Forum Topics

Chiswick has had it’s say: And it is a Resounding Rejection of Hounslow Councils Road Closures

Whilst Councillors Dunne, Lambert and Khan try to defend their decisions, under pressure from the London Cycling Campaign - Hounslow Cycling, of which Lambert and Dunne are members, and all 3 subject to an investigation as to conflicts of interest, it appears that Chiswick residents and businesses have rejected the schemes from analysis of the Councils own survey.  See the comments on FaceBook.  Looks like Councillor Khan needs to live up to his promise and reverse the changes now.  From Facebook:"On 8 November Hounslow Council’s own “Have your Say” Commonplace survey on the Future of Chiswick Town Centre closed. The initial thorough independent analysis evaluating each response, including the comments in boxes, and the likes supporting those comments, shows that:·         98% want the changes in Turnham Green Terrace reversed,·         98% want the Staveley Road diagonal barrier removed.·         95% want the Fishers Lane change reversed and opened to all traffic,·         83% want Devonshire Road reopened,And that is before wider analysis on the contentious Chiswick High Road and other schemes takes place. A resident said: “Well, what is clear is that Hounslow Council has nowhere to hide.  Councillor Hanif Khan was clear in the Chiswick Area Forum that if the evidence was clearly against the schemes, then they could come out.  Well, the evidence is clear and the schemes should be immediately reversed, there is no need to wait"From further news articles on Chiswick W4 this afternoon  it looks like Labour Councillors are also now questioning the actions of Steve Curran, and his cabinet members, Khan, Dunne and Lambert and calling in schemes in Isleworth for review, good on them.  From going to the “Have your say” surveys for Hounslow, Feltham and Brentford Town Centres you can also see that there is significant dissatisfaction with Hounslow Council. Best summed up by one respondents comments:"Hounslow town centre is awful, worse than 3rd world. It's been getting worse and worse for the last 20 years.  Knock it down and start again. There is no other way."

David Riley ● 2171d33 Comments ● 2169d

“.... nothing has inflamed like LTNs” - Rupa Huq

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/11/22/lobbied-syria-bombing-brexit-time-nothing-has-inflamed-like/Rupa HuqLTN: three letters guaranteed to make suburban MPs shudder.“Low Traffic Neighbourhoods” might sound harmless enough, but since bursting onto the landscape with little notice and zero consultation, central government-funded schemes to encourage cycling and walking have seen once-compliant communities revolting.LTNs dominate our inboxes, social media notifications and daily encounters. A south London colleague was harangued by opponents when taking her children to the park. In Tooting, Islington and Ealing, residents who’ve never attended demos have protested at the effective blocking off of side streets by bollards and oversized flowerpots.The aim was to stop unnecessarily short car journeys to combat the climate crisis. Dramatically rushed through as a coronavirus emergency measure however, LTNs have felt for many, less introduced and more inflicted on them. I’ve been vigorously lobbied on Syria bombing and Brexit in my time but nothing has inflamed like this. My own cycling habit began in the 80s as my means of getting from home to school. At university in the 90s in Cambridge it was nigh-on compulsory. Our home now has more bikes than people. I do not need convincing of the benefits: cycling is healthy, free and takes you door to door.  Post-LTN however, I’ve been labelled a petrolhead by the lycra brigade, and warned that I am going to hell for passing on the concerns of my constituents. In an LTN, access to side roads is convoluted for drivers and restricted for emergency services, who have to be issued keys for unlocking bollards. Cumulative traffic is then forced onto main roads, whose residents complain of constant gridlock and worsened pollution. Opinions are so entrenched that there’s no possibility for rational debate. Those unwilling to be inconvenienced into driving a millimetre more than previously are pitted against others catastrophising that the planet is endangered. I’ve been the recipient of death threats in the past, but I’ve found lycra brigade surprisingly vicious.I’m a great believer in evidence-led policy, so find the lack of baseline data on LTNs, as well as the“implement now, consult later” sequencing concerning. As for claiming that they are needed because car journeys are set to rise exponentially, post-pandemic we're likely to see ever-more home working and thus fewer, nor more car journeys.All stick and no carrot is wrong: why not incentivise lift-sharing or address issues of bike ownership and storage for the disadvantaged instead? Increased road tax for households with multiple cars would be better targeted than punishing the elderly and infirm who are unable to cycle or walk. The blunt LTN instrument whacks all drivers, including electric vehicles generating no emissions or taxis taking people to hospital. I’d welcome proper segregated cycle routes rather than blocking all side-streets. A well-intentioned policy has resulted in multiple unintended consequences all over London. Labour councils have been the most ardent adopters of “active travel”. But I fear that ploughing on regardless endangers votes and council seats amidst accusations of arrogance. Tory Wandsworth has withdrawn all LTNs. Harrow and Redbridge U-turned on certain schemes after pressure. It’s been claimed that the policy was a Dominic Cummings wheeze to make people detest their Labour councils. The Tory London Mayoral candidate has exploited the issue – notwithstanding that it’s a Grant Shapps’ policy. If something alienates people and creates more problems than it solves, it sounds wrong to me. But let’s test it. For consent you need to consult. I propose that whenever the trial period for each scheme ends, a referendum should be held. Only that way can we see if it really is just a “vocal minority” opposed, as is constantly claimed. Now that’s what I call the will of the people.  Rupa Huq is Labour MP for Ealing Central and Acton

Mark Perry ● 2172d32 Comments ● 2170d

RICHMOND PARK

The cycling lobby is some piece of work - now they've got the whip- hand in the discussions about Richmond Park - see the story on front page here.Richmond Park said: “We’ve been working hard to find a way to allow cyclists to return to the park that supports their safety and the safety of other park visitors. This interim measure will allow us to fully assess the impact of lifting restrictions, including whether any further safety measures are needed.“By re-opening in a limited capacity, we will be able to accurately monitor the impact of the re-introduction of cyclists on the park, and on other park visitors, informing any future decisions around opening the park more widely to cyclists.“We would like to thank everyone who has supported the temporary restrictions which have been in place during these unprecedented times, in order to enable the park to stay open for everyone who needs it. We would also like to thank all those cyclists, cycling groups and other park users who have given constructive feedback and suggestions on how to re-open the park safely. "Very happy for cyclists to cycle safely in R.Park - they have a very pleasant cycle track well away from any motorised traffic and can meander along enjoying nature, trees and wild animals.  But oh NO those cyclists want to use R.Park tarmac roadway as a training ground and a racing circuit.  They frequently overtake or frighten the life out of me, zooming at speed down hill towards me.  Agree, some road closures or restrictions need to be taken to stop the Park being used purely at a cut through.  As a disabled person I just want to drive slowly along enjoying our beautiful natural park - what do this vocal cycling lobby want?  They want a racing circuit NOT Richmond Wildlife Park!  Clear off and let those of us, walkers, gentle cyclists and drivers freely roam through this beautiful place.

Jennifer Selig ● 2177d34 Comments ● 2171d

Council budgets for 'temporary' road closure for three years

Although this article specifically mentions Lambeth, it makes interesting reading, nonetheless:A Freedom of Information response offers an insight into how 'low traffic neighbourhoods' planter costs span three years.Councils introducing controversial road closures meant to be temporary are instead planning to keep them for three years amid fears town hall bosses may secretly want to make them permanent, it can be revealed.Lambeth Council is claiming hundreds of thousands of pounds to close off London streets while budgeting for three years of maintenance for bollards and planters. A Freedom of Information request has highlighted how it has claimed nearly £200,000 of Government cash to block off five streets in an affluent area as part of its “Oval Triangle low traffic neighbourhood (LTN) temporary scheme”.The breakdown reveals how nearly £50,000 was spent installing new signs and road markings, £25,000 was ploughed into “design and project management", and nearly £5,000 forked out on ‘traffic counts’ to monitor how the road closures were working.However, the majority of the money claimed was invested in technology to fine motorists breaching the new rules, with £90,000 - nearly half the total obtained - used to buy automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras and fit columns or bollards.https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/11/22/council-budgets-temporary-road-closure-three-years/

Leslie Wilson ● 2171d2 Comments ● 2171d