Cycleway Looks Set For Green Light As Report Endorses Scheme

Officers recommend to council cabinet that project should proceed

A report written by Hounslow Council officers has provided a strong endorsement of Transport for London's (TfL) plan to build a cycle path from Kensington Olympia to Brentford through Chiswick. In a detail review of the scheme they give detailed counter-arguments to most of the objections put forward by opponents of the project that was originally dubbed CS9.

The document is due to be presented to a council cabinet meeting on Tuesday, 3 September and makes the recommendation that the project be taken forward to the final stage of detailed design subject to a number of conditions. In addition the report states that should any further statutory consultations be required on the scheme due to unresolved objections, this should be reported back to the cabinet for consideration.

Assuming the cabinet endorses the report and there are no substantive objections requiring further delays, the project would be on course to break ground in spring/summer next year.

In the London Borough of Hounslow (LBH) the proposed scheme, which is now known as Cycleway 9, is a new two-way cycle track, largely segregated from motor traffic, running along the southern side of Chiswick High Road. This track would run from the borough boundary with London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham (LBH&F) to Heathfield Terrace. At this point the facility would then run on-road along Heathfield Terrace and Wellesley Road.

The Council report deals on a point by point basis with objections raised by opponents in the local area including the Chiswick ward councillors.

The authors dismiss claims that the project will increase traffic in the area saying that on each section of the route within London Borough of Hounslow, small variations of 0 – 2 minutes – some increases some decreases - are anticipated in both directions in the morning peak periods. There are more significant changes in two sections in the evening peak period, with reductions of 2 – 4 minutes in both directions between Chiswick Roundabout – Goldhawk Road and 5 – 6 minutes between Kew Bridge to Chiswick Roundabout anticipated. Taken as a whole route between Ealing Road and Olympia, westbound journeys are expected to reduce by 5 – 10 minutes in the morning peak, with an increase of 0 -5 minutes in eastbound journeys. In the evening peak, journey times in both directions are expected to reduce by 10 – 15 minutes (westbound) and 5 – 10 minutes (eastbound). These figures are a result of mitigation measures that have been taken by TfL as a result of changes made to the original design for which a higher level of delay was expected.

The report states, "On balance, officers are satisfied that TfL has taken reasonable steps to balance the journey time impacts on the variety of road users along this route, in line with the objectives of the new Mayor’s Transport Strategy (MTS) and the council’s Local Implementation Plan for Transport 2018 – 2041."

On concerns about air quality the report states, "Environmental surveys and modelling have been undertaken by TfL to understand what the impact of the scheme will be on air quality and noise. This report concluded that, the overall impact of the scheme on air quality is negligible. There are some beneficial and some adverse effects in terms of air quality, and the combined impact of the scheme are collectively considered to be balanced and overall not significant."

The report also rejects the option of running the cyclepath alongside the A4. It states, " Officers also consider that the A4 has a number of negative characteristics that makes it unsuitable for a facility of this nature and therefore do not support the view that Cycleway 9 should use this road."

The claim is made that the A4 is a hostile environment for cyclists and that an extra phase would be need to allow cyclists to cross at the junction with Sutton Court Road. Given the priority that needs to be given to traffic on the A4 that would mean even shorter phases at the lights and more tailbacks back up to Chiswick High Road.

The officers say that TfL has undertaken 'sophisticated 'analysis of cycle demand across London that it says helps to further illustrate the attractiveness of the High Road over the A4. The whole route of C9 (from Olympia to Brentford) is currently amongst the top 10% of routes into central London for current demand, despite having few dedicated facilities for cyclists. Chiswick High Road itself is in the top 5% for flows in London, and at times has recorded the highest flows for such a road in outer London.

Concerns about the impact on pedestrians are also played down with officers saying that there is much less footfall on the southern side of Chiswick High Road than on the northern side. These figures are from surveys carried out in June 2015 and show a significant difference in the use of each footway by pedestrians. The peak northern footway figure of 1533 is three times the peak southern footway volume, indicating that the demand for pedestrian space is focused on the northern side of the road. The northern footway also has more bus stops, a total of five, compared to three on the southern footway, so impact on bus passengers is minimised by locating the track on the southern footway. This is one reason why a bi-directional track has been chosen rather than having two cycle lanes on each side of the road.

Safety issues with the two way track are also addressed with objectors saying that the design is dangerous for both cyclists and pedestrians. The report admits that London Cycle Design Standards (LCDS) acknowledges these risks. It recommends that tracks should be bent away from the junction by 5 metres when crossing a two-way side road in general which is not incorporated into the Cycleway 9 design. However, the LCDS says that this may not be necessary where traffic speeds and volumes are very low, subject to specific investigation of the junction in question and the use of measures to enhance visibility of cyclists. This project will include a number of these measure including raising the carriageway of the junction to footway level, more signage and contrasting surface materials. Junction width will be reduced wherever possible and traffic generally will be slowed by the planned introduction of a 20mph speed limit on Chiswick High Road. In addition traffic surveys on the number of vehicles emerging from side roads onto Chiswick High Road suggest that the volume is below that which would require alternative designs to be considered.

As part of the detailed design process, the designs will be subject to a full road safety audit by an independent auditor and any specific issues relating to, for example, blocks to visibility will be further considered at this point.

Officers also address research cited by Redesign CS9 and other objectors which suggested that bi-directional cycle paths could increase the number of collisions.

The report states, " officers would perhaps question whether evidence about risk factors derived from facilities largely located overseas are directly attributable to the west London context and the specific C9 proposals in Chiswick, with all the detailed mitigation they include. We have also noted alternative interpretations of the risk factors derived from academic journals that suggests the view that such a facility could lead to more collisions than the current arrangement (that includes little or no dedicated facilities for cyclists) may be incorrect."

More detailed date on collisions in the local area is included in the report. This shows that one junction disproportionately contributes to these figures, Duke Road. Here, there have been a total of 12 personal injury collisions in the last 5 years, of which 4 have resulted in injury to cyclists one of which was classed as serious. This represents nearly a third of all collisions on the southern side of Chiswick High Road.

On the issue of loss of pedestrian space the report points out that the northern side is almost entirely unchanged. On the southern side (which as noted above is substantially less busy), some footways would be cut back in certain locations where they are considered wide enough for safe, comfortable
pedestrian movement. In most cases this is to accommodate bus stops or prevent the removal of trees. Over half of the southern footway is largely unchanged or actually widened. Around 49% of the footway is proposed to reduce in width by more than 0.5m but never reduced to less than 2m.

There have been a large number of concerns expressed about the loss of trees due to the scheme. The report says that just four mature trees will need to be removed on Chiswick High Road and there will be nine trees planted in their place. In addition they are recommending that TfL fund a tree-planting program in the three Chiswick wards.

Officers say they have reviewed a significant amount of data relating to parking supply vs. demand and loading requirements as well as wider evidence on the impact similar, though not directly comparable schemes, have had on local economic activity elsewhere.

They state, "Whilst it is clear that the scheme will lead to some reduction in parking availability, it would appear that the remaining parking stock should be able to accommodate existing demand. This would appear to be the case even at peak times."

They are dismissive of the idea that the scheme will have a negative impact for local retailers or that the 'café culture' of Chiswick High Road will be affected.

It was pointed out that the consultation also generated a large number of comments about the behaviour of some cyclists. This included jumping red lights and cycling illegally on footways. Officers consider that the provision of dedicated facilities such as that proposed as part of the scheme should help reduce illegal behaviour by providing formalised facilities for cyclists, reducing the need for them to use designated footways, and improving journey times generally, reducing the need for red light running and other such risk-taking behaviour. In response to a request for a cycle speed limit in the area the officers said that there was no legislation in place to make these restrictions legally enforceable.

More detailed maps of the scheme are also included in the information to be presented to the cabinet including the new planned layout around the junction with Dukes Avenue which retains two lanes for traffic eastbound. It has been possible to achieve this by amending the layout on the westbound approach to the junction, resulting in the loss of one tree. Scepticism has been expressed that a safe design could be created given limitations of space due to the decision not to run the cycleway on the pavement in front of the Church. The map does not show road widths but elsewhere on the report officers state that they are comfortable with proposed lane widths of 3 metres. HGVs can be up to 2.55 metres wide and the new routemasters including those on the 267 route are a similar width. Officers say they are willing to accept designs under the normally accepted width for this type of highway because of the pending speed restriction of 20mph. The majority of the lane widths on Chiswick High Road will remain at 3.2 metres but for a 50 metre portion of the road there will be two opposing lanes of 3 metre.

Updated design for junction near Dukes Avenue

Although the report endorses the scheme it is pointed out that, given the size and the complexity of the project, there will be additional officer cost for LBH and a request is to be made that this is covered up front given TfL's financing difficulties. The estimated amount required would be £300,000. Another condition officers have recommended is the previously mentioned tree planting program. This would led to a minimum of five new trees being planted in each Chiswick ward in addition to the planting planned for the High Road.

The agenda papers for the cabinet meeting on 3 September also include appendices with more detailed reports.

August 25, 2019