Category Archives: News

Why the A315 is the best route for CS9

There’s been some talk about routing CS9 down the A4 instead of Chiswick High Road and King Street (aka the A315). Fans of this idea have touted it as a perfect pain-free solution, given the existence of a cycle track of sorts on it (in reality, legalised cycling on the pavement), and its distance from residential areas. But there are downsides to this route that its proponents haven’t mentioned. We really wish people pushing the A4 route were willing to look into the details. We also think the local political parties who have been advocating the A4 for CS9 without any consideration of the issues it raises, especially to the residents who would be most directly affected, have been particularly negligent in this regard.

Let’s look at the four big reasons why the A315 is the best route, and the things that proponents of the A4 route don’t want you to hear.

1. A significant majority of people prefer the A315

Firstly, look at the number of people cycling down the A4 as opposed to the A315. Department for Transport traffic counts show between three to six times more people cycling along the A315 compared to the A4.

Source: https://www.dft.gov.uk/traffic-counts/
People who cycle have already voted for their choice of route. Protected cycle infrastructure along the A315 is therefore a considerably better investment in terms of the number of people who will use the route.
To emphasise this, the TfL consultation showed 60% support for the A315 route.

Advocates for alternative routes need to show evidence they are better used than the A315, and are supported by the public.

2. Because cyclist and pedestrian safety along the A315 needs to be improved

The A315 has a poor record for pedestrian and cyclist safety and has been claimed to the “fourth most dangerous road in Britain” based upon collisions per distance travelled. The collision rate along Chiswick High Rd and King St is representative of the overall road. Each star represents a collision involving a cycle or pedestrian between 2005 and 2016. It’s not pretty.


Source: https://bikedata.cyclestreets.net/#17/51.49257/-0.25328/opencyclemap

Advocates for alternative routes need to explain their proposals to improve cyclist and pedestrian safety along the A315.

3. Because it will be used for ALL types of journeys

Transport for London research has identified 8.17 million daily trips made by motorised modes that could be cycled. Of these, 6.47 million trips could be cycled by most people in less than 20 minutes.
Over half (53%) of potentially cyclable trips are for shopping and leisure while 17% are for commuting.
Even for current cycling trips in London, over half (51%) are for shopping and leisure while 28% are for commuting. That demonstrates huge potential for increased cycling in London.


Cycle superhighways being “only for commuters” is a myth. To be used by the maximum number of people, the routes must cater for people using them for shopping and leisure purposes as well as going to work. That means the routes must go through the main town centres of Hammersmith, Chiswick, Brentford and Hounslow and not bypass them, as a route along the A4 would do.
Like any mode of transport, the purpose of people using the route will change by time of day and day of week. At 8am on a weekday, CS9 will have mainly people going to work. During other times however, it will be people going shopping or visiting the other amenities along the route.
There is substantial evidence that cycling improves the local economy. Research on London shopping streets has found people coming by car visit less often and spend less per month than people using other modes of transport. We understand the concerns of businesses to any possible downsides, but the it is wrong to claim that these concerns confirm a loss in trade will occur, when in fact quite the opposite will most likely occur if past schemes are any guide.

Advocates for alternative routes need to show why they would be used for people shopping and visiting other amenities.

4. Because the people who are proposing the A4 don’t understand the problems it would cause

Now for the elephant in the room. Invariably we find that people proposing the A4 have done no investigation into what would be required to turn it into a proper cycle route rather than the current situation, which is cycling on a pavement shared with pedestrians.
With the A4 option, CS9 would either be two segregated tracks on either side of the A4, or a two-way segregated track on one side. On the north side, the subway tunnels produce pinch points, leaving only room for one lane of CS9. That would require removing pedestrian access from one direction to the subways. On the south side there are also pinch points, leaving room for only a single lane of CS9, for example between Sutton Court Road and Eastbourne Road, in this case with complete loss of the pedestrian access. Therefore CS9 would have to be one lane on each side the A4, and it would require losing portions of pedestrian access along both sides.
If we want a dedicated cycleway and not just the current shared use provision, this would also require closing down pedestrian access to the existing tunnels, removing parking in front of people’s homes on the A4, compulsory purchase of strips of front gardens and cutting down scores of trees, like the current row of approximately 68 trees in the Chiswick section of the A4.
• What would you do here, where there’s not space to put in CS9 and keep any pavement for pedestrians?
• Maybe there’s more room on the south side?
• And after cutting off chunks of pedestrian access to make the space for CS9, you then have to start on the trees, and then finish with the parking!
We certainly don’t think that TfL would be up for rejigging the A4 a few feet first one way and then the other to allow CS9 to snake around the subway entrances, trees and and parking, and it actually gets more challenging towards Hammersmith with several subways built right up to the side of the road.
However, there are residential properties on the A4 which require access, thus making it impossible to take any more pavement space. So now a lane of the A4 is required, displacing traffic to Chiswick High Road and King Street. If we’re going to build a “proper superhighway” along the A4, closing down a lane would lead to considerable traffic displacement to the High Road. Not great for anyone. The A4 carries six times the traffic of the High Road (90,000 vehicles per day vs. 15,000 on the A315), so even if only 10% were displaced from a one third cut in capacity for a lane closure, that would add more than 50% to the traffic along the High Road.
As they say, where there’s a will there’s a way. Just maybe not in this case, hopefully.

People proposing the A4 have different motivations for doing so. It is the most convenient route for some people, and they would like to see the cycling facilities improved there, as do we. For others, proposing the A4 seems to be a coded way of saying “get those cyclists away from me”, and others may genuinely think it is a better solution but without actually having to look the detail. Whatever their motivations, advocates of the A4 route really need to provide more than the most basic of evidence for why their proposal is the better option, rather than relying on guesswork and gut feelings for their case.

In conclusion, we see no other route but to place CS9 along the route that has received clear majority backing in the consultation. With the growth of cycling as a mode of everyday transport in London, doing nothing is not an option, and although it’s fine to suggest alternatives, we need to hear clear, evidence-based reasoning for these options.

20mph

LBHF are conducting a consultation on a 20mph speed limit in the Borough.  The main question is will it extend to most main roads or not, The cluster map below shows the location of cyclist fatalities and seriously injured from 2005 until recently.

clusterMapLBHF

When we combine the Pedestrian and Cyclist casualties the  results show a similar cluster around main roads, where people are going about there business. The cluster map below shows casualties from 2005 to 2014 from the police’s STATS19 data

HandF_Ped_CylistsCasualties500

The LBHF consultation is live until 31 July 2015. Whether you are a pedestrian or cyclist or motorist we urge you to make all main roads 20mph to produce a civilised Borough. Each household should receive a printed version of the questionnaire in the post.

But to make sure further Information and an online version of the questionnaire can be found here:

http://www.lbhf.gov.uk/directory/news/20mph_consultation.asp

Please go there and fill in the questionnaire now. Say YES to the first question.

Ride London 2017

Prudential Ride London is the Mayor of London festival of cycling that will take place on July 29th and 30th

On Saturday 29 July 2017 we will be leading feeder rides to and from the Central London FREECYCLE. The ride will leave from Brook Green in the Morning. Join us for a spectacular day and make lots of new friends.

We will be meeting on Brook Green by the corner of Dunsany Road. Meeting from 10am for a 10.30am departure.

The ride Leader will be John Griffiths.  truefeelings@gmail.com

07789 095 748

 

 

 

Our Nitrogen Dioxide Project

OUR POLLUTION TESTS – JOINT PROJECT WITH CLIENT EARTH

Alex Ingram has uploaded an ITV News piece on our work: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ntk3hkEQKEA
Download Summary Report  and Detailed Results as PDFs

 Summary report  at —  http://hfcyclists.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/NO2_hfcyclists_ClientEarth_Report.pdf

Detailed Results and analysis Download at  http://hfcyclists.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/NO2_hfcyclists_ClientEarth_results.pdf

 

NO2graphic

OUR PROJECT

Nitrogen dioxide is a noxious gas given out by petrol and diesel engines, but particularly by diesel engines. It aggravates asthma and leads to many early deaths.

DSCF3482

Andrea Lee on left with Paul Saunderson and Susie Gretz

On 4 February four members of hfcyclists, joined by Andrea Lee from Client Earth set off to place 33 small NO2 detection tubes around Hammersmith Gyratory and Shepherds Bush Green. They were collected and replaced on 4 March, and the fresh tubes will be collected a month later. We hope to get the results sometime in April.

DSCF3489crop

John Griffiths, Chair of hfcyclists, placing an NO2 tube

London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham measures NO2 / pollution in a few locations around the Borough, but at a height of 3m. Our tests are to show if NO2 pollution levels are higher in places where the NO2 may be concentrated because of the local geometry and prevailing winds. We also want to see if the levels are  higher at breathing height and push-chair height.

We hope to use the results to inform and influence those making traffic decisions at Hammersmith Gyratory and Shepherds Bush Green. If the results turn out to be of general interest we will consider how to broadcast them more widely.

A LITTLE MORE DETAIL

Several tubes will be used at each site, so there are not 30 separate sites. We are looking at places where there are a lot of people crowded together with a lot of traffic. The local geometry and prevailing winds can concentrate the pollution in certain areas.

HamBwyDots

 

 

 

Because of the potential for interference when tubes are placed at a lower height LBHF only place tubes at a height of 3m. Pollution levels lower down and closer to the source are expected to be higher, but we do not know by how much. We will be measuring at two heights, 3.0m and 2.25m at the same location. We hope that by extrapolating, this will give us an indication of the NO2 levels at 1.5m,  approximately breathing height.

DSCF3472crop

An NO2 monitoring tube in situ

At a couple of places where we do not expect any interference to the tubes we will be measuring at heights of 3.0m, 2,25m, 1.5m and 0.5m. This may give us an indication as to whether children in pushchairs are exposed to greater levels of pollution, and by how much.

It should be pointed out that NO2 diffusion tubes are not considered a very exact method, and measuring for only two  months out of a year will not lead to very robust results, and they may be described as “indicative”.

We will use statistics on our results to see how much reliance can be placed upon them. However we do hope to  extract useful information from these tests that may be used to inform people making traffic [and health] decisions.

POLLUTION LEVELS

The level found for 2013 at the Hammersmith Broadway NO2 diffusion tube site was 89.5 microgram / cubic metre. The EU guideline  for the maximum value is 40μg/m3 . Levels above 60μg/m3 could lead to a potential exceedence of the NO2 hourly mean Air Quality Strategy objective.

This is an important consideration that traffic planners must take into account when deciding whether to give space to pedestrians and cyclists or to motor traffic.

OUR RESULTS

We did not find any consistent difference between the values at 3.0m and at 2.25m. We were surprised that at some places the values were higher at 3.0m than at 2.25m. In the circumstances we combined the values at the two levels to give an average for that location.

This also meant that we could not extrapolate to estimate the NO2 concentrations at normal breathing height. However we were able to find how the NO2 values varied around our locations and how they compared to the NO2 value at the LBHF reference point.

At the two locations where we measured at 4 different heights we found a gradual increase in NO2 as we descended to pushchair height.

It is possible that the proximity of the Hammersmith flyover may have affected the height distribution of NO2.

We applied corrections

a] for the difference between our reference tubes and the readings from the Automatic Monitoring Station at Shepherds Bush Green.

b] to estimate an Annual Mean by taking into account how our months compared to the general trend over the last year.

On the following pages are charts showing the adjusted values. The EU limit is 40μg / m^3 [40 microgram per cubic metre].

NO2 results Chart

NO2 values compared to the EU limit of 40μg / m^3

Pushchair Chart

Graphic showing the relative NO2 pollution at different heights

NO2graphic

Graphic showing relative NO2 values at different heights

Conclusions

1] The NO2 values were all well over the EU limit of 40μg / m^3 [40 microgram per cubic metre]. Most were more than 2x the EU limit.

2] In Hammersmith all the values apart from the one in Beadon Rd were greater than at the LBHF reference location by St Paul’s Church. This may be due to the Canyon Effect where in enclosed places the pollution is concentrated.

3] At Shepherds Bush Green there is an Automatic Monitoring Station. Around the area all the values are higher than at the monitoring station. The closest LBHF tube is on the Uxbridge road and does not have a very high reading.

4] At present LBHF uses indications of the NO2 pollution levels that are below those that actually exist in some of the busiest spots. To bring these values down to the EU limit some extraordinary measures must be taken. One such would be to encourage a massive modal shift towards cycling for shorter journeys. This would involve using the road space to encourage cycling.

5] Whilst we only measured NO2 values in two locations at pushchair height, we found the values at 0.5m to be about 30% greater than at 3.0m where LBHF makes its measurements. At a buggy height of 0.8m the NO2 value is about 25% greater than at 3m. Young children with developing lungs are especially vulnerable to the effects of NO2 pollution.

Contacts

John Griffiths Chair hfcyclists

122c Edith road, West Kensington, W14 9AP

020 7371 1290 / 07789 095 748

john@truefeelings.com

www.hfcyclists.org.uk

Andrea Lee ClientEarth

Community Engagement Officer (Healthy Air London)

t. +44 207 749 5979

e. alee@clientearth.org

www.clientearth.org

Healthy Streets

COUNCIL ELECTIONS 3rd MAY

LCC and London Living Streets members and supporters will be requesting that the main party leaders commit to:

Submitting a high-quality and safe, Liveable Neighbourhood bid, based in an area with high potential for walking and cycling, that provides big wins for both and that takes major steps to prioritise people walking and cycling over private cars in the area during the course of your term.

My Liveable London Candidate Brief

http://hfcyclists.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/MLL-candidate-brief-FINAL.pdf

My Liveable London Policy Brief

http://hfcyclists.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/My-Liveable-London-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf

LCC Campaign Guide

http://hfcyclists.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/My-Liveable-London-Campaign-Guide-FINAL.pdf

Healthy Streets for London

http://content.tfl.gov.uk/healthy-streets-for-london.pdf

++++++++++++++++++++

Old stuff below

Hammersmith and Fulham Council have a new Draft Cycling Strategy which is now in the final days of consultation, with comments due by this Friday, 16th January – Now Extended to 2nd February 2015.

Y
ou can review the strategy in full here and complete the council questionnaire. The strategy has taken on board briefings made by hfcyclists but does not yet contain firm commitments on how to deal with every barrier to cycling in the borough as identified in Space For Cycling. There is support for tackling major junctions, providing space for cycling, filtered permeability and 20mph so the tools are in discussion.

A proposed cycling network is also shared at the current high-level stage where not all alignments have been finalised. A positive sign is that there are two east-west superhighways proposed but unfortunately only the northern one is likely to continue all the way into town. The indicative quietways are likely to be many years away, and the junction improvement at Hammersmith Broadway by June 2017. Out most likely early change is to be 20mph and changes around Hammersmith Bridge.

Screenshot 2015-01-13 14.41.48

Let us know your thoughts below, here is a quick summary of the key items in the council’s strategy aims, but you should review the full strategy here.

The primary purpose of this Strategy is to increase the number of journeys made in the Borough.
The key objectives of the Cycling Strategy are:

  1. Enhance and extend cycle routes to create a comprehensive network
  2. Create more space for cycling to improve cycle safety
  3. Improve interactions between road users to reduce the perception of the risk of cycling
  4. Provide more cycle parking and cycle hire locations within the Borough

This will be achieved in a number of ways:

  • Collaborating with TfL on the development of Cycle Superhighways to extend the cycle network;

  • Implement a network of Quietways building on the existing cycle network;

  • Working with TfL on creating more space for cyclists through the Better Junctions programme;

  • Create a safer environment for cyclists by introducing 20mph speed limits across the Borough;

  • Provide cycle training for children and adults to increase participation and confidence in cycling;

  • Provide training to increase awareness between different road users and cyclists;

  • Increase the number of cycle storage and parking options;

  • Develop and expand the Barclays Cycle Hire scheme within the Borough; and

  • Ensure that new developments are designed to encourage cycling and provide adequate parking.

Space For Cycling – The Final Push

Our space for cycling campaign has now been contacting candidates for the local election for some weeks. Using feedback from over a hundred involved local campaigners we have devised a particular proposal for every ward in Hammersmith and Fulham. These ideas each use a theme which relates them to the Space For Cycling campaign throughout London.

You can check the proposal for your local ward, see which candidates support it and contact your candidates to urge further support.

Search for your ward by postcode
or

Browse the borough

You can also ride with us on Saturday 17th May. We are meeting at 10AM on Brook Green at foot of Dunsany Rd. Experienced cyclists will lead cyclists of all ages including accompanied children to a ride on closed roads starting on Park Lane. Join us on the ride to show your support.

At the time of writing we appear to have support from the Green Party, Liberal Democrats and Labour across the borough. We remain optimistic that there is further support to be had, as there are some very important issues on road safety and enabling cycling as a choice for transport locally. For both candidates and those seeking to better influence them we have produced a detailed guide to the entire campaign and the issues we feel it can address.