Motorists fined on Twickenham bridge cycle lane

Richmond and Twickenham Times: Slow lane: Motorists are putting cyclists in danger Slow lane: Motorists are putting cyclists in danger

Motorists using a cycle lane as a sneaky fast track across a bridge have been hit with fines following a police crackdown.

Safer transport team officers from Twickenham had been alerted to drivers speeding up the left-hand lane of the bridge that crosses over Twickenham station.

They were first alerted to the problem in London Road when Richmond’s borough commander, Clive Chalk, was almost knocked off his bike while crossing the bridge.

Richmond safer transport team officer, police constable Nick Blyth said: “Cyclists have complained previously that cars come right up behind them in their cycle lane and intimidate them when they should not be in the cycle lane in the first place.

“Cars that use the cycle lane tend to be travelling at an unsafe speed and should they come over the brow of the hill and encounter a cyclist they would have trouble stopping in time.”

There were seven penalty notices issued to drivers in an hour on April 5, but officers will be heading back to do several more operations once the school holidays are over.

There were originally two small signs in London Road alerting motorists of the lane, but two more have been put up at the foot of the bridge, where Railway Approach meets London Road.

Drivers found using the cycle lane were issued a £30 fixed penalty notice.

PC Blyth, said: “Most of the motorists tend to comment when stopped that everyone else does it and they were just following them.”

Alastair Barr from Richmond Cycling Campaign said: “The London Road cycle lane is a vital link, including many mums and dads who cycle to school with their kids or to and from Twickenham riverside.

“Being intimidated off the road is a concern many of them share with us, and often leads many to resort to cycling on the pavement. Improving the understanding of and the enforcement of the rules of the road, whether on two wheels or four is beneficial for everyone.

“Ultimately, it is about making our streets safer for everyone and we’re really encouraged to see the police take these concerns seriously."

Comments (27)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:22am Wed 10 Apr 13

CH1983 says...

I'm glad of this - serves them right. Its always frustrating when 'impatient' drivers try to take short cuts. £30 is maybe a bit light though...
I'm glad of this - serves them right. Its always frustrating when 'impatient' drivers try to take short cuts. £30 is maybe a bit light though... CH1983

11:49am Wed 10 Apr 13

ruggabugga says...

I'm pleased the police are taking action to protect cyclists.

But I agree that the fine is too Iight. £30 is not much of a deterrent.

It is both dangerous & illegal to drive in the London Road cycle lane.

If drivers were given penalty points they would soon stop.
I'm pleased the police are taking action to protect cyclists. But I agree that the fine is too Iight. £30 is not much of a deterrent. It is both dangerous & illegal to drive in the London Road cycle lane. If drivers were given penalty points they would soon stop. ruggabugga

11:58am Wed 10 Apr 13

Dekazer says...

I agree - road fines are not currently proportionate to risk or inconvenience.

£65 fine for stopping in a yellow box junction.

£65 for stopping in a loading bay for five minutes.

£30 for endangering cyclists by driving in an area specifically designated for their safety?! Not enough by (more than) half!
I agree - road fines are not currently proportionate to risk or inconvenience. £65 fine for stopping in a yellow box junction. £65 for stopping in a loading bay for five minutes. £30 for endangering cyclists by driving in an area specifically designated for their safety?! Not enough by (more than) half! Dekazer

12:11pm Wed 10 Apr 13

bandit63 says...

Am glad there is a clamp down on this and the fine should be higher. However, how about fining cyclists who shoot red lights, pedal over zebra crossings when people are on the crossing etc. I'm a cyclist, car driver and motorcyclist and it drives me nuts to see the arrogant attitude of a large minority of cyclists who treat the the road as their own. I have even been knocked off my bicycle by 2 cyclists who didn't even attempt to slow down for a red light....

We all have to share the road and need to look out for each other / treat each other with respect.
Am glad there is a clamp down on this and the fine should be higher. However, how about fining cyclists who shoot red lights, pedal over zebra crossings when people are on the crossing etc. I'm a cyclist, car driver and motorcyclist and it drives me nuts to see the arrogant attitude of a large minority of cyclists who treat the the road as their own. I have even been knocked off my bicycle by 2 cyclists who didn't even attempt to slow down for a red light.... We all have to share the road and need to look out for each other / treat each other with respect. bandit63

2:18pm Wed 10 Apr 13

lucullus says...

Bandit63, you'll find Richmond Police have spent a lot more time in the last year taking cyclists to task for infringements like the ones you describe than they have in operations like this.

Does it drive you similarly nuts to see a large minority of drivers and motorcyclists 'treating the road as their own'?

You're absolutely right that "we all have to share the road and need to look out for each other / treat each other with respect" - that means that enforcement needs to be applied to all the rules of the road, and this is just such an example ....
Bandit63, you'll find Richmond Police have spent a lot more time in the last year taking cyclists to task for infringements like the ones you describe than they have in operations like this. Does it drive you similarly nuts to see a large minority of drivers and motorcyclists 'treating the road as their own'? You're absolutely right that "we all have to share the road and need to look out for each other / treat each other with respect" - that means that enforcement needs to be applied to all the rules of the road, and this is just such an example .... lucullus

2:36pm Wed 10 Apr 13

Twickenham Man says...

About time. My wife uses this route daily and almost every time she is intimidated by drivers using this lane. While they're at it the police could have a word with the bus controllers about their drivers who are frequent offenders.
About time. My wife uses this route daily and almost every time she is intimidated by drivers using this lane. While they're at it the police could have a word with the bus controllers about their drivers who are frequent offenders. Twickenham Man

3:11pm Wed 10 Apr 13

Scott Naylor says...

Along with so many earlier ideas not necessarily included in the first draught of the core roads revitalisation, I have also pointed my finger at using the separation blocks which are proposed in Boris's Cycling blueprint with the almost £1bn investment in cycling infrastructure over ten years for places like this which no car or lorry or bus would want to drive over for fear of ripping pieces off their vehicle.

The safety of cycling is one of the three core issue I have continued to insist is kept on the Twickenham Riverside Police Liasion Group priorities and will continue to press for action towards cycling safety, enforcement and theft.

I am delighted my one and a half page list of design and safety issues I had confirmed back by the Head of Transport Design Chris Smith is beginning to come to fruition, the latest two I have really driven at are the counter cycle lane in Holly Road between Queens Road and London Road, and moreso after being told absolutely not in the first response to my long list nine months ago that through repeated lobbying and common sense that Church Street looks as if it is going to become a two way cycling street, it is better to embrace a common sense alternative where so many cyclists naturally cycle and is so incredibly difficult to enforce as well as design out, and when I noticed some high profile people doing it I was rather shocked to see, with the street designation already a non through street for motorists and a shared suface that this couldn't happen too.

I have also suggested that there is space to put a cycle lane in each direction in London Road past the station, and demosntrated how, however this one will be one of the last to be redesigned finally when we know the outcome of the Twickenham Station Judicial Review High Court Court of Appeal Hearing granted permission just over two weeks ago being heard at the end of this month (April).

I am also suggesting various ways of further radically increasing the numbers of cycle parking bars, as the detailed design is now taling shape.

Thank you to everyone's support to make Twickenham Town a far better place for all, the Town Plan was what I campaigned for for two years on the doorstep and in the street, along with various other issues like Twickenham Poolsite transformation (I have principles accepted to put an active frontage to towards the river at road level opposite the slipway into the river, and I hope this will be in the form of boathouses to be used by disabled, youth sections of river activity clubs, as well as supporting rental of rowing boats brought back to the Embankment since the June 19th 1944 doodlebug detroyed so much and killed so many, I have worked with landscape architects to get drawn up and shared with many residents in and around our area).

Please let me know any further thoughts on detail you might see as obvious which can be checked if possible to see how it works, email me Scott at Cllr.SNaylor@Richmon
d.gov.uk
Along with so many earlier ideas not necessarily included in the first draught of the core roads revitalisation, I have also pointed my finger at using the separation blocks which are proposed in Boris's Cycling blueprint with the almost £1bn investment in cycling infrastructure over ten years for places like this which no car or lorry or bus would want to drive over for fear of ripping pieces off their vehicle. The safety of cycling is one of the three core issue I have continued to insist is kept on the Twickenham Riverside Police Liasion Group priorities and will continue to press for action towards cycling safety, enforcement and theft. I am delighted my one and a half page list of design and safety issues I had confirmed back by the Head of Transport Design Chris Smith is beginning to come to fruition, the latest two I have really driven at are the counter cycle lane in Holly Road between Queens Road and London Road, and moreso after being told absolutely not in the first response to my long list nine months ago that through repeated lobbying and common sense that Church Street looks as if it is going to become a two way cycling street, it is better to embrace a common sense alternative where so many cyclists naturally cycle and is so incredibly difficult to enforce as well as design out, and when I noticed some high profile people doing it I was rather shocked to see, with the street designation already a non through street for motorists and a shared suface that this couldn't happen too. I have also suggested that there is space to put a cycle lane in each direction in London Road past the station, and demosntrated how, however this one will be one of the last to be redesigned finally when we know the outcome of the Twickenham Station Judicial Review High Court Court of Appeal Hearing granted permission just over two weeks ago being heard at the end of this month (April). I am also suggesting various ways of further radically increasing the numbers of cycle parking bars, as the detailed design is now taling shape. Thank you to everyone's support to make Twickenham Town a far better place for all, the Town Plan was what I campaigned for for two years on the doorstep and in the street, along with various other issues like Twickenham Poolsite transformation (I have principles accepted to put an active frontage to towards the river at road level opposite the slipway into the river, and I hope this will be in the form of boathouses to be used by disabled, youth sections of river activity clubs, as well as supporting rental of rowing boats brought back to the Embankment since the June 19th 1944 doodlebug detroyed so much and killed so many, I have worked with landscape architects to get drawn up and shared with many residents in and around our area). Please let me know any further thoughts on detail you might see as obvious which can be checked if possible to see how it works, email me Scott at Cllr.SNaylor@Richmon d.gov.uk Scott Naylor

3:49pm Wed 10 Apr 13

twickeman says...

I would love to see separation blocks between the cycle and vehicle lanes on London Road, and also on many other local roads in order to prevent conflicts between cyclists and motorists.

I hope these can be included in the Twickenham Highways scheme (part of the TAAP), especially along the busiest stretch of road of them all, namely King Street.

These blocks come in a variety of forms and are sometimes known as 'armadillos'. See picture of armadillos in Barcelona here:

http://www.flickr.co
m/photos/camdencycli
sts/8171928991/in/se
t72157631790720427/

Implementation of sensible pragmatic measures like this will surely encourage more people and families to use some of the busier, but unavoidable, roads in and around Twickenham.

While I support the proposals for two way cycling on Holly Road and Church Street. These very short sections of road are of limited benefit to cyclists peddling through Twickenham in most directions.

The greatest challenge and opportunity is in making King St, London Rd, York St and Cross Deep cycle friendly, without stopping traffic movement.

Smart, flexible separation of vehicle and cycle lanes by armadillos seems to be the way to go.
I would love to see separation blocks between the cycle and vehicle lanes on London Road, and also on many other local roads in order to prevent conflicts between cyclists and motorists. I hope these can be included in the Twickenham Highways scheme (part of the TAAP), especially along the busiest stretch of road of them all, namely King Street. These blocks come in a variety of forms and are sometimes known as 'armadillos'. See picture of armadillos in Barcelona here: http://www.flickr.co m/photos/camdencycli sts/8171928991/in/se t72157631790720427/ Implementation of sensible pragmatic measures like this will surely encourage more people and families to use some of the busier, but unavoidable, roads in and around Twickenham. While I support the proposals for two way cycling on Holly Road and Church Street. These very short sections of road are of limited benefit to cyclists peddling through Twickenham in most directions. The greatest challenge and opportunity is in making King St, London Rd, York St and Cross Deep cycle friendly, without stopping traffic movement. Smart, flexible separation of vehicle and cycle lanes by armadillos seems to be the way to go. twickeman

4:29pm Wed 10 Apr 13

ConcernedLondoner says...

I cycle every day in London and I rarely see cars driving in the bus lanes. As in this case, there is no need for physical separation for a cycle lane we just need £130 fines and cycle lane cameras. It works for bus lanes.
I cycle every day in London and I rarely see cars driving in the bus lanes. As in this case, there is no need for physical separation for a cycle lane we just need £130 fines and cycle lane cameras. It works for bus lanes. ConcernedLondoner

5:23pm Wed 10 Apr 13

twickeman says...

Can anyone advise why the fine for driving in a cycle lane is £100 less it is for driving in a bus lane?

Surely it should be the same, or more because it is more dangerous.

Fixed Penalty Notices are intended for minor offences, such as parking and peeing.

Penalty Charge Notices are intended for illegal driving, such as in bus lanes.

As driving in mandatory cycle lanes is illegal, shouldn't drivers receive £130 PCNs rather than £30 FPNs?

Please can the Council and/or Police explain this crazy inconsistency ?
Can anyone advise why the fine for driving in a cycle lane is £100 less it is for driving in a bus lane? Surely it should be the same, or more because it is more dangerous. Fixed Penalty Notices are intended for minor offences, such as parking and peeing. Penalty Charge Notices are intended for illegal driving, such as in bus lanes. As driving in mandatory cycle lanes is illegal, shouldn't drivers receive £130 PCNs rather than £30 FPNs? Please can the Council and/or Police explain this crazy inconsistency ? twickeman

5:32pm Wed 10 Apr 13

Scott Naylor says...

In answer to Twickeman's question, the mandatory cycle lanes are the ones which would have the separation blocks. Other cycle lanes can have deliveries across them and vehicles at certain times crossing them too.
In answer to Twickeman's question, the mandatory cycle lanes are the ones which would have the separation blocks. Other cycle lanes can have deliveries across them and vehicles at certain times crossing them too. Scott Naylor

6:28pm Wed 10 Apr 13

alex twickenham says...

Here is a most interesting link to a well reasoned and balanced post on a cycling blog by "Concerned Londoner" together with the inevitable vitriolic posts from those who disagree with him or her: http://lcc.org.uk/di
scussions/concerned-
londoner
Locally we get the following tweet from Gareth Roberts or Tim Lennon aka "Lucullus" - how depressing.

"Undoubtedly soon to be unbalanced by the usual suspects and their comments!"

This is how our local pro-cycling activists regard those who dare to challenge them. I recently dared to do so about the Teddington roundabout roadworks and was described as "joyless" by Lucullus and a "troll" by LibDem Councillor Gareth Roberts, so I guess I'm a suspect - scary! They like to present themselves as charming, joyful, easy going people but, as I have found to my cost, they are anything but. Like most activists they are obsessive and become quite unpleasant when challenged.
What might surprise them is that I actually agree with the police clampdown on the cycle lane over the railway bridge in Twickenham. It is routinely abused and unless respected it simply creates a pointless chicane so high time for enforcement.

I'm intrigued by the idea of converting one-way Church Street and Holly Road into two way routes for cyclists - not a bad idea but, yet again, it may involve the removal of parking in Church St - I wonder what the already beleagured traders think of that? How many more can we afford to lose? Also, wouldn't you rather walk your bike through the graveyard in front of Crown House in Holly Road rather than chancing your luck with an oncoming motorist on the blind bend?

I hope that's not too unbalanced for you Gareth and Tim.
Alex
Here is a most interesting link to a well reasoned and balanced post on a cycling blog by "Concerned Londoner" together with the inevitable vitriolic posts from those who disagree with him or her: http://lcc.org.uk/di scussions/concerned- londoner Locally we get the following tweet from Gareth Roberts or Tim Lennon aka "Lucullus" - how depressing. "Undoubtedly soon to be unbalanced by the usual suspects and their comments!" This is how our local pro-cycling activists regard those who dare to challenge them. I recently dared to do so about the Teddington roundabout roadworks and was described as "joyless" by Lucullus and a "troll" by LibDem Councillor Gareth Roberts, so I guess I'm a suspect - scary! They like to present themselves as charming, joyful, easy going people but, as I have found to my cost, they are anything but. Like most activists they are obsessive and become quite unpleasant when challenged. What might surprise them is that I actually agree with the police clampdown on the cycle lane over the railway bridge in Twickenham. It is routinely abused and unless respected it simply creates a pointless chicane so high time for enforcement. I'm intrigued by the idea of converting one-way Church Street and Holly Road into two way routes for cyclists - not a bad idea but, yet again, it may involve the removal of parking in Church St - I wonder what the already beleagured traders think of that? How many more can we afford to lose? Also, wouldn't you rather walk your bike through the graveyard in front of Crown House in Holly Road rather than chancing your luck with an oncoming motorist on the blind bend? I hope that's not too unbalanced for you Gareth and Tim. Alex alex twickenham

10:23pm Wed 10 Apr 13

twickeman says...

In response to Cllr Naylor,

It is a shame that you are always so quick discredit other people's suggestions and so keen to promote yourself.

You may recall that I and a number of others reported the dangerous misuse of the London Road cycle lane at the October Cycling Liaison Group meeting.
We asked for enforcement action, but our request fell on the deaf ears of LBRUT's Cycling Czar Cllr Harborne and yourself.
If nothing else our request was minuted.

It is only through ongoing dialogue with the local police teams on twitter and at the Twickenham Riverside PLG last month that this issue has now been addressed.
I would like to thank the Twickenham SNT & Richmond STT for responding positively to this issue, that Twickenham and Richmond Cllrs ignored.

BTW, cycling safety is NOT one of the priorities for the Riverside SNT. You ought to recall from the PLG meeting 4 weeks ago & the subsequent minutes that the priorities are as before: ASB, Burglary and Irresponsible Cycling!

Regarding the separation blocks, the whole point of them is that they will discourage drivers from using the cycle lanes, but they don't prevent cyclists from moving in or out, nor do they prevent delivery vehicles from moving carefully over/between them. Anyway, most delivery vehicles should be using the service roads behind the King Street shops for deliveries rather than blocking the main highway, especially during peak hours.

Where there are side roads, gaps between the blocks will allow entry/exit of both vehicles and cyclists.

Separation blocks are just as suitable for the advisory cycle lanes proposed in King Street, as the mandatory one in London Road.

Following a recent meeting with Council officers Richmond Cycling Campaign reported that the latest plans for King Street allow for a 2m wide cycle lane, alongside a 5m double width vehicle lane.
This is exactly what I proposed many months ago, on the basis that it provided safe passage for cyclists while maintaining vehicle flow (I'm a motorist too).
Unfortunately, you chose to rubbish my suggestion and declined my offer to come and discuss it with you and officers.
I am very pleased that this proposal is now being seriously considered by officers.

There is absolutely no good reason to not separate the cycle lanes from the vehicle lanes. It is basic common sense, and no doubt that's why it's included in Boris's Cycling Blueprint.

Cycle lane separation along the town centre's busiest road is absolutely critical if we are to encourage families to cycle to/from school and less experienced cyclists to use it to commute during peak periods, and to encourage everyone to use this essential through road safely at weekends.

I'm pleased that the TAAP Highways Scheme plans are progressing positively, but there's still scope to improve them for the mutual benefit of motorists, cyclist and pedestrians.
In response to Cllr Naylor, It is a shame that you are always so quick discredit other people's suggestions and so keen to promote yourself. You may recall that I and a number of others reported the dangerous misuse of the London Road cycle lane at the October Cycling Liaison Group meeting. We asked for enforcement action, but our request fell on the deaf ears of LBRUT's Cycling Czar Cllr Harborne and yourself. If nothing else our request was minuted. It is only through ongoing dialogue with the local police teams on twitter and at the Twickenham Riverside PLG last month that this issue has now been addressed. I would like to thank the Twickenham SNT & Richmond STT for responding positively to this issue, that Twickenham and Richmond Cllrs ignored. BTW, cycling safety is NOT one of the priorities for the Riverside SNT. You ought to recall from the PLG meeting 4 weeks ago & the subsequent minutes that the priorities are as before: ASB, Burglary and Irresponsible Cycling! Regarding the separation blocks, the whole point of them is that they will discourage drivers from using the cycle lanes, but they don't prevent cyclists from moving in or out, nor do they prevent delivery vehicles from moving carefully over/between them. Anyway, most delivery vehicles should be using the service roads behind the King Street shops for deliveries rather than blocking the main highway, especially during peak hours. Where there are side roads, gaps between the blocks will allow entry/exit of both vehicles and cyclists. Separation blocks are just as suitable for the advisory cycle lanes proposed in King Street, as the mandatory one in London Road. Following a recent meeting with Council officers Richmond Cycling Campaign reported that the latest plans for King Street allow for a 2m wide cycle lane, alongside a 5m double width vehicle lane. This is exactly what I proposed many months ago, on the basis that it provided safe passage for cyclists while maintaining vehicle flow (I'm a motorist too). Unfortunately, you chose to rubbish my suggestion and declined my offer to come and discuss it with you and officers. I am very pleased that this proposal is now being seriously considered by officers. There is absolutely no good reason to not separate the cycle lanes from the vehicle lanes. It is basic common sense, and no doubt that's why it's included in Boris's Cycling Blueprint. Cycle lane separation along the town centre's busiest road is absolutely critical if we are to encourage families to cycle to/from school and less experienced cyclists to use it to commute during peak periods, and to encourage everyone to use this essential through road safely at weekends. I'm pleased that the TAAP Highways Scheme plans are progressing positively, but there's still scope to improve them for the mutual benefit of motorists, cyclist and pedestrians. twickeman

10:44pm Wed 10 Apr 13

Twickersmum says...

The crackdown on the use of the bus lane on London Road by cars is all well and good but the fact that there is only 1 lane of traffic over the bridge on that stretch of road has a knock on impact on the crossing outside the Cabbage Patch. Drivers appear to think that queuing traffic ahead means that they can sit across the junction and the crossing. They also seem to think that they can then just pull across the crossing with complete disregard for any pedestrians. I have 3 young children, who I tell every time we cross at a crossing to wait for the green man before crossing. However on this crossing I have had cause to pull them back to prevent cars knocking them over and when the cars pass over the crossing two abreast, its even worse. I am sorry but an intimidating car who is well aware of the cyclist ahead that is blocking its path is much less of a threat than the unaware driver who pulls across the path of a pedestrian when he has right of way on a crossing. Isn't it time something was done about this?
The crackdown on the use of the bus lane on London Road by cars is all well and good but the fact that there is only 1 lane of traffic over the bridge on that stretch of road has a knock on impact on the crossing outside the Cabbage Patch. Drivers appear to think that queuing traffic ahead means that they can sit across the junction and the crossing. They also seem to think that they can then just pull across the crossing with complete disregard for any pedestrians. I have 3 young children, who I tell every time we cross at a crossing to wait for the green man before crossing. However on this crossing I have had cause to pull them back to prevent cars knocking them over and when the cars pass over the crossing two abreast, its even worse. I am sorry but an intimidating car who is well aware of the cyclist ahead that is blocking its path is much less of a threat than the unaware driver who pulls across the path of a pedestrian when he has right of way on a crossing. Isn't it time something was done about this? Twickersmum

11:38pm Wed 10 Apr 13

FNS-man says...

bandit63 wrote:
Am glad there is a clamp down on this and the fine should be higher. However, how about fining cyclists who shoot red lights, pedal over zebra crossings when people are on the crossing etc. I'm a cyclist, car driver and motorcyclist and it drives me nuts to see the arrogant attitude of a large minority of cyclists who treat the the road as their own. I have even been knocked off my bicycle by 2 cyclists who didn't even attempt to slow down for a red light....

We all have to share the road and need to look out for each other / treat each other with respect.
And what about fining people who drop litter? And also fining people who don't pick up their dog mess? I think I've got some other irrelevant things that also should be fined as well.
[quote][p][bold]bandit63[/bold] wrote: Am glad there is a clamp down on this and the fine should be higher. However, how about fining cyclists who shoot red lights, pedal over zebra crossings when people are on the crossing etc. I'm a cyclist, car driver and motorcyclist and it drives me nuts to see the arrogant attitude of a large minority of cyclists who treat the the road as their own. I have even been knocked off my bicycle by 2 cyclists who didn't even attempt to slow down for a red light.... We all have to share the road and need to look out for each other / treat each other with respect.[/p][/quote]And what about fining people who drop litter? And also fining people who don't pick up their dog mess? I think I've got some other irrelevant things that also should be fined as well. FNS-man

10:37am Thu 11 Apr 13

Scott Naylor says...

twickeman wrote:
In response to Cllr Naylor, It is a shame that you are always so quick discredit other people's suggestions and so keen to promote yourself. You may recall that I and a number of others reported the dangerous misuse of the London Road cycle lane at the October Cycling Liaison Group meeting. We asked for enforcement action, but our request fell on the deaf ears of LBRUT's Cycling Czar Cllr Harborne and yourself. If nothing else our request was minuted. It is only through ongoing dialogue with the local police teams on twitter and at the Twickenham Riverside PLG last month that this issue has now been addressed. I would like to thank the Twickenham SNT & Richmond STT for responding positively to this issue, that Twickenham and Richmond Cllrs ignored. BTW, cycling safety is NOT one of the priorities for the Riverside SNT. You ought to recall from the PLG meeting 4 weeks ago & the subsequent minutes that the priorities are as before: ASB, Burglary and Irresponsible Cycling! Regarding the separation blocks, the whole point of them is that they will discourage drivers from using the cycle lanes, but they don't prevent cyclists from moving in or out, nor do they prevent delivery vehicles from moving carefully over/between them. Anyway, most delivery vehicles should be using the service roads behind the King Street shops for deliveries rather than blocking the main highway, especially during peak hours. Where there are side roads, gaps between the blocks will allow entry/exit of both vehicles and cyclists. Separation blocks are just as suitable for the advisory cycle lanes proposed in King Street, as the mandatory one in London Road. Following a recent meeting with Council officers Richmond Cycling Campaign reported that the latest plans for King Street allow for a 2m wide cycle lane, alongside a 5m double width vehicle lane. This is exactly what I proposed many months ago, on the basis that it provided safe passage for cyclists while maintaining vehicle flow (I'm a motorist too). Unfortunately, you chose to rubbish my suggestion and declined my offer to come and discuss it with you and officers. I am very pleased that this proposal is now being seriously considered by officers. There is absolutely no good reason to not separate the cycle lanes from the vehicle lanes. It is basic common sense, and no doubt that's why it's included in Boris's Cycling Blueprint. Cycle lane separation along the town centre's busiest road is absolutely critical if we are to encourage families to cycle to/from school and less experienced cyclists to use it to commute during peak periods, and to encourage everyone to use this essential through road safely at weekends. I'm pleased that the TAAP Highways Scheme plans are progressing positively, but there's still scope to improve them for the mutual benefit of motorists, cyclist and pedestrians.
Reference Twickerman aka John Milner's post.

I am sorry that nothing is ever good enough for you. I wonder when reading your comments if I should even apologise for having brought the Town Plan idea to the table five years ago which I canvassed on for two years before the last election with all of the positive this will bring, as you never appear to believe that anyone is working on your (a collective you for all residents) behalf to make things so much better.

I along with many recognise that something as large as a Highways Scheme is going to challenge Council Officers and TFL, however I laid down my ideas from day one which came about from having spent over 130 weeks in public places in Twickenham Town talking to every type of resident and visitor who uses our town.

Sadly I was not shown the first set of plans until they were about to be released, and of course I raised the major issues of cycle lanes through Twickenham as a key priority, but I was told as others were that this was a draft, that certain things were not possible, then gradually they are being put back into the plan, as well as many features that also appear on my long list as mentioned in my previous note. I am grateful for the many residents who have made their wishes known, it has helped me as I stated in my previous post, again, I am priveleged in so far as I can and do have many meetings with key Officers, some planned, some just by my dropping in.

Being a Councillor who has spent hundred and hundreds of hours of my time representing the views too for you in Mary's Terrace not only on the Station Development but on Travelodge and the large number of track possession and platform extension works, sometimes it would be nice to receive just even a single word of thanks, but I won't hold my breath, it surprises me to say this now as we have worked so closely together on these issues sitting in your Dining Room or Conservatory or garden on many occasions with a packet of biscuits and a fresh coffee.

However I would say that if you are continually clubbed and tarred for doing this and trying to mediate and getting the whole negativity raining down on you when the results start happening as apparently nothing we have done is recognised or given any form of credit then the resolve to want to go over and above starts to evaporate.

I will continue seeing out this work on behalf of the many who see the positive and know that unpleasantness does not lead to results it demotivates, but many would not wish to be associated with this brand of lobbying, it eventually wears down even the most steely and proactive representatives and Officers.
[quote][p][bold]twickeman[/bold] wrote: In response to Cllr Naylor, It is a shame that you are always so quick discredit other people's suggestions and so keen to promote yourself. You may recall that I and a number of others reported the dangerous misuse of the London Road cycle lane at the October Cycling Liaison Group meeting. We asked for enforcement action, but our request fell on the deaf ears of LBRUT's Cycling Czar Cllr Harborne and yourself. If nothing else our request was minuted. It is only through ongoing dialogue with the local police teams on twitter and at the Twickenham Riverside PLG last month that this issue has now been addressed. I would like to thank the Twickenham SNT & Richmond STT for responding positively to this issue, that Twickenham and Richmond Cllrs ignored. BTW, cycling safety is NOT one of the priorities for the Riverside SNT. You ought to recall from the PLG meeting 4 weeks ago & the subsequent minutes that the priorities are as before: ASB, Burglary and Irresponsible Cycling! Regarding the separation blocks, the whole point of them is that they will discourage drivers from using the cycle lanes, but they don't prevent cyclists from moving in or out, nor do they prevent delivery vehicles from moving carefully over/between them. Anyway, most delivery vehicles should be using the service roads behind the King Street shops for deliveries rather than blocking the main highway, especially during peak hours. Where there are side roads, gaps between the blocks will allow entry/exit of both vehicles and cyclists. Separation blocks are just as suitable for the advisory cycle lanes proposed in King Street, as the mandatory one in London Road. Following a recent meeting with Council officers Richmond Cycling Campaign reported that the latest plans for King Street allow for a 2m wide cycle lane, alongside a 5m double width vehicle lane. This is exactly what I proposed many months ago, on the basis that it provided safe passage for cyclists while maintaining vehicle flow (I'm a motorist too). Unfortunately, you chose to rubbish my suggestion and declined my offer to come and discuss it with you and officers. I am very pleased that this proposal is now being seriously considered by officers. There is absolutely no good reason to not separate the cycle lanes from the vehicle lanes. It is basic common sense, and no doubt that's why it's included in Boris's Cycling Blueprint. Cycle lane separation along the town centre's busiest road is absolutely critical if we are to encourage families to cycle to/from school and less experienced cyclists to use it to commute during peak periods, and to encourage everyone to use this essential through road safely at weekends. I'm pleased that the TAAP Highways Scheme plans are progressing positively, but there's still scope to improve them for the mutual benefit of motorists, cyclist and pedestrians.[/p][/quote]Reference Twickerman aka John Milner's post. I am sorry that nothing is ever good enough for you. I wonder when reading your comments if I should even apologise for having brought the Town Plan idea to the table five years ago which I canvassed on for two years before the last election with all of the positive this will bring, as you never appear to believe that anyone is working on your (a collective you for all residents) behalf to make things so much better. I along with many recognise that something as large as a Highways Scheme is going to challenge Council Officers and TFL, however I laid down my ideas from day one which came about from having spent over 130 weeks in public places in Twickenham Town talking to every type of resident and visitor who uses our town. Sadly I was not shown the first set of plans until they were about to be released, and of course I raised the major issues of cycle lanes through Twickenham as a key priority, but I was told as others were that this was a draft, that certain things were not possible, then gradually they are being put back into the plan, as well as many features that also appear on my long list as mentioned in my previous note. I am grateful for the many residents who have made their wishes known, it has helped me as I stated in my previous post, again, I am priveleged in so far as I can and do have many meetings with key Officers, some planned, some just by my dropping in. Being a Councillor who has spent hundred and hundreds of hours of my time representing the views too for you in Mary's Terrace not only on the Station Development but on Travelodge and the large number of track possession and platform extension works, sometimes it would be nice to receive just even a single word of thanks, but I won't hold my breath, it surprises me to say this now as we have worked so closely together on these issues sitting in your Dining Room or Conservatory or garden on many occasions with a packet of biscuits and a fresh coffee. However I would say that if you are continually clubbed and tarred for doing this and trying to mediate and getting the whole negativity raining down on you when the results start happening as apparently nothing we have done is recognised or given any form of credit then the resolve to want to go over and above starts to evaporate. I will continue seeing out this work on behalf of the many who see the positive and know that unpleasantness does not lead to results it demotivates, but many would not wish to be associated with this brand of lobbying, it eventually wears down even the most steely and proactive representatives and Officers. Scott Naylor

1:07pm Thu 11 Apr 13

Twickenham resident says...

Many writers have castigated drivers for driving up the cycle lane over the railway bridge but to be fair, there was no proper signage and so many probably didn't realise they shouldn't be doing so.

I hope when this area is re-developed for housing, something will be done to widen the road and once again allow two lanes of traffic and stop this area from being constantly gridlocked and jammed.
Many writers have castigated drivers for driving up the cycle lane over the railway bridge but to be fair, there was no proper signage and so many probably didn't realise they shouldn't be doing so. I hope when this area is re-developed for housing, something will be done to widen the road and once again allow two lanes of traffic and stop this area from being constantly gridlocked and jammed. Twickenham resident

1:16pm Thu 11 Apr 13

twickeman says...

Cllr Naylor made the following comment on twitter about cycle lanes following the Overview & Scrutiny meeting in January:

'Additions of possible surface colour changes to 1.5m wide 7 Advisory and 1 Mandatory Cycle lanes will enhance the safety offered, as observed by Officers, cars rarely enter cycle lanes unless they have to, and like any other road user have to take the practical steps they have learnt and the Highway Code in order to use this. We won’t be knocking most of Twickenham Town’s historical architecture down to accommodate dedicated cycle lanes'

The excellent police monitoring of the London Road cycle lane has clearly shown that drivers routinely use cycle lanes without a second thought.

The evidence from Commander Chalk and many other commentators confirms that cyclists are terrified of being hit by vehicles that are misusing cycle lanes.

It really is time for Cllr Naylor to stop waffling and procrastinating, and to acknowledge that the only way to protect cyclists on the busiest town centre roads is by physical lane separation.

Please Councillor, get off your backside and take positive action.
We'll even let you claim this proposal as your own!
Cllr Naylor made the following comment on twitter about cycle lanes following the Overview & Scrutiny meeting in January: 'Additions of possible surface colour changes to 1.5m wide 7 Advisory and 1 Mandatory Cycle lanes will enhance the safety offered, as observed by Officers, cars rarely enter cycle lanes unless they have to, and like any other road user have to take the practical steps they have learnt and the Highway Code in order to use this. We won’t be knocking most of Twickenham Town’s historical architecture down to accommodate dedicated cycle lanes' The excellent police monitoring of the London Road cycle lane has clearly shown that drivers routinely use cycle lanes without a second thought. The evidence from Commander Chalk and many other commentators confirms that cyclists are terrified of being hit by vehicles that are misusing cycle lanes. It really is time for Cllr Naylor to stop waffling and procrastinating, and to acknowledge that the only way to protect cyclists on the busiest town centre roads is by physical lane separation. Please Councillor, get off your backside and take positive action. We'll even let you claim this proposal as your own! twickeman

1:28pm Thu 11 Apr 13

twickeman says...

Correction.

Cllr Naylor / twickregenerate / Anonymous made that statement on twickerati rather than twitter:

http://twickerati.wo
rdpress.com/2013/01/
07/street-scene-high
ways-twap/#comments
Correction. Cllr Naylor / twickregenerate / Anonymous made that statement on twickerati rather than twitter: http://twickerati.wo rdpress.com/2013/01/ 07/street-scene-high ways-twap/#comments twickeman

1:51pm Thu 11 Apr 13

ruggabugga says...

I agree with Twickenham resident.

We are hoping for 2 lanes of traffic & 1 lane for cyclists on the Lodon Road bridge.

Then there will be peace and love.
I agree with Twickenham resident. We are hoping for 2 lanes of traffic & 1 lane for cyclists on the Lodon Road bridge. Then there will be peace and love. ruggabugga

2:13pm Thu 11 Apr 13

anidel says...

I find it depressing to read such comments on an issue were lives are at stakes every single day.

How can people disagree that cycling is not safe in Uk? How can people have different ideas on how cycling should be made in the Uk?
Why do people always have to look to bring water to their own mills?
Why letting politics ruin these discussions and why don't we simply build a proper cycling infrastructure as THAT is simply a RIGHT for every citizen in every place of the world ?
I find it depressing to read such comments on an issue were lives are at stakes every single day. How can people disagree that cycling is not safe in Uk? How can people have different ideas on how cycling should be made in the Uk? Why do people always have to look to bring water to their own mills? Why letting politics ruin these discussions and why don't we simply build a proper cycling infrastructure as THAT is simply a RIGHT for every citizen in every place of the world ? anidel

5:20pm Thu 11 Apr 13

alex twickenham says...

I'm very sorry to note that Councillor Scott Naylor has finally been ground down by the difficulty of trying to reason with "Twickeman/Twickerma
n" - judging by his Twitter account they seem to be one and the same person and I can quite see why Scott has had enough. He is a friend of mine and I know what a toll his brand of conviction politics has taken out of him and his political career prospects.

What I admire is the way he fought a tireless campaign to preserve the Twickenham Riverside and succeeded. Since election, he has incurred the wrath of his party leader by supporting TRAG and undoubtedly blighted his career prospects by doing so. For all his faults, which he has, I would far rather have him representing me than the sort of smug LibDem politico who foolishly stated that he enjoys a seat in Hampton, the second safest ward in the borough - hubris or what! Looks like an easy run to a £50K+ GLA seat via the LibDem list - perhaps he will prove me wrong, his party leader didn't.

Twickeman has had a rather uncharitable pop at Councillor Naylor who is not alone. This is what I have had today from the cycling lobby aka "Lucullus" -

"As expected, local pompous twit Alex thinks a story about driving in cycle lanes is actually about him (last comment)"
I'm puzzled by the last comment bit - any ideas? A few days ago he described my posts as "ill-informed drivel". He might be right about both observations but is that any way to develop a reasoned debate with someone who disagrees with you?

Aah! - the callowness of youth.
Sorry about the politics Anidel - the issues are inextricably interlinked. You are clearly part of the cycling lobby so your views are understandable. One thing that puzzles me is your mill and water thingy - what's that about? Is it Italian?
Alex
I'm very sorry to note that Councillor Scott Naylor has finally been ground down by the difficulty of trying to reason with "Twickeman/Twickerma n" - judging by his Twitter account they seem to be one and the same person and I can quite see why Scott has had enough. He is a friend of mine and I know what a toll his brand of conviction politics has taken out of him and his political career prospects. What I admire is the way he fought a tireless campaign to preserve the Twickenham Riverside and succeeded. Since election, he has incurred the wrath of his party leader by supporting TRAG and undoubtedly blighted his career prospects by doing so. For all his faults, which he has, I would far rather have him representing me than the sort of smug LibDem politico who foolishly stated that he enjoys a seat in Hampton, the second safest ward in the borough - hubris or what! Looks like an easy run to a £50K+ GLA seat via the LibDem list - perhaps he will prove me wrong, his party leader didn't. Twickeman has had a rather uncharitable pop at Councillor Naylor who is not alone. This is what I have had today from the cycling lobby aka "Lucullus" - "As expected, local pompous twit Alex thinks a story about driving in cycle lanes is actually about him (last comment)" I'm puzzled by the last comment bit - any ideas? A few days ago he described my posts as "ill-informed drivel". He might be right about both observations but is that any way to develop a reasoned debate with someone who disagrees with you? Aah! - the callowness of youth. Sorry about the politics Anidel - the issues are inextricably interlinked. You are clearly part of the cycling lobby so your views are understandable. One thing that puzzles me is your mill and water thingy - what's that about? Is it Italian? Alex alex twickenham

7:04pm Thu 11 Apr 13

twickeman says...

Alex,

If Cllr Naylor was prepared to listen rather than dictating, and didn't make such preposterous and inaccurate statements he might gain some support.

He claimed above 'cycling safety is one of the three core issue I have continued to insist is kept on the Twickenham Riverside Police Liasion Group priorities'
But, it's not one of the priorities, and never has been.
Cycling safety is very different from the illegal/irresponsibl
e cycling that the PLG has prioritised.

To return the main issue, over the last 6 months Cllr Naylor has continually denied there is a problem with cycle lane misuse.

Perhaps he would like to explain his lack of interest and action on this matter to the police, the R&TT, and all the commentors above who have expressed their concerns over safety.

I personally have campaigned for the optimum balance between the needs of motorists, cyclists and pedestrians in the Twickenham Highways scheme and see no reason why this can't be achieved in the town centre if our ward cllrs are prepared to listen to and work with local residents and groups.

Again, I would like to thank the local police for taking action over illegal driving, and Rachel Bishop for getting up so early to witness their activities and write the above article.
It is clear that the vast majority of people support the police initiative, and many have made positive suggestions for future highways improvements.

Let's hope their comments are listened to.
Alex, If Cllr Naylor was prepared to listen rather than dictating, and didn't make such preposterous and inaccurate statements he might gain some support. He claimed above 'cycling safety is one of the three core issue I have continued to insist is kept on the Twickenham Riverside Police Liasion Group priorities' But, it's not one of the priorities, and never has been. Cycling safety is very different from the illegal/irresponsibl e cycling that the PLG has prioritised. To return the main issue, over the last 6 months Cllr Naylor has continually denied there is a problem with cycle lane misuse. Perhaps he would like to explain his lack of interest and action on this matter to the police, the R&TT, and all the commentors above who have expressed their concerns over safety. I personally have campaigned for the optimum balance between the needs of motorists, cyclists and pedestrians in the Twickenham Highways scheme and see no reason why this can't be achieved in the town centre if our ward cllrs are prepared to listen to and work with local residents and groups. Again, I would like to thank the local police for taking action over illegal driving, and Rachel Bishop for getting up so early to witness their activities and write the above article. It is clear that the vast majority of people support the police initiative, and many have made positive suggestions for future highways improvements. Let's hope their comments are listened to. twickeman

9:19am Fri 12 Apr 13

bandit63 says...

FNS - thanks for making me laugh with your pathetic comment. All road users are subject to the law.If you shoot a red light (in a car, on a motorbike or cycle), you may cause an accident, injury or even worse. Grow up and put forward a valid point or don't waste your time.
FNS - thanks for making me laugh with your pathetic comment. All road users are subject to the law.If you shoot a red light (in a car, on a motorbike or cycle), you may cause an accident, injury or even worse. Grow up and put forward a valid point or don't waste your time. bandit63

12:59pm Fri 12 Apr 13

bandit63 says...

It's interesting to see the debate on this site. Putting aside the personal and "playground" points scoring, the issues basically come down to:

1) The need for a sensible, integrated polciy that adresses all the major issues (cycling safety, traffic rule enforcement for all users, easing congestion)
2) the need for sensible compromise from all parties
3) All road users take responsiblity for the actions they take whilst riding / driving etc.

I realise that this wishful thinking, but too often sensible and measured disucssions get hijacked by people from more militant lobby groups with an axe to grind. Twicker - like you ideas and seems to go some way of getting to a compromise.
It's interesting to see the debate on this site. Putting aside the personal and "playground" points scoring, the issues basically come down to: 1) The need for a sensible, integrated polciy that adresses all the major issues (cycling safety, traffic rule enforcement for all users, easing congestion) 2) the need for sensible compromise from all parties 3) All road users take responsiblity for the actions they take whilst riding / driving etc. I realise that this wishful thinking, but too often sensible and measured disucssions get hijacked by people from more militant lobby groups with an axe to grind. Twicker - like you ideas and seems to go some way of getting to a compromise. bandit63

1:35pm Fri 12 Apr 13

alex twickenham says...

I wonder why these comments don't appear at the head of the "most commented" list. If so, since the article dropped off the e- front page pretty quickly, it might draw in a wider and more representative group of contributors.
Over to you Ed.
Alex
I wonder why these comments don't appear at the head of the "most commented" list. If so, since the article dropped off the e- front page pretty quickly, it might draw in a wider and more representative group of contributors. Over to you Ed. Alex alex twickenham

11:32am Tue 30 Apr 13

Ludovic says...

Once more, the real culprit is TfL.

The design of those bike lanes is inadequate: bicycle and motor vehicle traffic should be physically segregated, not with a band-aid road-painting approach.
Once more, the real culprit is TfL. The design of those bike lanes is inadequate: bicycle and motor vehicle traffic should be physically segregated, not with a band-aid road-painting approach. Ludovic

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree