Forum Topic

Proposed changes to TGT, Devonshire Road, etc.

As I read the information provided, it is proposed that access to TGT from either end will be severely restricted and the same for Devonshire Road.    Doing this could have a very detrimental effect on traffic moving between north and south Chiswick or indeed Chiswick High Road. Added to this was the comment that there could also be restrictions imposed on Fishers Lane and that the use of Dukes Road and Avenue would also be looked at.If all these proposals were to be implemented, the only access routes to the north end of Chiswick and beyond and vice versa to the south of the High Road, would be via Goldhawk Road or Sutton Lane North.  Both of these routes are already highly congested and the unintended consequences are ratruns through residential streets as bad tempered drivers seek to find their way through from the north or the south.  Getting to or from the A4/M4 or 316 would mean even longer queues and higher levels of pollution.  I believe this proposal has not been thought through and that the main beneficiaries will be to the greedy agent and landlords in those 2 streets who will see it as an attractive opportunity to bump up rents and drive out the few independents that remain.

Elizabeth Ross ● 2344d70 Comments

From which can we assume you anticipate traders will do better without cars whizzing past their doors?

Ken Munn ● 2344d

Your assumption is wrong.  I do envisage the small traders not being able to afford the rents/rates that would be charged for this desirable location.  I also have my doubts the such restrictions would significantly increase the footfall.  The added hazard could also be will the many more cycles tied to anything immoveable, as happens now as most seem incapable of using the cycle racks provided at the station end.  As an example, last weekend whilst queuing to buy an ice cream, 2 teenagers blocked the doorway by laying their bicycles on the pavement and then taking their time tasting their ice creams before getting organised and unblocking the pavement and the doorway.

Elizabeth Ross ● 2344d

Lost me. If landlords think they can charge more it'll be because they think the premises scan make more. No?Ah, teenagers. I was never one.

Ken Munn ● 2344d

No you can’t

Elizabeth Ross ● 2343d

I have decided that like many things I used to enjoy before Covid 19 hit us all, some are firmly in the past.As a disabled person wholly dependent on driving from Grove Park & parking, these delights will be no longer.  Wandering in and out of the small local specialist shops and even some larger ones like browsing Waterstones, Roger Dyas, local fruit veg stalls, Campbells for luxury makeup and more, Rymans, Paperchase and lunches with friends in and around the Hi Road.  Don't suppose my single person's spend will make much difference so I do wish them all the very best with the hoped for increased footfall from fit cyclists and pedestrians.Hopefully Barnes will still be possible once things ease up and I'm safe to leave total isolation.

Jennifer Selig ● 2343d

I think it is likely that there will be more disabled spaces for you to park in Jennifer and you will have exclusive access to the streets to park in them. It should make life much easier for you.

Paul Campbell ● 2343d

Can you guarantee that ? Or more likely this is a 'spin' on you and yours achieving your objective.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2343d

Agree Loraine,PC is again trying to promote his own agenda without substantiating evidence.

Jeffrey Cope ● 2343d

I've not read anything about catering for disabled drivers let alone actually increasing parking spaces for us.  How are we supposed to drive past those huge planters blocking access to these roads?

Jennifer Selig ● 2343d

If disabled parking is not included then I'll be fighting as hard as anybody to make sure it is. These schemes need to be inclusive and cater for disabled shoppers who need to drive IMHO. It is a must.

Paul Campbell ● 2343d

When I have to take my animals to the vet in Richmond (from North Chiswick) it takes forever. With even longer times, it could be the difference between life and death. And anyone who commutes regularly from north of Chiswick to South areas of Chiswick and beyond or vice versa  will have a horrendously longer journey.  They will find every cut through there is.  The law of unintend consequences could prove absolutlely dire.

Claire Moran ● 2343d

Oh I dunno, Ken. With reduced trading capacity and nothing but deferred costs, the model for any business is becoming less and less tenable. If rents go up, more businesses will close. Inevitably rents will go down.

David Lesniak ● 2342d

For Loraine and Jeffrey - I am pleased to say that following a twitter exchange that I had with Strand Antiques on Devonshire Road regarding disabled access and parking and then a direct inquiry from the owner, Councillor Biddolph has confirmed that there will be disabled access and parking provision on Devonshire Road. Good news for Jennifer as these types of schemes should benefit people with reduced mobility.

Paul Campbell ● 2342d

Good work Paul.  What's being looked for here is the beginning of an overdue cultural change for the able.  The disabled must be assured they can “carry on” as usual.Tom Pike also made an important (wise I feel) point on the Bedford Park thread this morning.  About the wider consequences of road pedestrianisation in Chiswick (and beyond).  Making life, he proposes,    “much more attractive to the younger residents who see a future beyond personal car ownership....”

Stuart Kerr ● 2342d

If the pooch's life is in danger, why not find a closer vet? One about to open on CHR in the old Evans cycle shop.

Ken Munn ● 2342d

If the shops relied on the passing car trade I think they would be moribund - most cars are passing through, but are prioritised.Of course businesses need access - deliveries etc - and access to places like Capital Motors as that is their trade.But don't we think that TGT and Devonshire Road would benefit with less traffic and more pedestrian opportunities?Is it so hard to carry your dry cleaning from one spot to another?I do not fully understand the reference to greedy landlords (why are landlords greedy for making a living housing shops, but staff asking for a raise are not is beyond me - but hey ho) - as a landlord in Dev Road I have not increased my rent for over 10 years - is that greedy or just commercial sense in wanting a thriving commercial street that you can drive down?What is so bad about prioritising pedestrian movement (while of course enabling inclusive access and commerce)?James

James Holmes-Siedle ● 2342d

Just to clarify. There will be access to Prince of Wales Terrace (and Capital Motors) and it was never envisaged that such access would be stopped. I rang Capital Motors (I have been a customer for many years) this morning to reassure them that the scaremongering was just that, and their access would not be affected. The gentleman I spoke to was very pleased to hear from me, as he had been really worried.

Guy Lambert ● 2342d

It's a shame our local councillors weren't able to provide this reassurance, and it was down to Guy to correct the scaremongering about these changes. Some councillors previously seemed more interested in fomenting opposition to just about any proposed traffic scheme rather than understanding and conveying the actual context. There's not so many of those dinosaurs left, thankfully, and it's good that Guy stepped in.

Tom Pike ● 2342d

Plus several locals were shooting from the hip about how terrible it all is, without any idea of the details.

Ken Munn ● 2342d

Guy , as a trader along Devonshire Road can you reassure us that our customers will have the ability to collect goods by car in some way?Thanks.

Penny Ledbury ● 2342d

Wasn't this a Labour Council initiative and if so, wouldn't the responsibility have been with Labour Councillors to inform the affected businesses ? Notwithstanding that, perhaps a survey of the businesses getting their views and concerns BEFORE announcing the proposed scheme would have been sensible, rather than just announcing it and unnecessarily worrying the Traders on these roads. Seems it was Cart before the Horse management.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2342d

The politics are not straightforward. It's the national govt (Con), via the Department for Transport which is pushing for such things to be done, and in a screaming hurry before lockdown evaporates. It's local govt (Lab) that has to implement them. So the local Con councillors are pretty much obliged by party loyalty to go along with it, while the Lab council can push on and blame Con DfT if it all goes pear-shaped.

Ken Munn ● 2342d

Ken et al, Yes I know all that re the Government, and as you say it's for Local Gov to implement, however in this instance our Labour Council has made a Pig's Ear out of this particular issue by not consulting with the Businesses who believe they will be adversely affected. It's  a shame that Cllr Lambert was not proactive but only reactive after the Front Page story on CW4, but better late than never.Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, the prolific pro cycling / motor vehicle reduction Forumers have yet again taken unfair and unwarranted pot shots at Chiswicks Councillors.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2342d

The Conservative Councillors will have known about the proposals before the announvement and before that would have been aware of the Commonplace survey and the Council's interest in receiving suggestions to reallocate road space to walking and cycling. Those suggestions have also of course been available to the public. Naturally suggestions to not reallocate road space are unlikely to be considered as that is not the objective of the exercise.So knowing about it in advance you would think that they would have two options:1) Talk to traders about it, get into the details, hear about their concerns and represent those to Council officers to create a constructive dialogue, allay unnecessary fears and try to find solutions to challenges2) Leave it to LBH to engage directly with the tradersIt would be reasonable to expect that because this has come about due to the statutory guidance provided to Councils to reallocate road space from a Conservative DfT that they would consider option 1. Also I know that the Council Officers kind of expect the local Councillors to play a part with their local knowledge and connections and don't want to cut across them because they would, fairly, take flak for that.But sadly the Chiswick Calendar reports in its newsletter that Councillor Biddolph worte an email to Devonshire Road traders which it says urges them to object to the scheme, saying "It's LBH who are being lobbied hard by people who are anti-car; LBH is anti-car". Are the DfT and Conservative government also "anti-car"? I don't think it's right for this to be a political fight. It is about improving the streetscape and providing better amenities for people in Chiswick. There has never been a better chance for a joined-up apolitical approach and it is so disappointing to see partisan politics emerge so far downstream. Please stop. No more scaremongering! Please help people instead. Like Guy is doing.

Paul Campbell ● 2342d

Penny, existing loading bays will be retained so that should allow collections

Guy Lambert ● 2342d

The Conservative Councillors definitely knew about the consultation website because  in a Chiswick Calendar article a few weeks ago, there was a request for people to submit complaints about loss of pavement to cycleway 9.It's a bit pathetic that the only suggestion to address current social distancing issues was asking people to complain about a non-existent cycle route but anyway.It didn't work, as there were only a few comments along this line.  Two seemed to be from the same person as they spelled "pavement" incorrectly.

Michael Robinson ● 2342d

Our local councillors knew the details, and in this case were urged to provide reassurance. Guy as outside the area has gone above and beyond to do this - he hardly deserves criticism in comparison. Why did the councillors whose job it is to respond to the concerns of their constituents fail to do so in this case? To prolong unnecessary uncertainty for businesses at this time is beyond unhelpful, and rather reveals their priorities.

Tom Pike ● 2342d

So you say, but please provide proof

Loraine Pemberton ● 2342d

Consultation doesn't fit with 'screaming rush'. There will be consultation, but after the event, not before it. My understanding with Experimental Traffic Orders is that they are implemented  without hard infrastructure, so that they can be undone quickly if need be.As for pot shots at councillors, that's par for the course for anyone with political ambition. After all, you've just taken a poke at Lambert.

Ken Munn ● 2342d

I have said this before but it is worth repeating,I think this is now the 4th place I have lived in where the local council have had the bright idea of restricting parking for a busy shopping area (in the past this was all about increasing parking charges rather than encouraging cycling). The other 3 places it was tried it was a disaster, shoppers went elsewhere to places that had easier and cheaper parking. In 1 case it took less than a month before the small town centre was a ghost area and the council had to reverse the policy but it still took years before the town centre recovered, many people had changed the shopping habits and never came back I am not expecting this to be 4th time lucky, and I am a regular cyclist.As for the changes on Dukes Avenue and other restrictions which will force more traffic to use Sutton Court Road.  I can only assume that the proposals were developed by someone who has never lived close to Sutton Court Road between the Town Hall and the A4 and has a traffic study done at lunch time in the middle of summer school holidays (or during the lock down).  It will cause more jams from the A4 junction back to the Town Hall, more accidents and more occasions where it gets bad enough to grid lock CHR

Justin Stephenson ● 2342d

Maybe you could ask Councillor Biddolph if she sought reassurance from Mark Frost, head of Transport at LBH on this issue? If so, why did she not share it with Capital Motors? If not, why didn't she feel that was necessary?Paul at Capital Motors had very valid concerns on access. Councillor Biddolph seemed to be more interested in drumming up opposition to restricting traffic along Devonshire Road rather than providing reassurance to Paul. As I said, it's a question of priorities.

Tom Pike ● 2342d

The Chiswick Calendar 12 May 2020https://chiswickcalendar.co.uk/hounslow-to-publish-proposals-for-south-chiswick-in-the-next-couple-of-weeks/“ If you wish to comment click on the link below to share your views  haveyoursay.hounslow.gov.ukSome residents might, for example, like to highlight where Cycleway 9 will reduce the width of the pavements of Chiswick High Road making social distancing impossible.”As I said, it is pathetic that the only suggestion to address the current issue of social distancing was asking people to complain about a cycle route that isn’t there.

Michael Robinson ● 2342d

I had another call from Capital Motors this afternoon asking me to confirm what I had told them when I rang to reassure them this morning, which I was able to.

Guy Lambert ● 2342d

I’m sure you will be assiduous in paying the full price for your next MOT, Guy!Well done, and a shame our local councillors were slow to come forward to provide the these assurances.

Tom Pike ● 2342d

One of the joys of Capital Motors is they hate to see you spending money. They advised me to write off one car because it wasn't worth as much as they'd charge me to fix the gearbox. And they resisted fixing the air conditioning on my current car, advising me to open the windows.

Guy Lambert ● 2342d

Thanks Guy.

Penny Ledbury ● 2342d

I haven't used them for many years but they were brilliant at helping me sort out my lovely old Rover, my pride and joy, when I left it for half an hour on Chiswick Mall to take the dog for a walk along Dukes Meadows and came back to see the water up to the top of the driver's window! I didn't realise at the time that Spring tides start much earlier than Spring!  They deserve to be looked after whatever the changes to the surrounding roads.

Claire Moran ● 2342d

Again Guy steps in to help out Chiswick - in the absence of any local help.

John Stroud ● 2342d

"Again Guy steps in to help out Chiswick - in the absence of any local help"What are you doing to help, John? Other than moan,that is.Local councillors have quite a bit on their plate at the moment, in case you haven't noticed. Good to know your grudge is firmly in place and you dare not reach across the aisle to pitch in. Well done.

David Lesniak ● 2341d

Guy ,will the loading bays remain for commercial vehicles only or will non trade customers be able to now use the loading bays without the fear of a paring ticket?.Also on the "grape vine" we have heard that cars will be allowed through Devonshire Road but with a low speed limit is this the case?. Thanks.

Penny Ledbury ● 2341d

“Also on the "grape vine" we have heard that cars will be allowed through Devonshire Road but with a low speed limit is this the case?“Hmmm.. sounds like an unsubstantiated rumour to me. Devonshire Rd is already 20mph and as far as I’m aware, there is no way to enforce speed limits lower than this (not than the police enforce 20mph very often anyway).  Speeds can be limited by putting in large speed humps but I doubt this is the case.

Michael Robinson ● 2341d

My understanding is that speed limit will be as is, loading will allow 'shoppers' loading and access to PoW Terrace (definitely) and Glebe St (I think) will be permitted. There will otherwise be disabled parking only and an option to use freed parking spaces to support retailers. I'm sorry I can't be 100% definitive as it's the weekend and the key officer was on leave yesterday. This has happened quickly and is absolutely aimed at supporting local retail (and health!) in what is and will be a radically different environment. If some of the changes need to be revisited in the light of experience they will be.

Guy Lambert ● 2341d

Thanks Guy. This does sound like then there will be access for cars so I'm confused as to why Hounslow Council have said on the website the statement below..  I'm wondering what the real changes will be?. Whether we agree or not with the proposed changes we need to prepare our businesses and inform our customers accurately. Could we have a statement with the changes and how they will be implemented ?. "To this end, the Council will be restricting through traffic on Turnham Green Terrace and Devonshire Road, limiting vehicle access to bus and essential servicing."

Penny Ledbury ● 2341d

Maybe it would help if they had a virtual viewing of what will be there.

Janice Evans ● 2341d

Understand.I think that's truly the intention for TGT but for Devonshire the issue is Glebe St. Will try and get a completely clear statement on Monday.

Guy Lambert ● 2341d

Brilliant, thanks so much .

Penny Ledbury ● 2341d

GuyIs LBH's haste in pushing this through at speed driven by Grant money from Govt ? If LBH don’t fulfill first phase by a deadline do they lose the funding ? If achieved do they get more money for next phase ? Is that accurate ?Thank you

Loraine Pemberton ● 2341d

To be honest I'm not sure how the grants might work, but in any case it's an instruction from central government and Local Authorities are expected to carry out instructions of this nature.We anyway view it as urgent for other reasons: we cannot afford for those who have been tempted in the lockdown traffic lull to travel by foot or bicycle to abandon  this change and get in cars, which will be very tempting given public transport restrictions.If they do, we'll have total gridlock and there are likely to be many early deaths from pollution and fitness-related conditions. Plus it's an opportunity to take some space back from parking for people and local business

Guy Lambert ● 2341d

GuyThanks for your prompt reply.I do have a question that I'm hoping your able to answer, like many of Chiswicks older generation I dont yet qualify for a Blue Badge, although that's only a matter of time before I and others do. I'm a long standing, regular customer of Chiswick Pets and Top Hat and, respectively buy in bulk and heavy dry cleaning laundry to collect as do many other residents. What provision for parking will there be for us to drop off and collect  without too much inconvenience ?Many thanks

Loraine Pemberton ● 2341d

It is a good question and it is lucky that there is a diligent and open-minded Labour Councillor in Brentford who is willing to answer Chiswick residents’ questions at the weekend. Maybe we should ask for Guy’s Ward to be merged with Turnham Green ward at the next election. Look forward to hearing Guy’s answer but in the meantime your question does make me wonder if there might not be a more efficient way for the pet shop and Top Hat to serve customers like you who live within a 400m radius of their shops instead of having everybody drive 400m to try to find a parking space in a street with 16 spaces creating localised congestion and pollution for very short journeys to put what in reality are relatively small loads in the boots of their personal cars. Like Lea and Sandeman for example who provide free delivery.

Paul Campbell ● 2341d

Might Devonshire Street traders set up a joint e-bike/e-van delivery service for local customers, do you think?

Ken Munn ● 2341d

"Like Lea and Sandeman for example who provide free delivery."For orders £200 and above per the L&S website. Not your average purchase. Thought it best accuracy played a part in making your point.

David Lesniak ● 2341d

Actually I inspired myself to order a case of MIP by my last posting. So I can give you the latest and most accurate information. If you ring the shop instead of going through the website the minimum order for free delivery locally is £100; a reasonable cost for a case of wine. Of course Covent Garden Fishmongers and Macken are also providing free delivery locally if you want other examples. The cost of free delivery for people like Loraine in a small radius will be reduced by means of the new cycle lanes that are going to be installed.

Paul Campbell ● 2341d

PaulAccording to the AA and RAC, not to mention me, I live 1.2 miles away from Devonshire Road  which equates to 1931.213m, and not the 400m you've stated. So you expect me, or any other 70+ year old with mobility problems, to walk very heavy goods to and from these local shops or expect them to pay for collection and delivery when they're already operating on small margins ?Btw, thank you so much for your recent posts on here publishing where I live, that's not your business to do that and quite frankly is shameful and shabby on your part. It's not a secret but its certainly not up to you to highlight it on several occasions - it's mine.Great shame you don't know how many metres equate to 1.2 miles not to mention your complete lack understanding the adverse effect on businesses having to increase their OH's. Lea & Sandeman have high value goods, Neither Top Hat or Chiswick Pets are in the same position.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2341d

Loraine, I think you may have entered a different Devonshire Road in your search. It’s a 5 min walk to Devonshire Road. You would do well to walk 1.2 miles in 5 mins. It is 400m from St Mary’s Church to Devonshire Red. The cost of delivering over those distances would be minimal with a shared cargo bike delivery scheme which is exactly the sort of thing that the High Road Task Force could help create for the traders. The savings on petrol and wear and tear would even justify a small surcharge to cover the minimal additional costs. Loads of places are providing delivery and I have mentioned just two with lower value items.We all need to open our minds to different solutions when changes happen.I am quite sure that I have not published where you live. You have provided more accurate descriptions yourself on this site but I guess you needed to find something to be outraged by as the argument developed.

Paul Campbell ● 2341d

Not at all, I know my post code and that of Devonshire Road.And yes you have published where I live ! Btw who gives you the right to tell local businesses the right of how they should operate and the services they should provide ?

Loraine Pemberton ● 2341d

Loraine is quite right it is more like 2km from that end of the High Rd to Top Hat.

Will Watson ● 2341d

Lol! To be fair it explains the need to drive. I now understand better why Loraine thinks cyclists are speeding.

Paul Campbell ● 2341d

I’m not telling anybody to do anything. I am making suggestions. Why would anybody be offended by customers having ideas for how businesses might respond to changes? You do seem to search hard for reasons to be outraged.

Paul Campbell ● 2341d

Give it a rest and just admit you're wrong ! You are really flogging a dead horse on this.  I don't live 400m from Devonshire Road and I, like many others of my age with health conditions, can help and support our much loved and essential businesses without using our cars. Are you, Mr Campbell, completely without empathy for both residents and businesses ?It would appear so, shame on you!

Loraine Pemberton ● 2341d

My understanding is that loading spaces will be provided in Devonshire Road and TGT for those who won't or can't avail themselves of any delivery services offered and that these will be available for shoppers as well as delivery vans. I expect their availability will be tight, just as parking availability is in Devonshire/TGT today.

Guy Lambert ● 2341d

Look at Will’s map. You are wrong about the distance. You just are. I’m sorry but it’s very funny how adamant you are that Barley Mow Passage is 1.2miles from Devonshire Road. Of course I am not without empathy. I have been suggesting numerous ways in which the schemes can work for businesses and customers and also brought clarification to the forum about the disabled access and parking spaces on Devonshire Road. Try to open your mind instead of just opposing everything.

Paul Campbell ● 2341d

I'm not on Barley Mow Passage, that's your first mistake !You can debate with Will Watson, the man who tried to skew the original TfL survey over 2 years ago.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2341d

I know that. I’m just trying to pick a spot close. Well I must admit I was wrong then about where you live. I just remember the article with the picture of you at Barley Mow with the caption saying it was close to where you live. You know the one about you objecting to Sam putting some tables outside his restaurant, Sam’s Brasserie, a much loved Chiswick institution sadly missed by me and many other Chiswick residents.

Paul Campbell ● 2341d

It wasn't just Sam's which supported part pedestrianisation,  it was also Chisou which was a fantastic restaurant and like Sam's was much loved and  really added value to Chiswick.I guess we can tell some businesses what do or how to operate but others not.

Matthew Swain ● 2341d

But only people without empathy would have no consideration for the needs of local businesses Matt.

Paul Campbell ● 2341d

Very odd, Guy, because the lead officer told me that, to reach the shops on Devonshire Road by car from the west or south, I should make my way to Dukes Avenue. For some that will mean rat-running along Barrowgate Road or Wavendon Avenue or Alwyn Avenue and Hadley Gardens, then up Dukes Avenue through Bourne Place then down Duke Road and along Glebe Street. Reminds me of the Hampton Court Maze. If there is access from the top of Devonshire Road to Glebe Street, what are the entry restrictions for?  Is there going to be a planter at the end of the shops stopping essential access vehicles from going down the rest of Devonshire Road or turning left into Ingress Street?  If so, all delivery vehicles will have to get out along Glebe Street. Devonshire Road will cease to be a through-route and become a cul-de-sac with a route out along Glebe Street. Is that the plan? If that isn't the plan and driving along Devonshire Road to Ingress Street is to continue, and we can get through to Glebe Street, what's the point of having restricted entry?  Anyone coming through can say they want access to Glebe Street. Residents, visitors to residents, trades/service people to residents, deliveries to residents, people who want to park during non-CPZ hours. No change. No need for entry restrictions. There's a lot of "I think" in your comments and what everyone wants is the facts, none of which is in the "consultation". Some say the local councillors should know.  Members of cabinet don't know!  And before you say it's not your brief, why choose to get involved in answering questions you can't answer? You refer to others who can't answer questions, but say they don't know rather than "I think", as scaremongering. Saying "I think" raises expectations that might be dashed. I'm now very excited at the thought that I can still get to Glebe Street from the top of Devonshire Road - but very anxious for our brilliant independent shops because of the loss of parking, including the free 30minute stop and shop option, on Devonshire Road. On that point, will the council, as we've asked, add the free 30 minute stop and shop option to the remaining spaces (for as long as they do remain) on the High Road from the Chiswick Fire Station to Linden Gardens? Do you "think" we could agree on that?

Joanna Biddolph ● 2341d

Hi Joanna,Guy was able to provide some clear answers:1. Access to access Prince of Wales Terrace would be maintained, much to the relief of Capital Motors.2. There would be loading bays and disabled parking. 3. The remaining existing parking bays would be freed up for use by the retailers.This is indeed exciting, allowing the possibility of extended al fresco options along Devonshire Road instead of parking. This looks like a win-win for retail and customers, and especially responsive to the new challenges we face with COVID-19. He is going to get back to us tomorrow after getting clarification from the council officers on some subsequent questions raised here. Guy had already been thanked for providing this information and I will wait for him to come back with the remaining facts rather than try to disentangle the speculative comments in your post.

Tom Pike ● 2340d

I have replied extensively to this on another thread. As I say, there has been completely unjustified scaremongering about this plan which has made local retailers very worried with absolutely no justification.

Guy Lambert ● 2340d

GuyWould you articulate exactly what the scaremongering is and by whom ? So far I've read the article on the front page of CW4 which appears to have been instigated by 2 of the DR Traders.Many thanks

Loraine Pemberton ● 2340d