metOctober04

NOTES OF HFCYCLISTS MEETING

Tuesday 5 October 2004, 8pm in the Info Centre

PRESENT: John Griffiths, Bill Ogden, Mo Morgan, Bernard Bunting, Jonathan Gurney, John Smits

APOLOGIES: Chris Bainbridge, Simon Franklin, Mark Alderton, Alan Rowden, John Gilbert, Paul Alexander, Louanne Tranchell, Alex Forrest, Chris Tranchell

THE TRAM - RATIFYING A GROUP RESPONSE

The response that John G had prepared was examined. It was agreed to send this in as a group response. [This has been appended to the end of these notes]

Bernard was pleased that it was a constructive response, even though it was against the plans as proposed.

It has already been sent out to the email group and the response there has been 100% in favour [thank you Mark Greenwood, whose ideal preference would be for a clear route for trams and cycles].

If you wish to send your own response go to
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/trams/initiatives/wlt/wlt-consultation.shtml
by 8 October 2004.

Various aspects of the tram were discussed.

Jonathan thought that the increased distance between tram stops, as compared to bus stops, would put some people off using the tram, and lead them to using a car instead. He was impressed by the way the Croydon tram had brought communities together.

John S thought that carrying bikes off-peak would be very useful.

Bill brought up the dangers of tram stops in the middle of the road. He was against the inflexibility of the tram, and did not like to see developing technologies being ruled out. Bill was against the tram.

HAMMERSMITH BROADWAY - WHAT IS GOING ON

Earlier in the day John G had a meeting with Colin Glendenning and Dion Hallett from the Highways planning group at LBHF. This was to bring John up to date with the Council's latest thinking. They are going to present the plans for approval to Deputies in the next few weeks.

They explained that it was only at this point when all their ideas were firmed up that they felt it was useful having a meeting. John G said that he was very pleased to have this meeting, but expressed great disappointment that we had not had a discussion earlier. John is hoping that we could work more openly and co-operatively in the future.

The consultants had been looking at five options, including surface level crossings on the south side. The option the Council is taking forward was a route linking Hammersmith rd to King Street. It would go along the pavement from Hammersmith rd, past the bus station entrance and up to the Piccadilly line station entrance. It would then cross the road and dismount to join up with King Street. Coming the other way the contraflow cycle lane in King street would be continued up to the gyratory, with the roadway being narrowed from two lanes to one lane.

The reason for taking these forward is that it fitted in with pots of money, section 106 money from the temporary bus station, and Green Ways money for improving the King street corridor. The pavement route is called phase 1 and should be constructed Jan to April 2005. The contraflow in King street is Phase 2 and is planned for 2005 - 6.

At the meeting with Colin and Dion John G made the following remarks

1) The pavement route would be more useful for westbound cyclists. The plans should be adapted to make it easier for eastbound cyclists from King Street to join the main on-road traffic flow.

2) How many cyclists per light change were expected, and could the design cope with that many? On the island near Butterwick and at the bus station space was limited. Near King street the concentration of pedestrians might be a problem.

3) John thought that the new bus station [to be built on the NW corner of the main island] was a temporary bus station and that the northern entrance to the present bus station was to be modified with a complicated crossing pattern of bus flows. The plans did not seem to incorporate this proposed development.

The group welcomed the proposal in principle, and the pavement route was an illegal route that most of us took quite regularly.

The main concern was that the route went through the congested pedestrian area on the peninsular at the end of King Street. We wondered how many cyclists could physically get through during a light change in the evening rush hour. And with cyclists traversing the area coming from both directions? Would this match the number of cyclists wanting to use the route, as it is on a main desire line? Would it impede pedestrian flows at an unacceptable level?

Bernard thought that we should be very positive about the fact that the Council were doing something for cyclists at the Broadway.

John G was happy but less euphoric, and had hoped that the roadway would have been made safer somehow. The cycle route to the south goes down a pedestrian subway, and this route may present some difficulties during the rush hour.

We would like the Gyratory to be able to cope with a large numbers of cyclists in a safe way. We should press for a 20mph limit. John was expecting the consultants to have done modelling on this, but this was not mentioned at the meeting today.

The council are planning a CRIM very soon, a cycle route inspection meeting. John G and Bernard are hoping they will be invited and could make a meeting.

Mo pointed out that the CRIM should definitely take place in the evening rush hour.

MO [to Jonathan] How do you get around the Broadway?
JONATHAN: I use the flyover.
MO: I do not think that you are very wise to do that. [note: these may not have been Mo's exact words]
JONATHAN: It's okay, except for the expansion joints. If you have thin tyres you might fall through.

BIKE THEFTS - AND KRYPTONITE LOCKS / REPLACEMENT

Mo worried that someone may steal her valuable lock. Kryptonite are organising a free replacement with flat key locks, with a certain delay. She will go to the bike shop to see what is happening. http://www.kryptonitelock.com/

Previously we gave a link to a video clip of a lock with a tubular key being opened by a bic pen. see:
http://thirdrate.com/misc/krypto.mov
hear:
http://video.bikeforums.net/npr-interview.mp3

WOOD LANE JUNCTION -WHAT IS GOING ON

John G has raised concerns about how the planned islands at this junction would work. Chris Bainbridge [LBHF Transportation Policy Group] has been in communication with John Lee at Cycling Centre of Excellence. John Lee has responded, in positive but rather general terms, not really giving Chris backing for any specific action.

It would be a shame if a flawed facility were to be built because no one has the authority or clout to do anything about it.

Basically, in John G's opinion, the main east-west pedestrian crossing is larger than need be, squeezing the cycle routes into a restricted space. Reservoirs may not be able to cope with expected numbers. The cycle route leads directly into an obstruction, the old brick toilet.

John G was hoping that a major rethink of the junction could be carried out, with the position of the pedestrian crossing moved south to give more room for cyclists. see http://www.hfcyclists.org.uk/issues.htm#SBG

[Just before sending out these notes Chris Bainbridge has said that a safety audit will be carried out on this junction. They are looking at demolishing the toilet, though the sub station transformer inside may be harder to move. They had initially incorrectly thought it to be a listed building because of the alleged activities of one Wilfred Bramble? Chris has said that cyclists going on the Green could be redirected to the north of the toilet as an interim measure.]

EXPENSES

John G had expenses of £10.25 for wine, juice and food.

BEING INVOLVED IN OUR GROUP

Next meeting will be our AGM. Please consider how you might be more involved. It would be good if you could put yourself forward to be on our management committee. This is not very onerous, but makes it easier to have quorate meetings if we a have a wide selection of people on it. And you can direct the way we will progress. If you cannot make the AGM but would like to be considered for the MC please let john g know.

DATE FOR HFCYCLISTS AGM -

Tuesday 9th November, 7.30pm at the Info centre. Refreshments available.

John Griffiths [co-ordinator]
020 7371 1290 / 07789 095 748
john@truefeelings.com
OUR WEBSITE www.hfcyclists.org.uk

******************
[TRAM RESPONSE]
Time to have your say

Response by hfcyclists - local branch of the London Cycling Campaign in LBHF

1] 1 The need to improve congestion is very serious.

2] 3 No. I do not support the proposal. Not well thought out, or shown that it would it would work in LBHF area. Not shown that it is more appropriate than other possible schemes. It is a shame that a workable proposal was not available at this time. [Nick Berrill, head of engineering for the tram, has stated on 8 September 2004 that the present plans at Shepherds Bush Green would not work].

3] 4 - Personally I would use it less than once per month

4] 3 Main advantage would be easier access between towns.

5] Comment on advantages: However it would introduce chaos for other road users, including essential delivery and emergency services.

6] 1 - Main disadvantage increased congestion on main roads.

7] Comment on disadvantages: Thoroughly and fairly look at and compare alternative schemes, to see if they would give better overall cost / benefit performance. Or refine the tram proposal.

8] Any comments on stops - No

9] Other comments:

The work so far is flawed in not looking at the modelling for the evening peak, or to the area to the east of Shepherds Bush Green. Alternative schemes were dropped before the problems at Shepherds Bush Green were realised. The full disbenefits of congestion should have been put into the cost / benefit equations. Or the additional costs of dealing with problems in LBHF area should have been incorporated into the costs.

Cyclists groups should have been consulted and listened to earlier in the process.

GENERAL CYCLING ISSUES

Concerning general cycling issues we are in accord with the response made by the Ealing LCC group, except that we would put a high importance on the carrying of non-folding bikes during off peak times.

The carriage of cycles off-peak would benefit some people in giving greater combined travel options. Research should have been carried out to consider the benefits of carrying cycles, rather than autocratically ruling it out.

On the Manchester metro link there are good arguments for the carriage of cycles put forward by the Greater Manchester Cycling Campaign. We are attaching a report and a press release on the matter. We would hope these considerations could apply for the West London Tram from the outset.

MetrolinkReport_72dpi.pdf
GMCC_PR161002.pdf

These files can also be found on http://www.gmcc.org.uk/

H] comments on local areas.

SPECIFIC PROBLEMS IN THE SBG / LBHF AREA

The main problem is that the arrangement for Shepherds Bush Green with the north side closed does not work for general traffic. [Nick Berrill 8 September 2004]

Moreover the proposal as given does not give adequate space for cyclists, or pedestrians, at some of the junctions. We are not completely happy with the present provision and proposed provision at the SW and NW junction at SBG. The tram proposal sees fit to remove any facilities that are there. We would have hoped for a scheme that included cycling routes through the Green and onward through the Holland Park roundabout.

Our comments on the present junction layouts are attached as

SBGcomment.doc
SBGWoodLaneJunction.doc
SBGWoodLaneJunctionDrawings.doc

Similar material can be found on our website at
http://www.hfcyclists.org.uk/issues.htm#SBG

We would like full consideration to be given to the needs of cyclists in any proposal to put a tram through SBG. It is a major route for a healthy, sustainable form of transport, and cycling needs to be a part of the core planning, not tacked on at the end if space is left.

There are also problems at the Hammersmith &City line bridge.

If there is to be single line working at SBG, having this continuing under the bridge may alleviate the problems.

The Hammersmith & City line station could be a major interchange along the route, giving access to areas not otherwise well connected to the tram. These areas might include Hammersmith and North Kensington and Paddington. We would like to see the station redeveloped as a high class station with a wide span bridge and convenient interchange. This would turn a problem into an opportunity.

ABOUT YOU

John Griffiths
co-ordinator hfcyclists / local branch of the London Cycling Campaign
122c Edith road
W14 9AP

991 no - I do not live on proposed route
992 no - I do not run a business on proposed route
993 no - I do not own property on proposed route

I travel along the uxbridge rd by
cycle yes
walk yes

I travel along Uxbridge rd for:
visiting friends

data protection:
OK to disclose response details.

John Griffiths [co-ordinator hfcyclists / local branch of London Cycling Campaign]
020 7371 1290 / 07789 095 748
john@truefeelings.com
OUR WEBSITE www.hfcyclists.org.uk