-
The Western Extension was misconceived in several ways--as you say, it shouldn't have been the same zone, it should have been announced clearly that it would be the first segment of a(n eventual) ring around the Central Zone (although there were no such plans that I'm aware of, partly because of what is in the next paragraph), and it should have been less expensive than the Central Zone, which should have been made more expensive than it was at the time.
Having said all that, the technology used at the time was already effectively superseded (as it is now, even though it's still in use), and the political uncertainty over any primary legislation enabling the use of more modern technology has made further progress impossible. I still think Livingstone shouldn't have gone ahead with it, as it was too badly compromised, and he should have taken a fresh look and done it properly.
-
Oh, of course, I know. Quite irrespective of the local situation, it's a bit of a dead topic at the moment, mainly because there's no clarity about what kind of technology/system to go for, and no high-level political support. There are also real problems with some of the (unintended) effects this sort of thing can have (fairly long story).
-
There are a few exhibitions.
Monday evening is at the pilot a pub on wellensey road. This is the road most effected as it will be one way. Expect some red face neighbours.
List on consultation page.
https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/d5aa04cc/ -
The main opposition is coming from the Catholic church on the high road which has a massive 7.3 metre wide pavement in front of it that is hugely under utilised.
Seems crazy, but the jizzwick nimbies are unfortunately well connected and organised. So it's important to send positive feedback. I'm sure they'll l9ve it once it's built.In other new the a4 great west road cycle path has come in for consultation too. I use it alot towards the wild west. The plans have massive flaws and not much of an improvement at all tbh.
But those that are interested here's the link
https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/great-west-road/ -
I'd say the other prominent opposition is come from Outsider Tart, the American cake shop at the Eastern end of the High Street.
This is what is in their window... you could argue it's neutral, but given it only talks of negatives and suggests it can be blocked, it's pretty clear what it is:
2 Attachments
-
-
That is what has triggered me pinning this to the front page... they are spreading FUD and not talking of any of the positives, even to them.
I have been a long time customer but will now boycott them.
I am seriously considering striking up the mailing list again and emailing 25,000+ cyclists... asking them to fill in the consultation... just because of the Chiswick High Road traders being so dishonest and lobbying customers based on that.
-
I agree. You should do this.
-
The idea of the cycle path blocking deliveries is crazy. Everyday a huge truck docks out side the argos king street in Hammersmith and a massive amount of stock in cages is offloaded taken over the existing segregated path and into the store after opening hours.
I can't imagine any store in chiswick having even fraction of that amount of deliveries daily. -
Quick two minute take from us at LCC on what to raise in the consultation. Please do everyone fill out a response - it is getting some stick locally. Same deal with CS4...
-
do it!
-
I looked up their blog to see if it explained their thinking.
It's noticeably short on specific complaints or proposed improvements, and very long on hypothetical problems and rhetorical questions.
They seem to be convinced that making cars give way to the cycle lane when turning off Chiswick High Road will cause queues of idling traffic, for some reason, and also think that lots of loading bays are being removed which I don't see at all (their closest one on Chiswick Lane is staying).
There's also some suggestion that the floating bus stop will be bad, but mostly ... it seems like they don't like the pavement right outside their shop on Chiswick High Road being narrowed. The fact that all or most of the reallocated space is currently used for street furniture and bike stands rather than walking isn't mentioned.
-
I have just emailed the 10,000 most recently active LFGSSers to go fill in the consultations.
If you haven't filled either in yet, these are the links you want:
- By 31st October: https://membership.lcc.org.uk/respond-directly-tfl-support-cs9
- By 19th November: https://membership.lcc.org.uk/respond-directly-tfl-support-cs4
- By 31st October: https://membership.lcc.org.uk/respond-directly-tfl-support-cs9
-
I hope forum members fill in the form in good numbers. With regards to the foot path being eaten away, the main opposition is from the Catholic church which has a under utilised nearly 8 metre pavement in front of it. It seem perfectly reasonable to ask for a cycle path on it. Bare in mind that the massive London plane trees will remain and keep that green leafy feel that the residents feel is under threat in their suburban middle class bubble. It's like they think cycle track will result in a invasion of poor people from Hammersmith and Brentford, and disturb the peace.
Once it's built they'll regret any opposition.
Oliver Schick
wildwest
anidel
amey
floatingcyclist
PsiMonk
frank9755
ObiWomKenobi
useless
Backstop-
Post a reply
About
CS9 Kensington to Brentford public consultation closes Oct 31st
Posted by
@Velocio
I agree with you that the Congestion Zone should have stayed extended,
but,
I have one mate who lives in Kensington.
He told me that his car-driving neighbours were looking forward to the extension,
as with the 'promotion' to 'residents' of the CZone, most of them were looking forward to no longer paying the charge during the week, as they mostly only drove short distances, (kids to school etc). The Congestion Zone should be re-extended, but split into two zones, with residents paying to drive into the other zone.