Consultation docs have been uploaded to the library.

My initially ranty response:
1. The existing cycle route along here, although far from optimal, provides a meaningful alternative to fighting your way down the A316 westbound.
2. The change proposed here would introduce by far the sharpest change in direction/speed along the whole length of this section (from Chalker's Corner to Manor Circus). At present it is possible to get down here at a reasonable speed without putting pedestrians at risk, and without excessive stress.
3. The present kerb is quite low - people run over it because they can. To prevent them doing so, the best thing would be to raise it and make it physically clear that damage will occur if you choose to mount it.
4. Making it wider like this invites drivers to execute the u-turn much more quickly, whereas I'd suggest that pedestrians and cyclists should feel entitled to move down here without having to look everywhere just to proceed on their way.
5. Except at the Manor Circus end, this cycle facility has **for its entire length** separation from pedestrians, even if this is only a simple slightly raised kerb. It's completely inappropriate to make this change, considering the rest of the route.
6. "Vehicles are sometimes forced to over-run the kerb.." is, frankly, rubbish. Even in rush hours, the traffic lights at Chalker's Corner ensure that the two wide lanes here are quiet enough that a vehicle will be able to execute a multi-point turn without seriously inconveniencing other traffic. Further, any HGV attempting this turn would be able to begin the turn from the lane to the left of the u-turn lane, in order to make it in fewer manoeuvres.

To be honest, the more I think about this, the angrier I get. They spent a fortune building a facility which, in places, is really nice. And then they start chiselling away at it because they seek to accept poor driving standards and aberrant behaviour, rather than seeking to protect and reassure the most vulnerable transport options - walking and cycling - beside a road where traffic routinely flaunts the 30mph limit.

@timlennon: agree with most of your point, in particular #4. You're wrong on #3 though: the issue is the alignment. See below my email to the planning chap.

Frankly, it's a case where lunatics are running the asylum here.

#################

To: "stengagement@tfl.gov.uk"
Sent: Friday, June 7, 2013 9:23 AM
Subject: Re: A316 - Elsinore Way

Dear Mr. Howard,

Let me chip-in this conversation, as a local resident and keen cyclist. The proposed plans raise a few interesting questions indeed.

1. This tinkering of a U turn facility and junction is an implicit admission that the initial design was wrong, something I pointed out at the time. Quite clearly, the planning process should take into accounts residents views as this would avoid wasting taxpayer's money by doing things twice or more times. Out of interest, what is the budget for this planned redesign?

2. TfL's planning approach to cycling facilities is clearly outdated: shared pedestrians and cycles paths are nothing but dangerous. In the present case, any cyclist approaching from Chalkers corner would have to mount onto the pavement using a badly indicated kerb drop, then get onto an unevenly surfaced cycle path to Richmond ; itself constantly interrupted by junctions where cycles have to give way, bus stops and those shared paths. At critical points, such as Manor circus, the cycle path stops completely and cyclists are supposed to dismount. I urge you to borrow someone's bicycle -I infer from the design that the author is not a cyclist- and attempt that to complete that journey.

3. Bill [the other neighbour who objected] is correct is saying that the kerb alignment doesn't work for Richmond-bound cars. It may look nice on a computer screen, but doesn't take into account on small detail: the road bears slightly left... And it's clearly visible at night or when it rains. Again, a field trip would have pointed this out.

Regards,
Etc.

As well as riding a bike I drive a big 4x4 that has quite a wide turning circle. I use this U-turn a lot and have never had to mount the kerb here. I really think this is unnecessary for motorists and a big inconvenience to cyclists.

Letter sent as below
####################

Dear Mr Howard

I am writing with regard to the consultation on "Elsinore Way junction with the A316 Lower Richmond Road"

I am a keen cyclist, local resident and owner and driver of a large 4x4 vehicle.
As a cyclist, I frequently use this cycle track, with my children to travel into Richmond - eg. to Pools on the Park and sports/leisure venues along the Kew Road.
As a motorist, I frequently use this U-turn facility when travelling from Richmond to access Bicester Road.
I therefore feel pretty qualified to comment on all counts of this proposal.

As a motorist - my Land Rover Discovery has a wide turning circle. Nevertheless I have never had to mount the kerb when making this turn. Any driver that cannot get their vehicle round in the existing space must either have a very large vehicle (e.g. a lorry) or have misjudged the turn. Even if you do misjudge the turn; there is usually plenty of time to stop, reverse and correct the manoeuvre since the westbound carriageway has long periods when its quiet whilst traffic is held at the Chalker's Corner traffic lights.
I therefore believe this proposal is unnecessary for motorists.

As a cyclist - this proposal will inconvenience cyclists and put them into conflict with pedestrians. I am dismayed and annoyed that, having spent good taxpayers money on something almost approaching a good cycling facility, TFL are proposing to undo this good work in order to compensate for bad driving. The A316 cycle track is a good start on the way to building a more cycle friendly Richmond - however it does have a number of issues with it - primarily of the poor design at junctions with side roads. We should be spending our money ironing out those remaining issues; to make a truly safe and usable cycle track - not on dismantling the cycle track and returning it to the bad old days.

Cyclists are fed up with cycle tracks that involve weaving round obstacles such as lamp-posts and trees; having to get past pedestrians who don't realise they are on a shared path; and then having to stop every 2 minutes to give way to a side road. This kind of proposal is an absolute exemplar of all the things wrong with provision of cycling facilities in the UK; and I believe completely at odds with the Mayor's vision for cycling in London.

Yours faithfully

Quite agree with your points Andrew: I forgot about those lamp posts...

It would be rather interesting to know what suddenly prompted TfL to wake up one day and think it's an issue?

For instance, on the picture above it's doubtful that those tyres tracks have been made by a vehicle clipping the kerb. IMHO, it's more likely that it was a lorry reversing at low speed. In either case, one of those low and fat bollards should solve that issue.

Furthermore, widening the U turn would encourage larger lorries to use it I think, which isn't quite such a good idea. They should rather spend the money into improving that cumbersome junction, for instance by allowing folks to turn right coming from the A205 South. And of course, providing a segregated Dutch crossing for bicycles: the traffic lights are phased in such a way that it takes up to 10 mn to cross that junction when abiding the pedestrian lights! (on that junction, cycles are supposed to dismount).

Just received consultation response from TFL below - they have decided to think again. Good result!
##########

Dear sir or madam,

We recently consulted on changes to the kerb line and cycle path at the junction between the A316 Lower Richmond Road and Elsinore Way.

We received a total of 38 responses. The majority of those that responded, whether local residents or others, are strongly against the proposal for moving the kerb and cycle path and providing pedestrian/cyclist shared space.

Almost half of the local respondents argued that the kerb to the west of the junction is a more significant problem than the alignment to the east, and called for this to be cut back.

After carefully considering all responses, the immediate plans to proceed with the work have been suspended. We will prepare a revised design that retains the cycle way and addresses the kerb line to the west of the junction, and a further consultation will take place shortly.

The full consultation report can be found here - https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/streets/elsinoreway

Luke Howard
Consultation Specialist
Transport for London, Palestra, 197 Blackfriars Road, London, SE1 8NJ

Now in-reconsultation: we need to get our responses in for this, as it's looking good!