- Mobile site
- E-Newsletters
-
- News feed
- Find us on Twitter
@richmondtimes
Follow us on Twitter
- Find us on Facebook
Richmond & Twickenham Times
Like us on Facebook
Town centre plans approved, but still not right for many (From Richmond and Twickenham Times)
Contact us: Got a photo? Text 'SLPICS' to 80360. Got a story? Call the newsdesk: 020 8744 4260
Twickenham town centre plans approved, but still not right for many
3:43pm Tuesday 8th January 2013 in News By Rachel Bishop
A satisfying consensus to the Twickenham town centre plans seems no closer after a Richmond Council meeting this week.
It was confirmed at an environment, sustainability and community overview and scrutiny committee meeting on Monday, January 7, that the council still planned to push ahead with the removal of bus stops in King Street – despite strong opposition from disable charity Richmond Aid.
It now needs to go before the council's cabinet for approval and must be backed by Transport for London (TfL).
The council’s director of environment Paul Chadwick said: “The reality is we don’t support Richmond Aid’s position. We just have not agreed with them.”
He added later: “It’s difficult to persuade people that there’s sense in change.”
Council chief executive Norton said the information from TfL had been contradictory, but said: “The preferred option is an attractive one.”
Despite the uncertainty, TfL has included the town centre scheme in its “major projects” programme and has allocated £4m in its budget.
Mr Chadwick said if TfL did not approve the plans there would be no further consultation but the plans would be changed.
He said: “The time for consultation is over and the time for doing is here.”
The plans have changed over time, with further cycle lanes introduced, but campaigners were concerned that seven advisory cycle lanes and only one mandatory cycle lane would put cyclists in danger.
Alastair Barr, from Richmond Cycling Campaign, said: “We were hopeful when we sat down with the council in November that they would take on board our comments of what was needed to make a Twickenham that people would visit, not just drive through.
“Sadly, after Monday's meeting, we're left with a design that relies on disjointed advisory cycle lanes that at one point cyclists have to swerve into the middle of the road to avoid a taxi rank. Not a design that parents will feel happy about.
“Until the council treats cycling as a means of transport, with officers who actually use the designs they come up with, will we see more people taking to their bikes to cycle to work, school or the shops. Across London, other councils are waking up to this; we only hope it will eventually happen in Richmond.”
However, at the meeting, officers stated there could not be a mandatory cycle lane running through junctions, which mean advisory cycle lanes are the best option.
The plans were approved by the administration, but the Liberal Democrats abstained from voting. The recommendations will now be heard at the next cabinet meeting.
Further changes to the town centre include removing the traffic islands at the King Street/Cross Deep/Heath Road junction and the possibility of implementing a countdown for pedestrians at the junction’s traffic lights.
For a further update, see this week’s RTT on Friday, January 11.
Comments(10)
Julie Hill
says...
9:57pm Tue 8 Jan 13
Readers who live in or near Holly Road and who park in Holly Road car park in Twickenham may be interested to know that Lib Dem cllr Stephen Knight came up with the ludicrous suggestion at the Scrutiny Meeting of making Holly Road available to cyclists only (thus preventing residents and businesses from parking and loading and unloading at the rear of their premises) and routing all cars from Holly Road car park along another very narrow residential road Northbound, with two blind bends and in entirely the opposite direction to the High Street. Drivers would then have to try to turn into another road which is regularly gridlocked and along further residential roads in order to find their way (if they manage to) back to the High Street.
Con Knight would do well to concentrate on his own Teddington Ward, which has numerous traffic issues, including the dangerous Waldegrave / Broad Street roundabout, which is currently undergoing a consultation and where there are plans afoot to reduce the width of the road off the Hill to one lane.
Twickenham Bob
says...
11:08pm Tue 8 Jan 13
http://www.richmond.
gov.uk/principles_of
_scheme_overview.pdf
Lets hope the council calls round all the utilities so all the new paving isn't dug up within 3 months of being laid?
Plus the paving in the bridge area will need good foundations as cars and lorries will be pulling onto the pavement when a blue light is flashing
tim_lennon
says...
8:04am Wed 9 Jan 13
Readers who live in or near Holly Road and park there probably need to think a bit harder about how they get to central Twickenham - while some may need to drive, anyone living that near surely wouldn't need to use a car to get to the shops.
pluton
says...
9:22am Wed 9 Jan 13
twickerman
says...
1:54pm Wed 9 Jan 13
King Street in particular was always going to be a very difficult juggling act because of the high volumes of traffic, increasing numbers of cyclists, congestion around bus stops (& Cousins overflowing stalls) and lack of alternatve routes.
I'm pleased that cycle lanes have now been added to the scheme where the combined bus/cycle lanes have been removed. But, we need confirmation that the 1.5m wide cycle lanes are additional to vehicle lanes (and not part of them).
The cycle lanes also need bright colouring to clearly identify them, because they will not be physically segregated from vehicle lanes. One advantage of doing this is that the colour can be continued through crossings and junctions where cycle lane dotted lines have to stop (for zig zags etc).
Better enforcement of cycle lane use is also required. If you need an example of why this is important just go and stand on London Road opposite the station for a few minutes and watch buses, minibuses, HGVs and Council vehicles using the mandatory cycle lane as a bus/lorry lane. Unfortunately, the Council turn a blind eye to this dangerous practice.
twickerman
says...
2:05pm Wed 9 Jan 13
It was a shame that the Richmond Cycling Campaign didn't ask the O&S committee to confirm the commitments made at the:
"Meeting with Council Officers – 23 November 2012
Perhaps prompted by the cabinet meeting, the council invited us sit down with the Principal Transport Planner on 23 November. This was a productive meeting and we came away with the following commitments:
■Any cycle lanes now present will be preserved
■Any bus lanes removed will be replaced by cycle lanes
■Cycle lane width will be in addition to, not part of the motor lane width
■Cycle lanes will be a minimum of 1.5m width"
This is extracted from the notes on the RCC website: http://www.richmondl
cc.co.uk/2012/12/30/
twickenham-consultat
ion-december-update/
twickerman
says...
2:05pm Wed 9 Jan 13
It was a shame that the Richmond Cycling Campaign didn't ask the O&S committee to confirm the commitments made at the:
"Meeting with Council Officers – 23 November 2012
Perhaps prompted by the cabinet meeting, the council invited us sit down with the Principal Transport Planner on 23 November. This was a productive meeting and we came away with the following commitments:
■Any cycle lanes now present will be preserved
■Any bus lanes removed will be replaced by cycle lanes
■Cycle lane width will be in addition to, not part of the motor lane width
■Cycle lanes will be a minimum of 1.5m width"
This is extracted from the notes on the RCC website: http://www.richmondl
cc.co.uk/2012/12/30/
twickenham-consultat
ion-december-update/
pluton
says...
4:47pm Wed 9 Jan 13
The rest of the half-carriageway is planned to be 4.5m wide and at peak times is expected to be used two-abreast by cars. Add a few HGVs and buses which need 3m and driving into that space in the cycle lane will be very attractive.
metis
says...
6:02pm Wed 9 Jan 13
The tax has not changed since Torys got into office in 2010. I have no idea what inflation has been since then - I imagine at least 10%. So in effect there has been a reduction in absolute terms.
Twotonted says...
5:43pm Tue 8 Jan 13
Is it really worth spending £4m in times when money is short just to make the street a bit prettier.
I would rather have a cut in Council tax.