Forum Topic

Proposals for new cycleway in Brentford

What I don't understand is how removing bus stops and bus lanes and making the bus stops that remain less accessible will make buses run more reliably. Can anyone explain? Using the data published by TfL, the number of people using these cycle lanes will be a tiny fraction of the number of people using buses on the same roads, so how can disadvantaging the latter be a good idea?

Jeremy Parkinson ● 841d46 Comments

In which case all those Councillors who are members of the AA, RAC, RHA and any other motoring organisations who lobby for motorists'interests should also be declaring a conflict of interest.

Philippa Bond ● 800d

Have you actually experienced the bus islands or are you just propagating change-hate rumours?  You'd think they were a new invention from the fuss.

Philippa Bond ● 800d

How will the Council close KFC?

Philippa Bond ● 800d

It's a classic case of putting policy before pragmatism.You only have to look at the dismissive comments of the A4 Cycle route.Links many of the districts of the borough and the airport,Has a full width cycle lane both sides of the roadis segregated from vehicular traffic. And Exists.Yet it has had nothing more than neglect.Minimal enhancements and righting some of the wrongs made in more recent times would make this the practical and best choice by far.The London Road is reasonable as it is and does not need stupid and dangerous enhancements, just some surface improvements and better markings.But to stuff up public transport and commercial traffic to serve an ideology and only pay attention to cycling groups who are no more representative of all cyclists than any one political party is pure folly and indicative of why we have such poor end results.

Raymond Havelock ● 801d

Having just filled out the online survey, TFL make it very hard to access and navigate their website and consultation. As a responsible cyclist and car driver these proposals are ill thought out and guaranteed to snarl up Brentford town centre even more!I find it strange that the very people pushing these schemes are hardly role models for TFLs vision.Cyclists are certainly in the minority around here and on my regular cycle ridesI hardly ever see any other cyclists.

David Cook ● 801d

Is the Isleworth Public Hall used as a mosque? That's the first I've heard of it.

Anne England ● 808d

Well said Vanessa. The wider  pavement outside Isleworth Public Hall/ Mosque had previously easily accommodated the 100 or so attendees piling out, making it easier to jump on a bus with a wooden bench provided that is more comfortable for elderly passengers to wait in the sunshine.

Philippa Auton ● 808d

Biggest problem is not local traffic it is the huge amount of through traffic from the several trunk roads that converge hereabouts.That won't change by penalising local vehicular users who have just as much right to make a living and move around as those who commute in.Trouble is it is milking the wrong people and forcing local people into disadvantage when it comes to making a living.Same with Crossrail or the Elizabeth Line, the real benefits are for this west of Slough  and in similar areas the other two directions.. GLA zone passengers are likely to rarely get a seat and yet pay into TfLs coffers in council tax, while those outside don't and get the benefit to the full.

Raymond Havelock ● 824d

I would say he is right - 1000s of new residents will mean thousands of new vehicles. These won't necessarily be owned or driven by the new arrivals.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 824d

I responded to the "thousands of new vehicles" claim made by nick. There will undoubtedly be an increase in journeys but not in vehicle ownership as no provision is made for parking and renting a space is both impractical for most and prohibitively expensive for many

N V Brooks ● 825d

Nick, I am no spring chicken but the reason I don't use Facebook is that my more technically aware work colleagues have demonstrated to me the dangers it presents in the way that it misuses any data that you provide to them.Nigel is not correct to say that new builds won't lead to a significant increase in traffic. Although I'm not aware of any authoritative research being done on the subject, common sense tells us that just because new developments are notionally car free doesn't mean that they won't generate more vehicle journeys. Even a person who lives like a hermit in a flat will generate some traffic on account of the goods and services they will need. A person who doesn't own a car doesn't necessarily generate less vehicle journeys than someone who does - they may habitually order food and groceries to be delivered, they may travel by Uber rather than public transport and they may use car share services.As traffic is already an issue on local roads, if nothing else changes then it will get worse when these developments are built. Encouraging walking and cycling can serve to mitigate this but it is public transport that can do the heavy lifting as only it can really provide a viable alternative for a sufficient large proportion of the people currently using cars. That's why I think that any plan that delays buses through Brentford and makes the service less accessible will cause our traffic problems to be worse.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 825d

It will actually mean very few new vehicles, not "thousands" as the majority of the new builds have neither provision for parking nor are the council likely to issue a CPZ permit as many developments have a no parking restriction. Ealing are already refusing CPZ permits to new developments as a condition of planning consent, expect Hounslow to follow suit.

N V Brooks ● 835d

As much as I realise this is an echo chamber for people too old for Facebook and asking for a solution is probably unwise, what is your solution Robert for transporting the 1000s of NEW residents of TW8?Have a look around, new flats going up all around!This will mean 1000s of new vehicles on roads that cannot get any wider.What do you suggest we do about congestion, pollution and injury caused by motor vehicles?

Nick Alesoch ● 836d

Do you mean to say Vanessa that a powerful cycle lobby exists akin to the Automobile Association (AA), the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), the Road Haulage Association (RHA) and the Freight Transport Association (FTA).I'd love to contact them - if you have their details - please forward!

Nick Alesoch ● 836d

I cycle locally but have never been any good at longer distances. Yet I was a good cross country runner in my youth could run long distances but never replicated on my bike. But for a living I have to drive. It is simple.  No vehicle, No work. It cannot be done any other way.  A great many occupations of a great range only exist because of personal transport.  It is the same for a great many and will remains so. Only so much can be done from a laptop from a room. At the end of the day someone has to go and make things happen, whatever that may be.Then there are those who scrape a living and just get by. They often have to rely on a car as their lifelong to a living. Horrible unsocial hours, longer distances and with the demise of so many local businesses, travelling further afield is all to often the only option to put food on the table and pay the bills.Seriously overlooked is the way in which previous regeneration directors have ridden roughshod over small business locations and wiped out viability and expansion hopes of so many local companies. It's still happening. It seems that unless it's a big employer, Businesses of 15 or less are of no significance.All those pennies add up.But nothing affordable or versatile has been factored into a single development anywhere locally.With huge increases on the cards for the local population and no sign of any tangible improvements to the infrastructure to cope, it is invariable that a great many will only be here for a short time before finding making a living without access to a vehicle will become a serious impediment to paying the bills.Opportunities for proper local quality employment are diminishing at a far greater rate than the population of working age is increasing.With such a limited ratio, how is walking or cycling going to work for all but a tiny amount? Public transport only serves fixed locations and it was being reduced before covid and journey times increased well in advance of the Cycle route to diminish the impact.Take a look at published timetables from 2016 to 2020. Several local routes show the differences in journey times and frequency. Those who use the 237 will know how often the bus stopped for 'frequency spacing' at Gunnersbury and Kew Bridge and similarly at Syon Corner during 2018/19.As ever it will be the most limited groups who will feel it first and then those who find they are trapped.

Raymond Havelock ● 836d

Well said Eric Baker and Anne England in response to the hysterical comments on this thread.

David Burke ● 836d

There are also an increasing number of people, as our population ages, who can neither cycle nor make use of public transport due to disability. London's transport is incredibly inaccessible in many locations notably local tube lines.

N V Brooks ● 836d

There are, of course, reasons to own and use a car. I know from personal experience though that when I had a car, which is going back about three years now, I was very much more inclined to get into the car even for short journeys. It can make one rather lazy I feel and I suppose my thinking was that if I paid out all that money to keep a car on the road then I was jolly well going to use it! That, I think, is half the problem.

Anne England ● 836d

Well you may like to walk and cycle and that's fine but how about my daughter in law a nurse who works in London but lives in Harefield how is she to get to work and home on an ever changing shift pattern.

Robert Ayres ● 837d

I use the  A4 all the time in preference to the proposed route. It is not perfect but is far safer, easier and journey times about the same.I am not a fast or long distance cyclist although in my early working years in my first job at Hatton Cross, cycled there in summer months. I cycled to college and night school for 3 years and it was easy and safe.You are of course only as safe as you can possibly be for yourself, that is to ride with due care and in a proficient manner and be able to control your machine properly.. in exactly the same way as any other responsible and diligent operator of a vehicle is supposed to be. The only difference is they are tested and examined and insured. So the onus is on the individual to be confident that they are safe and proficient enough to ride at night, in crappy weather and have spacial awareness at all times.There are flaws on the A4 routes which have been caused by bad road planning impeding on the existing cycle track that have made it less safe for cyclists in places and lack of thought or concern. It is a shame that many schools very close by did not push a deaf council on the impeding of the route as long back as the 1970s.But there are many improvements that can rectify this and way enhance and won't cost anything like the cost on trying to cam in a route which is an artery road and at a cost to public transport and commerce and increased pollution in an over developed area from delayed and artificially created congestion. Which has been the general outcome of TfLs designs and works to date. The GW road route is easy to access all the parts of the Borough north and south and to various points of Central hounslow with ease.As for the cafes and restaurants, there are hotels, restaurants, cafes, take aways on both sides of the road and many within 100m off many junctions.As I mentioned it's not perfect. But with little but deft improvements it could be by far the best cycle route in London. Some vegetative shielding was promised 5 years before the Olympics but has never materialised. Dutch style Cycle/ Pedestrian LED lighting pioneered in Holland some 15 years ago never even trialled.Clear signalling at Junctions, Anti slip surface and simple local signage.  It's only in a few places.  Removal of badly placed signs splat in the middle of the cycle road way and painted black or dark grey, what idiot approved that?It's all basics but properly enhanced serves many large residential districts and can run all the way from Hammersmith to Heathrow and Staines and to West Drayton. Not that I will ever manage that distance!Fact is it is 98% in place, not updated or enhanced in 60+ years and won't impede on traffic that keeps people in livelihoods.If money can be blown on a Zebra crossing to " Make a statement" then surely money can be blown on a few markings to make a junction safe for all?

Raymond Havelock ● 837d

I think this is 'news' from abt 3 yrs ago unless we are having some kind of deja vu.It would be great if some money could also be spent on improving the A4 cycle path.

Anne England ● 837d

I understand the option of the A4 is being rejected by the cycle lobby. Ruth Mayorcas, an avid cyclist, whose a Labour candidate for Turnham Green ward says it’s not an option as it’s too far from shops and restaurants.

Maggie Dodge ● 837d

I will have to look more carefully at the proposals.I do wonder, though, whether some people commenting on increased bus journey times actually ever get a bus. I can't think that there are many bus lanes on any of the routes I use, in fact the only one I can think of off-hand is the short distance covered near McDonald's and, I think, the stretch up from Kew Bridge to Fountain Leisure Centre. Then there is that controversial no parking strip stretching from Verdict to Goddard's - is that a bus lane? (poor visual memory)I realise cycling and walking aren't for everybody but journey times by bus would be shorter if there were fewer cars on the road.

Anne England ● 837d

They are specific about the removal of three and the relocation of the majority of othe bus stops. It certainly will make it far more difficult for some to use the bus. They (TfL) seem to infer that moving a stop by 50 metres is no big deal. For some, this puts the bus beyond the limit of their walking range.

N V Brooks ● 838d

Did I mention Deaths or injuries? No. Fact is there are no statistics published or made public on these installations.But you have to remember that a great many who use buses are people who have impediments from eyesight and hearing through to arthritis and restrictive mobility.Millions has been spent to accommodate some of these more severe limitations to allow the emancipation of those people. But the vast majority fall into the middle category.One day it could be yourself experiencing what it's like to lose agility that we take for granted.This is all being brushed aside to suit a policy without pragmatic thought.

Raymond Havelock ● 838d

This is true but I think the majority of people on this or similar threads are referring to the impact on journey times of the current cycle lanes. I did, in my reply to tfl regarding the new proposals, say that I thought that the removal of some bus stops could cause difficulty of access for certain groups (i.e. distance between stops) and that it would be helpful if they could be more specific on this matter.

Anne England ● 838d

I would suggest that you wait until after implementation when bus stops are removed and sections os bus lane are scrapped along with over half of the bus stops being relocated onto island sites.Only then can the impact on journey times be measured.

N V Brooks ● 838d

Agreed, as in my comment above.

Anne England ● 838d

I think TFL's disastrous fall in revenues has a lot to do with a certain virus and nothing to do with cycling. I've rarely read such a collection of sour comments as in this thread: 'all powerful cycle lobby', 'sitting in the clogged up traffic', 'chair bound car hater'. It all seems to be demanding continued preference for cars over people, US style. No thanks. I'm 70+ and use buses, trains, walking, our car and my bike (roughly in that order) and think that the increased provision for pedestrians and cyclists does not seem to have slowed the buses at all.

Eric Baker ● 838d

Dreading the construction  of this monstrosity . As someone who has to drive or use the bus on Brentford High St to access my home the journeys will be horrendous. The construction at Kew Bridge took forever with many days with no workers on site at all. Haven't  these people learnt anything from those dangerous bus islands on CHR? The cycle lane on Boston Manor Road rarely has a cyclist on it considering how much money it cost. Time to charge cyclists a tax to pay for these lanes. No wonder TFL is bankrupt!

Elizabeth Price ● 838d

Raymond - please do share some stats regarding the number of injured or deaths caused by these cyclists and scooterists.Having an injured ego from a near miss really doesn't cut it as newsworthy.

Nick Alesoch ● 838d

I can't wait for you to find out the actual (rather than imagined) danger that pedestrians face when they cross roads Pat

Nick Alesoch ● 838d

I use the buses a lot. In the last four days it's been the 267  from Goat Wharf to Isleworth Pool return, the 65 to Richmond followed by the 33 to Sheen return, 267 to Hammersmith return and today the 237 one way from Kew Bridge to Waterman's. All of the journeys ran very smoothly with minimal, in fact no, hold-up. This may be partly down to Covid and fewer passengers - who knows. Whatever, I find the bus services generally run very well although admittedly there can sometimes be a big wait to get on to the Chiswick Roundabout from Chiswick High Road at about 5.30p.m. but this has always been the case. I ride a bike as well at times and overall welcome the improvements which have been made to the cycling infrastructure.

Anne England ● 839d

Another waste of public money by some chair bound car hater which will lead to yet more traffic chaos how much more of this shite do we have to put up with

Robert Ayres ● 839d

I've just tried filling in the TfL questionnaire - that's no consultation - half the questions are intrusive and irrelevant, please someone tell me what anyone's religion or sexual identity has to do with this? If that's anyone's idea of consulting then no wonder they get away with this utter tripe. I cannot understand what Hounslow councillors are thinking - knowing how much flak there's already been over these bizarre schemes that only serve to p*ss a lot of people off. I dare them to canvass this household during the local elections!

Vanessa Smith ● 839d

The best thing about Cycling is the go anywhere ability - as long as you are fit and able enough to cycle.Cycleways do not address this at all. Sooner or later you have to leave the cycleway and continue on roads that have potholes, slippery surfaces and detritus and poor lighting and road markings.None of these have been even dressed in the slightest.Buses are being used less. But journey times on some local routes are way longer caused mainly by the chocking of artery routes enable cyclists.  Many cyclists - including myself don't cycle withing the bollards of Kew Road or Isleworth because they are to dangerous to overtake or be overtaken by other cyclists and also the sheer number of cyclists who simply cannot ride a bike safely or properly and she no due care to other cyclists. It's pretty much the same on the proper routes.  They are not terribly well designed. But the real damage is to commerce and livelihoods.  Those who work unsocial hours ( and that's very high in this part of the country, also earl less but a car is the only way to make that living. Bus and public transport is often simply ruled out. Unreliable and disrupted too often simply because the infrastructure cannot cope as it is.TfL should focus on its core remit. Public Transport for all. Not just something that can serve only a few and those few who are well enough and fit enough to be able to cycle anywhere anyhow.The way all this is conceived and formulated is an insult to democracy and common sense, an abuse of taxpayers funding when simpler and better all round solutions are simply dismissed.And locally, the fact that the Best cycle route in London remains neglected and bereft of simple improvements which would make it a jewel in the Cycling Crown is the biggest indicator of ineptness by these planners.

Raymond Havelock ● 839d

The irony is that TfL is desperate for money, yet seems keen to discourage bus usage, a source of revenue for it. Then it finds the cash to throw at I’ll-conceived cycle schemes that are chronically underused. Given the choice most sane people would use a bus ahead of a bike.And the health argument is spurious. Calorie burning is very low when cycling short distances. You won’t improve your health with local cycling, particularly if you then load up on carbs when you get home. A better move by LBH would be to close KFC and other fast food outlets.

Simon Hayes ● 839d

It is clear from the wording that the decision to proceed with this cycle lane has already been made and this is a fait accompli - any views that don't support this proposal will be simply ignored as they have been in the past - even if they are in the majority. 85% of respondents voted against the closure of my road in LBH's survey for the LTN changes and their objections were ignored. It's clear that any consultations carried out by this administration are window dressing - they may as well not bother with this pointless task and save some money.

Graham Thorpe ● 839d

'Councillor Hanif Khan, Hounslow Council Cabinet Member for Transport, said,“This consultation is a great opportunity for anyone who lives, works or visits our borough to give their views on TfL’s proposal to extend Cycleway 9, from Brentford to Hounslow. I would like to encourage as many people as possible to get involved in the conversation. The ability for more people to have safer cycling journeys, and to connect more areas of London to a cycling network, is a vital part of our work to support healthier lifestyles, free up space on public transport, and encourage more people away from private car journeys.”Is there really a point in anybody responding to this 'consultation' - given that absolutely no notice whatsoever is taken of what the consultees think? I have yet to see all these cyclists that we're constantly assured are out there pedalling away, and you do get plenty of observational time whilst sitting in the clogged-up traffic these potty schemes cause. What a pity that the two sides of TfL don't talk - we know that the bus operators didn't want to move the bus stop in South Street Isleworth but the other lot that promote cycle lanes did - it's the politics of the madhouse.

Vanessa Smith ● 839d

The Bus islands are seriously dangerous and there have been many incidents with passengers being clipped by mirrors and hit by cyclists and scooterists. Not to mention getting soaked by spray from vehicles and being unable to step back to a safer place.Smacks of modelling done by someone who has never experienced travelling by bus with lesser mobility, children or shopping.Devoid of pragmatism.And where did TfL source these accident figures? They are exactly the same as those used for other schemes?This at first read seems like an anti bus use brief and do they seriously think people will walk this route?  It's always been a bust bus route but never a favoured walking route.Then theres the hugely neglected Cycleway along the A4 which for those of us who cycle is a safe and easy ride which links Osterley, Isleworth, Spring Grove, Hounslow east, Central and west very easily as well as Heston and Cranford and onto the airportit just needs refining and updating and short bits properly reinstating and but is perfect in segregating cyclists without deviation.Yet TfL do not seem to ever acknowledge it's very existence.

Raymond Havelock ● 840d

I expect it will be a very expensive shambles like the cycleway in Chiswick. The proposals to me look unsafe for pedestrians and unfavourable for buses.

Chris Dakers ● 840d

I sincerely hope that any councillors who may vote on the proposals when they are finalized and who are members of the LCC or similar lobby groups will declare their conflict of interest and abstain.

N V Brooks ● 841d

Do visit South Street in Isleworth, particularly outside the Public Hall if you want to see the most ridiculous waste of money that pits pedestrians against the all powerful cycle lobby. This folly has necessitated moving a bus stop and thereby helping to clog the road up at busy times, in its original place outside the public hall there was a layby, allowing traffic to pass by - also benches for elderly users of the public hall. The joke of it was that TfL's bus section didn't want to move the stop but the cycle section won - these people are all bonkers, and totally ignored the vocal and bloody downright annoyed majority of residents.

Vanessa Smith ● 841d

The online survey is a total waste of time. This is a total waste of money.

David Squire ● 841d

Bus bypasses will only put pedestrians at risk of being hit by a cyclist when crossing them.

Pat Kingham ● 841d

We should all now realise that it is forbidden to criticise or question anything that contradicts the 'entitled cyclist first' policy. Still, the May ballot box is not far away to send a clear message to subserviant councillors who swallow everything from TfL without question.

N V Brooks ● 841d