| Topic: | Re:Re:Reply | |
| Posted by: | Paul Corcoran | |
| Date/Time: | 16/06/19 11:16:00 |
| The Kensington Society seems to be very well organised and coordinated opposition effectively. We don't really have the equivalent in Chiswick - the messages from the Bedford Park Society were a bit mixed on CS9 and they couldn't really be expected to be a focus for opposition anyway given they are not really on the route. It is hard to see how TfL ever expected to get K&C support for this scheme as it was always likely to be hugely unpopular on their patch. Holland Park Avenue is still very beautiful as a tree lined urban boulevard despite all the traffic and it would have been fundamentally changed by this scheme with no net benefit to the environment. The gain in my view would be limited because even with partial segregation the Shepherd's Bush roundabout would remain a very intimidating place to cross for cyclists so any increase in cycling from this route would be confined to already experienced riders. The suspicion has to be that there was a positive response to the consultation on the terms defined by TfL and K&C wanted to jump the gun by making the announcement before the results were revealed. That doesn't mean the Shepherd's Bush Green to Wood Lane section needs to be scrapped. It doesn't seem to be as controversial as the Holland Park bit and could deliver much more benefit if it made the green easier to cross by bike. Although I do wonder why this wasn't achieved simply by putting a two way cycle path through the middle of the green. TfL do need to be a bit more open and honest with these projects though. They have been quite opaque about the traffic impacts of these schemes on local roads and this shiftiness then casts doubt on any figures they do release. If they engaged properly with local communities to persuade people of the value of these schemes rather than using the power of the cycling lobby to try and claim they were popular they might have more success in getting them built. |