP.It would also mean closing the signed rat run off the A4 into Barrowgate and then SCR to reach GP. Which would mean a full redesign of the A4 junction. A good thing but is there money for that? I doubt it.A cycle lane along SCR would mean banning the right turn out of SCR to reach the A4, which would mean the only westbound exit from W4 becomes CHR to the Hogarth roundabout, a route which is already very congested and a roundabout beyond capacity already and even more oversized development planned there. More traffic then diverts onto Wellesley (also CS9). Or you close all of these... then have about two roads open in W4 to enter and exit. What could go wrong... So who is this for? If the criteria now is to make all major junctions cargo bike friendly while we cant deliver a reliable bus service to GP then something is going badly wrong and priorities are being distorted by single issue lobby groups.Its not about taking space away from motor traffic, its how to bus services function but also how does the traffic that we all contribute to get around. If you need a taxi or an ambulance or a delivery or a builder, how do they get to you? We cannot keep squeezing road space without looking at reducing the number of vehicles, which in turn means a congestion charge. We also need to place public transport at least on equal footing with cycling. But most of all we need transparency and all the community being involved in decisions on how we use public roads.

Bill George ● 11d

Assuming I am a usual suspect, you have to recognise that the issue with SCR is that it has a limited capacity due to the junction with the A4 and is prone to congestion that reaches back to the High Road causing gridlock across Chiswick.It is obviously not optimal that some traffic goes through residential roads but I really believe you are exaggerating the impact of this and these streets are generally experiencing light traffic. Don't forget also that SCR is primarily a residential street so it is grossly unfair that  pollution and congestion should be redirected your way. This road has more social and private rented housing compared to the streets crammed with multi-million pound houses you want to protect more.Where I do agree with you is that traffic should be redirected away from the western section of Barrowgate Road.  The signs pointing the way to Grove Park from the A4 are not consistent with the idea of protectiong residential streets and traffic should be directed to stay on the A4.On the issue of access for bikes used by people with restricted mobility, I didn't address this because I thought other people had done so. If the barriers at the underpass mean that they are impassable for particular kind of bikes, the option remains to use the pedestrian crossing at the SCR junction. This is wider than any cycle lane would be and, has been pointed out, may get you across more quickly that crossing with the rest of the traffic. It would be interesting to hear from people who use these bikes what they think but having observed some of them, I don't believe that some move quickly enough to have time to comfortably cross the A4 on the short phase of traffic lights at SCR. Any suggestion that TfL would extend this phase to accommodate them is pure wishful thinking.If groups lobbying for better access for disabled cyclists were supporting your plans I'd obviously be prepared to concede they might have some validity but I think you are distorting their requirements to support your argument.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 11d

Jeremy, you and your friends who oppose every single actual meaningful attempt to make streets safer for cycling and who have done so consistently for many years on this forum, thus building up an easily auditable track record of your positions, may hope that people with influence in decisions are taken in by your transparently phony efforts to present yourselves as reasonable objective observers with genuine concerns for safe cycling but I can assure that they are not. Hence your lack of success. Nobody is listening to you. You always confidently state an opinion based on nothing but your personal observations which are refracted through the prism of your bias and ignorance and detachment from today's universally accepted transport policies and engineering principles. The reality is these opinions are just as worthless as Maggie's regardless of how couched they are in more careful language because you never provide any evidence to support them, they always get proven wrong when the evidence emerges and you are oblivious to both that and how out of touch you are. Prove that family groups are frequently cycling along Barrowgate Road or continue to assert in vain that your opinions have more worth than those of people who, unlike you, actually do cycle locally with their young families. The absence of collisions on local high-speed rat runs is actually testimony to how hostile they are to local cycling. But maybe that is the real goal of the forum's brain trust - no cyclists = no collisions. Genius.

Paul Campbell ● 12d

Congratulations Justin in joining me in being accused of having a lack of imagination.The mis-characterisation of Barrowgate Road is very counterproductive. Aside from the fact that at its western side it is not a rat-run but a designated route for traffic heading to Grove Park, it is widely and safely used for cyclists of all ages including by families heading for Chiswick House Gardens.The attempt to persuade people that white elephant projects like a cycle lane on Sutton Court Road are necessary because cycling without segregation is unacceptably dangerous is going to discourage people from cycling. Chiswick is blessed with a wide network of residential streets which can be cycled by people of all ages with close to zero risk. These are widely used which is part of the reason why cycling is popular in the area.Just like the presposterous arguments about the 'othering' of cyclists. these notions exist in the heads of a tiny proportion of people who have ever mounted a bike. I'm not against segregation and I think the main value of C9 is that it gives an impression of safety encouraging people to take up cycling but the data continues to suggest that it has done nothing to reduce casualty rates so it shouldn't be introduced mindlessly at every opportunity. SCR shares the main drawback of CHR with lots of traffic emerging from side roads.If there is one subject I do know something about it is cycling north and south in Chiswick across the A4 - I've been doing it for years and if I was ever on Mastermind it would probably be my specialist subject. There is no ideal way to do it and improvements could be made for instance consideration might be give to segregating pedestrian and cyclists in the underpasses although I can see this might be tricky.Ultimately though its is very easy to get across the A4 although at points you may choose to dismount if your cycling skills are insufficient or your ride is too big to negotiate the barriers at the underpass. If you want to cross overground at the SCR junction, using the pedestrian crossing rather than going straight over may actually save you time if you arrive at the right moment.The point to stress is that cycling from one side of Chiswick is safe and easy and you should not be discouraged from doing so by people who tell you otherwise. For people living in the north of Chiswick it would be tragic if assets such as the riverside and Chiswick House were considered to be inaccessible due to some ill-informed nonsense by people peddling a fantasy agenda.

Mark Evans ● 14d

Congratulations Paul you have definitely proved you have never been anywhere near either Barrowgate Rd or SCR (I am sure there must be a road somewhere in Chiswick that you haven't accused of being a speed magnet).  I didn't accuse cyclists in general of not going anywhere near Barrowgate or SCR, as I am a regular cyclist who uses those roads daily (not on bike in winter) that would mean accusing myself, what I said was it was clear neither you nor Michael have been anywhere near them.Your suggestions of dealing with with SCR cycle lane are laughably inept.  Take the pinch point at the shops, there is parking on one side of the road only.  Remove the parking and replace with a 2 way bike lane you actually reduce the available road width.  Similarly your proposal for floating bus islands means less road width so the road becomes utterly unsuitable for fire engines, the bus blocks one complete lane. And that is before you consider that a floating bus lane to serve the north bound Barrowgate Road bus stop would inevitably cause a tailback onto the A4 so would be positively dangerous, or to be strictly accurate consider the danger of the A4/SCR junction, even more dangerous.  As for the lack of need for right turns, try looking at a map of Chiswick, you will find there are lots of streets that connect to SCR, are you suggesting that vehicles (including emergency vehicles) should not be able to go down those roads?The SCR cycle lane is not likely to happen any time soon, not because of lack of cash but because it is a seriously stupid idea

Justin Stephenson ● 15d

"But of course I am not a traffic consultant, just a lay person with eyes"Don't give me the false modesty. You have an in-built speed gun. You should be more proud."It is pretty obvious that neither main proponent, Michael and Paul have ever been anywhere near SCR or Barrowgate Road"Yes very unlikely that cyclists who have to use these roads every day might have been anywhere near them. You get much more credible with every post. "if we removed all on street car parking - which is not a bad idea - a bike lane would still need to deal with 4 bus stops, a central pedestrian island, 2 central right turn lanes, and a pinch point at the shops"The removing of all on street car parking deals with the pinch point at the shops issue so you could have been more concise. You'll get better marks next time. The bus stops - well you've seen how they get dealt with on the High Road - wakey wakey? Bus sits in the road and cars wait patiently behind it. Central pedestrian island - it goes. It's gone. It's no longer necessary due to the deprioritisation of flow of cars in transport policy and the effects of all the other changes that will be made to the street. Ta da! Handy and convenient street-parking for residents - nope sorry but we have more pressing priorities than that. Right turn lanes - unnecessary at Heathfield junction and subject to massive redesign at A4 junction. Unleash your imagination. I agree you've done an excellent job of being "a lay person with eyes".

Paul Campbell ● 15d

I'm not saying nobody ever has crossed the A4 on a cargo bike but the number of occurrences is vanishingly rare and anybody doing so with small children on board would be foolhardy.To accomodate this kind of use of the junction you would need an additional cyclist only phase to make it safe which would shorten the phase for all other traffic crossing the junction causing delays to buses. There possibly would need to be a longer hold on traffic on the A4 and even a marginal change would have a significant impact over time on congestion and air pollution.Those are the downsides. The upside is that someone on a cargo bike would be able to cross on the road rather than at the pedestrian crossings where they could get to the other side without even the need to unload passengers. So on the one hand we save a once in a blue moon user a couple of minutes making the crossing. One the other we have additional delays to hundreds of bus users every day and potentially thousands of vehicles on the A4. It may just be me but I'd say the disbenefits outweigh the benefits in this case.Neither of us can claim any detailed knowledge of guidelines used by Highway Engineers but, unlike you, I have at least looked up recommended widths for roads like SCR and cycle lanes. Even at the minimum recommended widths there are certain points at which SCR is not wide enough on this basis. I suggest you buy your own tape measure and check this out for yourself. You should be able to get a decent one in Robert Dyas.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 16d

"I fully accept that it would be highly challenging to travel by cargo bike through the A4 underpasses without unloading and pushing it through."Yes so the underpasses present accessibility challenges for some people who use bikes and are not adequate connections between GP and North of the A4. We're getting closer to defining the problem."It would also be similarly difficult to guarantee crossing the A4 on a cargo bike with two five year olds before the short phase for traffic on Sutton Court Road particularly travelling north where the slope is against you."Yes the current single option for surface crossing by bike is unsafe and also inadequate. Closer still."Transport policy shouldn't be driven by seeking to accomodate this"Incorrect. Transport policy is now driven by seeking to provide solutions that make bikes a safe and practical alternative to cars in London. Safe routes accessible to all cyclists are absolutely part of transport policy now. Flow of cars is no longer the priority. That has been explained many times on this forum and is surely no longer up for debate as it has proven to be manifestly true hence all the bleating from OneChiswick."they have the option of accessing the junction on parallel routes via Barrowgate Road as previously explained."Barrowgate road is a dangerous high-speed rat run that does not provide a safe, accessible route for some cyclists like the parent with the cargo bike or indeed any child on a bike. More help with that problem definition.The issue that you and Mark are having here is one of imagination and a lack thereof. Mark is right that parking spaces would be sacrificed for a cycle lane and that is no longer considered by transport policy decision-makers to be a red line. There would of course be the usual outcry and despair about the death of retail but again that debate has been well and truly put to bed in Chiswick. And the crossing of the A4 would be materially redesigned to accommodate a cycle lane that would be safe for a parent to use to cross the A4 with a cargo bike or for somebody with a mobility impairment to do so on a recumbent or adapted bicycle or trike. The world is changing.

Paul Campbell ● 16d

Okay, so we are getting a bit closer to the truth of the matter.You haven't seen the report so can't say that a cycle lane on SCR is practical only that it is desirable. If the report (based on the use of tape measures) concluded that it was practical, it can be assumed that you would have told us.The borough's traffic officers deserve the upmost respect and I have always striven to give it to them but I can't say this attitude is reflected in the commissioning of a report by external consultants that the officers could have said from the outset was impractical.I fully accept that it would be highly challenging to travel by cargo bike through the A4 underpasses without unloading and pushing it through. It would also be similarly difficult to guarantee crossing the A4 on a cargo bike with two five year olds before the short phase for traffic on Sutton Court Road particularly travelling north where the slope is against you. It would be extremely unwise for any parent to attempt this and I have never seen a cargo bike crossing the A4. Transport policy shouldn't be driven by seeking to accomodate this and beside, even if the kamikaze parent insisted on crossing the A4 with their little ones this way, there would be little net benefit to them from the Sutton Court Cycle lane as they have the option of accessing the junction on parallel routes via Barrowgate Road as previously explained.Much as you may decry them, tape measures and the laws of physics do matter and we can't always get what we desire.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 16d

I can't recall the name of the consultancy.  It was one of the big ones like Steer but could have been someone else.  You or I aren't going to get how much they charged because that is commercial in confidence.  You could always contact Hounslow and ask to be considered for future opportunities and tell them you will charge 50% and you have all the qualifications needed with your tape measure.  What sort of tape measure is it? One of the mechanical roll-out jobs or will you impress them with one of the latest laser measurers?I know enough about the engineering involved to know what I don't know.  You clearly aren't as inhibited to make pronouncements with zero knowledge.Perhaps you can produce a plan showing all the relevant dimensions along the route with reference to standards for cycle lane and roadway lane widths as specified in LTN 1/20, DMRB and other relevant references to prove your claim a bike lane is unviable (the reference to LTN here doesn't mean Low Traffic Neighbourhood, but I'm sure you knew that already)It really is a dilemma, on one hand there is an experienced engineering consultancy who have done a design that was viewed as viable and on the other hand, someone posting on the internet who says it isn't because he has a tape measure (he hasn't actually used the tape measure at this location, he just has one)  Do you plan to contact the various professional bodies like Institute of Civil Engineers and related specialist groups to say they are all pointless as all anyone needs to do their job is a tape measure?Who to believe? It's a tough one.

Michael Robinson ● 17d