Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Increased casualties at Chiswick Lane | |
Posted by: | Michael Robinson | |
Date/Time: | 27/11/24 10:05:00 |
Francis, it is very apparent why your predictions are so often wrong if you are “more comfortable with” what is literally an estimate based on an estimate based on an estimate based on an estimate based on an estimate rather than cameras counting actual numbers of people cycling. The DfT estimates don’t even consider that a cycle lane was built on CHR. They just take a figure from 2018 and adjust it based upon aggregated trends over a wider area. Yet again you are starting with your own biases and prejudices and working backwards to construct a fantasy that justifies them. In this case a belief that a figure from 2018 extrapolated forward 5 years with no account that a bike lane has been built is more accurate than a camera that records actual numbers of cyclists every hour, 24x7. All the source data from the TfL surveys is available should you want to analyse it. I'm sure you won't though, that would be far too much effort. The challenge with Weltje and Rivercourt isn’t financial or the competence of the people doing the design - it is political will. The leader of LBHF has a track record of not wanting to annoy drivers so action is delayed and compromised. The attitude of council leadership is the key reason why different councils do different things when presented with similar scenarios. Contrast with Hounslow. The design of C9 would have been compromised if Wellesley Rd and Stile Hall Gardens had been left open to through traffic, but they were closed. In LBHF, the leader still wants to appease drivers so there has been delay and compromise. The design principles involved are well established. Keep vulnerable road users away from the source of danger based upon space (physical separation) and/or time (signals). The designs will depend on the volume and speed of motor traffic and where it isn't possible to have separation with time/space, then reduce the volume and speed of the motor traffic. The junctions with residential streets along CHR (like Airedale etc) do not have high volumes of traffic but measures have been taken to reduce speed of vehicles crossing the bike lane by tightening the radius of turns, raised entries etc. Dukes Ave has signals and based upon 2019 data anyway, the volumes of vehicles using Dukes Ave were actually less than the volumes currently using Weltje and Rivercourt. I'd suggest that if Dukes Ave through route to the A4 was closed off, signals may not be needed and the junction there could just have entry treatments like the other residential streets on CHR. There are many other junctions on the London cycle network that are similar to Chiswick Lane but with higher volumes of traffic and an excellent safety record. |