The TFL are proposing to improve accessibility to crossing facilities at St Margaret’s roundabout, Twickenham. They say:
We propose to remove the footbridge located west of St Margaret’s roundabout and install a new toucan crossing. This would provide an accessible crossing at this section of the roundabout which at present is not accessible to everyone.
A toucan crossing allows both pedestrians and cyclists to cross the road at the same time. It is wider than other formal crossings which would mean that cyclists would not have to dismount when crossing. The toucan crossing would be staggered and have an island in the middle.
To make full use of the new toucan crossing, we propose to remove the cycle lane markings from the footway and create shared pedestrian/cycle space; this would allow cyclists that use the new toucan crossing facility to continue along the footway either side of the crossing without having to dismount.
The toucan crossing would improve accessibility for everyone. All roads on this roundabout would then have accessible crossing points.
The consultation runs until 4 July 2014. For more information and to fill out the survey.
This is a colossal waste of money and the marginal benefit to pedestrians and cyclists is to the significant detriment of motorists. The roundabout is going to get severely clogged up. It's such a shame.Richard Lebus on 2014-06-13 07:23:20 +0000
This is such an expensive and ridiculous idea. It will cause dreadful congestion on an already very busy road and is completely unnessecary for the few cyclists and pedestrians that use it. You do sometimes wonder about the people who make these decisions!Alister Cameron on 2014-06-13 09:47:50 +0000
Terrible idea. The last thing an already busy road needs. Totally unnecessary. Will brings months of congestion while built and years of gridlock thereafter.Tom Cooper on 2014-06-13 10:46:37 +0000
Marvellous idea and why hasn't it been demolished before? Because of the roundabout and traffic lights, the footbridge is totally unnecessary for crossing the road. It is an eyesore and doesn't do anything good for the value of our properties.Margo Faith on 2014-06-13 10:54:27 +0000
Margo there are two parts to the proposal...remove the footbridge and install a new toucan crossing. While I wouldn't weep at the loss of the eyesore as you say, putting a toucan crossing on an already heavily congested road will bring mayhem.Tom Cooper on 2014-06-13 11:00:24 +0000
Another waste of time and money, it's not needed, just like the shambles over Twickenham and the moving of bus stops and the Townmead rubish tip, How and why these highly paid people come up with these time and money wasting schemes is beyond me.alsie42 on 2014-06-13 11:10:47 +0000
This scheme will cause massive congestion on the A316, especially during morning and evening rush hours. How many people find it difficult to use the bridge ? Why can't cyclists use the road as I do ? If there is a need can the existing bridge be made more accessible ? This sounds like an expensive recipe for disaster.GaryB on 2014-06-13 11:39:50 +0000
The footbridge was built to serve the children who go to St Stephen's School and the many youth groups and others that use the school hall. As tatty as it is, the bridge does allow large numbers of young people to cross the road, safely and unimpeded without any of the 'pedestrian pooling' on the pavement that will occur if it is replaced by a Toucan Crossing. The bridge also allows the traffic to flow freely beneath. What we need is a new - and more attractive - bridge. M.J DAY - CUB SCOUT LEADER 1st ST MARGARETS CUBSCompost King on 2014-06-13 12:25:29 +0000
I would endorse all Martyn Day's comments. Having another 'stop' element where proposed, apart from it's effect on the A316 traffic flow will probably also cause even longer tailbacks along the station side of St Margarets Road for traffic wanting to turn left onto the A316. Perhaps the Council would like to share their thoughts on this TFL proposal, with us on this website?Harry Jacobs on 2014-06-13 13:09:25 +0000
Totally, agree with all the above comments. Massive expense for marginal and dubious gain. Didnt TFL spend a fortune last year on this very roundabout?Mary on 2014-06-13 13:53:18 +0000
Yes the bridge is ugly, but I really don't think it affects house prices! If it does then we need more bridges to contain the ridiculous house price rise around here! The point is the bridge gets our children across a very busy and potentially dangerous road. Many children gain independence by using the bridge. I for one would certainly not let me children wait on an island in the middle of the 316 by themselves. The island on the other side is bad enough. Maybe TFL should spend a small percentage of the allotted money on making the bridge look nicer...bunting anyone!!Mrs B on 2014-06-13 14:16:45 +0000
Everyone should respond to the consultation: opinions only expressed here will count for nothing.Chris Squire on 2014-06-13 18:33:53 +0000
C. Squires is right, every one should/ must respond. Having voted NO to the removal of the bridge and the proposed toucan crossing I gave the reasons for my decision in the comments box and I can say that so far all comments from local residents echo what I said. There are two exceptions, house prices and the visual image of the bridge feature in my comments. The bridge is fit for purpose and serves the local community and those that travel through underneath it extremely well However, I did question the wisdom of removal of guide rails from the three existing crossing islands which is part of this unwelcome proposal.Gerhard Schellberg on 2014-06-13 21:34:02 +0000
Correction, house prices and visual image DID NOT feature in my comments.Gerhard Schellberg on 2014-06-13 21:42:12 +0000
St Stephen's School is next door and expanding. What sense is there in removing the only safe way of crossing this road? The lights on the other side of the roundabout are notoriously fast ie allow less time to cross than is possible for some with a pram or walking stick etc. They would duplicate this on the new crossings for sure. Dumb.
I propose two nice bridges, to the East and West of the roundabout - maybe one could have a lift or escalator on it. Why not?
It's about time real money was put into supporting people on foot or 2 wheels. Hoorah for pedal extremities!Ben Driver on 2014-06-15 16:51:13 +0000
I'm told by Richmond Council one of the reason's for TFL's scheme at the St Margarets roundabout is "to improve cycle access from the A316 to the station area of St Margarets".Harry Jacobs on 2014-06-18 17:31:08 +0000
We have arranged for BBC London Weekend News to come to the St Margarets bridge on Thursday 19th at 3pm, they are very interested in this story and it will run at the weekend. They will be interviewing local parents and children and filming the bridge in action.
I know its short notice but it would be great if you could come and show your support on camera and see how important this is to local people and schools in the area.
Hopefully this will open up some discussion with TFL regarding this proposal.Geoff Dibben on 2014-06-19 11:44:08 +0000
As a cyclist living within sight of the bridge and who uses this route often i can say this will have no noticeable benefit. It will however, endanger my children who use the bridge to safely get to school. It's a simple case of priorities. Lets not even mention expense.Ian Cruickshank on 2014-06-19 20:56:39 +0000
Not a single comment in support of this ludicrous proposal........but as someone said it's vital to object to El Brute....not that they'll listen.Ian on 2014-06-20 05:18:14 +0000
This Wednesday 25th at 3.30pm at the A316 footbridge, your local councillors, Geoff Acton, Alexander Ehmann and Ben Khosa will be attending a residents' rally against the sham TfL consultation, which the Richmond and Twickenham Times, Evening Standard and other media outlets will be covering. Please join them on the day and add your voice to the growing numbers that want the bungled consultation withdrawn. Find out more from Facebook:
Dave: Note that this is not a council scheme - TfL is a Red Route so it's run by Transport for London. The comment by Margot Faith appears to be in favour but is perhaps intended tongue in cheekChris Squire on 2014-06-20 17:51:16 +0000
I followed Christopher Squires link to face book and noted the comment about a banner across the foot bridge to inform motorists of the tfl proposal and consultation.
The idea has been abandoned because it might distract drivers.
There are probably more drivers that do not want the bridge removed and have another set of traffic lights to contend with than local residents. We need these drivers to become aware of the consultation and take part.
How about distributing a leaflet to drivers while they are stationary when the lights are red on all access roads to the roundabout???Gerhard Schellberg on 2014-06-22 22:04:38 +0000
This is at its heart a campaign about genuine debate and consultation. The proposal by tfl to remove the footbridge is weak and lacks substance. Yes, the footbridge is ugly, but it provides a purpose - safe passage across a major London red route. 55,000 vehicles travel this route daily. Adding another Toucan crossing, because we already have one remember, will affect traffic flow, and merging ALL Cyclists and pedestrians at ground level will have impact too. The location of the Toucan crossing is also ill conceived. Its location is to be at the very point where traffic has already begun to accelerate off the roundabout. That makes sense? So, if you support the campaign to save the footbridge and would like to help in getting TFL to withdraw its proposal go to www.change.org to make a difference.Alison hawkings on 2014-06-23 13:55:08 +0000
Alison is right - if you want (as I do) a meaningful consultation in which the footbridge closure isn't a foregone conclusion, then I would encourage you to join the hundreds of residents and parents that have called for the Transport for London consultation to be annulled.
Please join us at: www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/transport-for-london-withdraw-the-consultation-calling-for-the-removal-of-the-existing-st-margaret-s-footbridge-over-the-a316-and-its-replacement-with-toucan-crossingsCllr Alexander Ehmann on 2014-06-23 15:24:16 +0000
Amongst other things on 17 June I asked TfL for the consultation period to be extended by one month so we could asses the situation and collate views from the community. Later as your representatives we asked for this inadequate consultation to be withdrawn.
Today we have heard that TfL have climbed down but only slightly. They have extended the consultation period by two weeks to reconsider.
We as your Councillors will continue to ask for a face to face and/or a public meeting with TfL so we can put parents concerns and strength of feelings to them first hand and probe other avenues. We must keep up the pressure by encouraging more people to sign the petition on the link provided in the posting above.Ben Khosa on 2014-06-26 22:31:47 +0000
You may have heard that TfL had agreed to a site meeting on 15th July.
I have to report that this meeting has now been called off.
We understand that the reason for this, is that TfL had intended a meeting with Ward Councillors only and perhaps one or two local representatives of the campaign.
They were not willing to attend if the visit runs any risk of becoming a public meeting.
Please can you let anyone you know, who may have been thinking of attending the site meeting on 15 July that it has been called off, instead Cllr Alex Ehmann and I (Cllr Geoff Acton is away) will be attending a meeting off-site (at City Hall) to discuss the consultation.
We will of course report back to you ASAP.
Sorry for any inconvenience.
Cllr Ben KhosaBen Khosa on 2014-07-07 21:02:04 +0000