Forum Topic

Steve -No apology was necessary, (but thanks anyway) - I was just attempting to clarify my role and manage any expectation that I could continue to post on a range of matters outside my portfolio.  Notwithstanding this, and with a view to giving subscribers to this site confidence that the Borough is actively managing the LBH/utility interface, I am posting below some information received from the Highways Asset Manager:"This week my street works team completed an analysis of the defects recorded during the year 2007/2008 arising from the inspections we carry out on a random sample of the works carried out by all the statutory undertakers.  We have written to the six companies that are responsible for the vast majority of openings in the borough giving each a summary of their performance and warning them of the consequences if their performance fails to improve. Whilst none of them performed sufficiently badly to require us to issue a formal Improvement Notice under the New Roads and Street Works Act, we have said that we will be repeating the analysis every quarter and will expect to see continual improvement."I have also been advised that there is provision under S74 of the New Roads and Street Works Act to charge utilities for overrunning agreed completion dates and that we do implement this, and have charged Thames Water’s contractors in some instances.  Under the new Traffic Management Act we will have power to issue fixed penalty notices for certain specific infringements of NRSWA regulations.  The relevant officers here have regular meetings with Thames Water and their contactors to discuss these issues. “As a matter of interest who is Hounslow's Director of Streetworks?”.  Responsibility for streetworks rests within Highways, which is part of Streetcare Services, which is under the overall control of Suresh Kamath, Director of Street Management & Public Protection, who is also my line manager.Philip -“The Dutch manage to separate cycle paths and have no problem keeping them clean. The current on road scheme does not stop motorist turning left and colliding with cyclist, I was eleven the first time it happened to me and the roads were a lot quieter thirty six years ago.”Maybe so, but if you are on a cycle lane on the carriageway and are heading straight you have right of way over a motorist turning, which is NOT the case if you are on a footway path.“Have you driven past Kew Gardens lately and seen the green car parking zone sorry cycle lane that runs down Kew Road?”  Yes, in fact I have ridden this route. In LB Hounslow we try to avoid placing cycle lanes in locations where they will simply be parked upon all day  - I realise that there are a couple of instances of this and we will attend to these as resources allow.“I can't help wondering when you last took your life in your hands by venturing onto the Boroughs roads on a bicycle but I bet it was not lately.”  Last Sunday.  I suggest you bet on something else."You claim there was consultation with the boroughs schools, could you perhaps steer me in the right direction so as I might see these reports/consultation documents."All LCN+ routes are subject to a CRISP study (Cycle Route Implementation & Stakeholder Plan).  All stakeholders including local schools are invited to participate in these reviews.  The CRISP for the route in question was undertaken last year.  The CRISP document is quite large but I can arrange for you to view it  - please email me direct.Thames Water issues – see above .I hope this thread can now be closed.

Chris Calvi-Freeman ● 6305d

Chris.The Dutch manage to separate cycle paths and have no problem keeping them clean. The current on road scheme does not stop motorist turning left and colliding with cyclist, I was eleven the first time it happened to me and the roads were a lot quieter thirty six years ago. The comparison with other boroughs holds true, as do my conclusions. Have you driven past Kew Gardens lately and seen the green car parking zone sorry cycle lane that runs down Kew Road. I can't help wondering when you last took your life in your hands by venturing onto the Boroughs roads on a bicycle but I bet it was not lately.You claim there was consultation with the boroughs schools, could you perhaps steer me in the right direction so as I might see these reports/consultation documents.On the point of Thames Water, surely the correspondence from the council to Thames Water should take the form of written request's this surely is the correct manner for dealing with such bodies as it represents tangible proof of commitments and confirms to all interested parties that the council are taking action and also confirms which points are being raised. Forcing written responses from Thames Water would provide some kind of legal redress over failing to live up to written commitments, as opposed to the get out of 'no proof of conversation or commitment' situation that now exists.If you personally have not communicated with Thames Water then the information you are providing on the councils behalf is just as third hand as Thames Waters responses are.

Philip Walsh ● 6305d

"I have passed several messages from this site and several personal obstructions to our highways and streetworks engineers, who have discussed the issue with Thames Water on more than one occasion." "Sorry Steve, this would all be third hand, and I don't have the time to play "he said that they said that he said.. Suffice to say that LBH staff will continue to monitor and will try to protect the public interest as far as possible within available resource constraints.""I said that the relevant officers (i.e. not me) have “discussed the issue with Thames Water”.  There is no correspondence....".Chris - I would certainly hope that the frustration of roadusers would not lend you to believe it appropriate to "play" he said, they said  with Thames Water.It has already been posted on the thread about the year long London Road debacle that the Council cannot afford to allow Thames Water to ride roughshod over it. West London residents are well aware of how Thames Water operate (if they are allowed to)  I merely asked what Thames Water's response was to the 'discussions' with your highways and streetworks engineers because my experience, in dealing with Thames,  is that 'discussions' with them are normally fruitless if not followed up and well documented with what has or hasn't been agreed. Your latest posting would appear to confirm that there has been no correspondence so the discussions have been 'informal' and have achieved little. Its very simple - someone senior should pick up the phone and speak to Richard Aylard and tell him that they don't have time to play. Roadusers, traders and residents  are clearly frustrated with the lack of action. Surely the local Authority is not employed to simply 'continue to monitor'  the situation?

Steve Taylor ● 6308d

Philip …“Chris so there was no local consultation with anyone, the local schools whose children are the most at risk were not consulted neither were local parents.”We are in close touch with all the schools.  Almost all now have a School Travel Plan, which forms the basis for investment in cycling facilities both within the school grounds and more widely.  We also provide cycle training in schools. “How much extra would it have cost to have had a kerb to separate cycle path from road.”We could not have achieved this here, due to the buried services which the new kerb line is now hard up against.  The only other option would have been to install a (better than previous) cycle path on the footway.  As I have posted on other occasions, most cyclists do not want a footway cycle path.  Cordoning off the cycle lane from the traffic lane, even in those few locations where carriageway width permits this, has several shortcomings, the two main ones being:  • Cyclists have to give way to turning traffic at each junction or commercial crossover• The cycle trough is difficult to drain and machine clean.  Kerbed off cycle lanes call into question the status of cyclists as road users at all other locations where such separate facilities are not available.  The only locations where I would advocate a kerbed off cycle lane would be (in general) on 40+mph roads.  Even there, the problems with giving way to side roads (and conflict with pedestrians) make these facilities equally unpopular with cyclists.“As for the award ! All that means is Hounslow council has been less crap than the other boroughs because none of the councils treat the safety of children on the road with ANY priority at all.”Thanks.  I’ll print and frame those words alongside the award, which was judged by independent transport experts, presumably including at least one who cares about children.“I must agree with Tim that the old path  running along the pavement was poor but that was down to the crap design with those steep ups and downs. As for Captain Morgans, was the pedestrians perhaps the owners of the cars which always used the cycle lane to park on and were never ticketed. They still park on the pavement there. Between them, the tables and that always in the way sign you are lucky to get by as a pedestrian let alone as a cyclist.”I agree about the footway obstructions and have passed your comments to the appropriate officer.  There is currently only a  single yellow line in front of the Capt. Morgan.  We are just about to consult on changing this to double yellow.  Ideally no car parking would be allowed at any time in any marked cycle lane, although there are locations where we have no option but to allow some off-peak goods loading  - to deny this would be to risk destroying local businesses.“I am still a little confused about how revealing Thames waters response is third hand, surely any official inquiry from the council to Thames water is documented and available to be quoted in accordance with the freedom of information act.”I said that the relevant officers (i.e. not me) have “discussed the issue with Thames Water”.  There is no correspondence for you to request under the FOI.

Chris Calvi-Freeman ● 6308d

I came across this press release from Croydon :Council to act tough on utility road worksPress Release DetailsDate      Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:17:37From later next year new obligations in the Traffic Management Act mean anyone wanting to carry out excavations on the highways will need a permit before starting.  This will require much more information being given to Croydon Council than is currently the case.  At present many of the utilities merely give notice of their intention leaving the council relatively powerless to intervene.    The advantages of the new arrangements are that:    * Councils can be more proactive in managing utility excavations;    * Conditions can be attached to permits imposing constraints on the way work is conducted and requiring public information;    * Direction can be given over the timing of road digging;    * Granting a permit gives the council greater flexibility to ensure deadlines are met.Even under the present system the council has been imposing fines of around £250,000 a year on utilities that fail to finish works within an agreed timetable.  But the income is of less importance to the council than the disruption that lengthy and sometimes inconsiderate roadworks cause to residents and road users.It is hoped that the tougher requirements will also help address ways in which utilities try to evade their responsibilities by closing down works within the agreed timescale only to re-open a few weeks later to actually complete works which were supposed to have been finished earlier.  Genuine emergency or urgent works will not be delayed by the new arrangements; utilities will be allowed to proceed immediately but required to submit a permit application early the very next morning.Said Councillor Phil Thomas, cabinet member for environment and highways: "Introduction of this permit scheme is long overdue.  If it works as the Government intends then it should be a helpful step in regulating and co-ordinating the utilities that are forever digging up our roads. "There is no doubt that a robust scheme is needed in the interest of road users and residents whose interests often appear secondary to the utilities' aim of doing whatever they want under the road surface without fully considering the impact they cause."Of course we need proper provision for unavoidable emergency works but we also want the utilities to get on with the job and treat their occupation of our roads as a temporary intrusion that should be over and done with as quickly as possible.  However, I remain concerned that emergency powers will be highlighted for jobs that could be planned in advance with other utilities.  While welcoming the intentions of the new legislation I believe we will need to watch the situation carefully to ensure that any attempts to get around the law are quickly spotted and enforced."

Tim Henderson ● 6311d