Forum Topic

Devonshire Road scheme and Capital Motors

Too many many W4+ locals Capital motors in an essential business and should not be affected by any alterations to access of Devonshire road. Capital motors has served this community since the 60's and Paul has developed a team of staff that are loyal, trustworthy, customer caring, honest and have developed under his astute and developing management. They are more family than staff.He deserves a Knighthood rather than closure! Where are our local Councillors when needed?

Patrick O Connor ● 2340d52 Comments

You're suggesting Capital motors is being forced to shut up shop?

Gordon McDonald ● 2340d

The opposite, I am drumming up support so that a closure does not happen.

Patrick O Connor ● 2340d

There is a strange vacuum of silence from local councillors about the emergency Covid schemes that were proposed after the Government guidance. The only public statement from Joanna Biddolph (who is the leader of the Chiswick Conservative council group) about the proposals was at about half three this morning buried in another thread and was rather obfuscating and negative. I’ve don’t think heard anything from her about closure of Wellesley, South Chiswick changes, Turnham Green Terrace  the ideas for low traffic neighbourhoods or anything else specific she would propose to do locally in response to the emergency. Guy Lambert posted on the same thread. He is actually a councillor in Brentford believe it or not and has used Capital for years. He has spoken and ‘called the owner to reassure him that the scaremongering was just that their access would not be affected’. He said that ‘The gentleman I spoke to was very pleased to hear from me, as he had been really worried.’  and actually called him again later . There are a couple of points that he is hoping to clarify on Monday Personally I’ve never used Capital Motors, but I think I will do so now. They sound excellent.

Edward Seaton ● 2340d

Completely support Capital Motors - a superb company and zero obstacles should be put in place for the ingress and egress of continuing to provide an ongoing excellent service.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2340d

Well we can see what Cllr Biddolph is doing - picking arguments at 4am with 18 month old tweets about cycling saying “such short memory” forgetting her own statement from 3 weeks ago saying it’s time to “move on”.I wonder what her fellow Cllrs think about her disregard for what was a welcome and thoughtful statement.Cllr Biddolph is one of the few people who does have direct access to the council officers to discuss proposed plans so it is a pity she doesn’t seem to have taken advantage of this and prefers to scaremonger instead.

Michael Robinson ● 2340d

Sam Hearn is the group spokesperson on transport and he has commented in detail on the proposals. You can see the gist of what he said in the article currently on the front page.His main point is that he supports the principle but that would like to see more consultation and analysis of likely impacts. What is clear is that nobody from Hounslow Council even bothered to walk the length of Devonshire Road before pushing ahead with these plans. The issue of access for Capital Motors  would have been immediately apparent. As I understand it someone from the council has now spoken to Paul and he has been assured that full access will be maintained to his garage and Prince of Wales Terrace. You can't do this without allowing cars to continue up the length of Devonshire Road so the change there won't be pedestrianisation but the removal of parking spaces.

Francis Rowe ● 2340d

Francis,You may be making two incorrect assumptions.Firstly that Hounslow didn't know that Capital Motors required access.  An alternative explanation is that Hounslow DID know Capital required access but we are seeing the result of misinformation, miscommunication or scaremongering.  Pick whatever one you like.  From an email leaked to The Chiswick Calendar, we already know that Cllr Biddolph has been stirring up Devonshire Rd traders with emails containing statements like "LBH is anti-car".  Not mentioning, of course, the measures come from government policy.Secondly, your assumption that, "You can't do this [access to Capital Motors] without allowing cars to continue up the length of Devonshire Road "You may not have considered that one of the changes would be to make Devonshire Rd two way from the entrance to the point where traffic is restricted.  Devonshire Road used to be two way and it was changed to stop traffic rat running northbound.  Stop all through traffic and no problem reverting to two way.The result will not be complete pedestrianisation where all motor traffic is banned, but a street where motor traffic is restricted to access only.  However volumes and speeds should be so low that people should have no problem walking in the street, This is quite common elsewhere and examples have been mentioned on other threads , such as Orford Rd, Waltham Forest and Exmouth Market, Islington.

Michael Robinson ● 2340d

It was never at any point the remotest possibility that we would cut off access to Prince of Wales Terrace - Capital Motors and the residents who live down there.The comment:"What is clear is that nobody from Hounslow Council even bothered to walk the length of Devonshire Road before pushing ahead with these plans. The issue of access for Capital Motors  would have been immediately apparent." is utter nonsense.The people who have been scaremongering about this should be ashamed of themselves.

Guy Lambert ● 2340d

"The people who have been scaremongering about this should be ashamed of themselves."As should the people who've sought to promote their own agendas also be ashamed of themselves.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2340d

Really don't understand people jumping to so many conclusions on this stuff. Just wait until you have seen a design then have a pop if you don't agree with it.At least you have something to reference rather than making things up and causing concern.

Tony Smart ● 2340d

I'll take your word for it that someone did actually visit the area before a plan was drawn up. That does of course beg the question of why people whose businesses were likely to be affected in the most profound way were not even informed. Paul Sahota was unaware of the plan until one of the Devonshire road traders came and told him having read about it on this site. The scaremongering you allege would not be possible if the council were being transparent in the way they were handling this and I don't think you can blame me for the severe anxiety many people are suffering over this issue.Michael seems to be consistently well informed about what is going on so it is probably safe to assume that making Devonshire road two way is what you are planning so why not just let people know? It appropriate that, as a member of the Hounslow Cycling Campaign, he should be consulted on schemes like this but if you are only going to talk to people who are likely to be in favour you aren't acting in a properly democratic manner.You might regain a bit of public trust if you stopped being so secretive about what your intentions were. Perhaps you could start by answering the following questions?1) Is the plan to make Devonshire Road two way up to Prince of Wales Terrace?2) There has been a suggestion that TGT is to be reduced to a single lane for traffic. Is that true and how would it work with the buses?3) Is a closure of Fishers Lane underpass to general traffic being considered? 4) Is the Fishers Lane underpass deemed to be an Ealing or Hounslow Matter?5) If Fishers Lane underpass is not closed what measures are being consider south of this area to manage traffic should TGT be closed?6) Is making Duke Road no entry from CHR and left turn only onto CHR? If so how will people on the Glebe Estate access their homes?7) Is making Dukes Avenue no access to CHR being considered?8) Have Ealing Council been consulted on the closure of TGT and, if so, what was their response?9) Is it the case that funding for any work done under this scheme requires the trial to be run for at least six months?10) If not does the council have the power to reverse any measure immediately if there was evidence that they were exacerbating traffic build up or had compromised road safety?11) Have bus companies been consulted on any measures being taken and, if so, what was their response?You have a well deserved reputation as the councillor in Hounslow most willing to engage with the public and now more than ever it is important that the council acts in a transparent way.

Francis Rowe ● 2340d

The emails that are going around on this from Brentford and Isleworth Conservatives and Councillor Biddolph are really bad. I can’t quite believe what I’ve read. They are amoral. They are ratcheting up the pressure and stress on people at a time when mental health is strained enough by the impact of the pandemic and economic crises. Leaving a guy like Paul to think for several days that a fickle and capricious Council was just going to inadvertently shut down his business is beyond the pale.

Paul Campbell ● 2340d

Better still, just plonk down some planters and traffic cones and tie up a few signs and see how it works, which I think is the basis of the new legislation.  The sooner shops can spill onto the pavement and pedestrians can safely spread into the road the better. Any longer spent discussing it and the virus will be cured.

Peter Evans ● 2340d

Paul, even by your standards this is a bit silly. Local people would be a bit less stressed if the council just told them what was going on. They are inevitably going to think the worst if there is an element of cloak and dagger about the whole thing.

Anita Blake ● 2340d

Even with your track record of defending the indefensible this is rather glib Anita if you have read the emails. They are doom-mongering and making it sound inevitable that partial pedestrianisation of TGT and Devonshire Road will close all the shops. They are terrible and thoughtless about the impact the messages could have on mental health. They say nothing about the reasons for the measures or that the Council is acting on statutory guidance from government.  But I can understand that some people are so loyal to party politics that they can’t read them objectively.

Paul Campbell ● 2340d

Peter, would you not be troubled in any way about the shops that would inevitably have to close if this was done including for certain Capital Motors, and the key workers who would have even greater difficulties getting to work due to the required bus diversions?Just to add to Francis' very apposite list of questions1) Removal of parking on TGT and Devonshire Road will end the provision of Stop and Shop in Chiswick. Will this be restored elsewhere for shoppers in the area?2) Is there any plan to maintain the level of parking in the central shopping district of Chiswick my creating extra bays to offset the ones that have been lost?

Paul Corcoran ● 2340d

Well said Francis Rowe and Paul Corcoran!

Loraine Pemberton ● 2340d

Paul, why are you scaremongering about Capital Motors when Guy has informed both them and us with absolute clarity that access will be maintained? And with the E3 no longer facing the queues at the junction of Turnham Green Terrace and the High Road, it's clear that bus passengers will be the beneficiaries here. The move from a focus on parking provision to opening up that space to retailers is to be welcomed, and it's clear that those shopkeepers who recognise the opportunities are excited by the possibilities. No high street in London benefits from a pointless competition to encourage driving to their shops - they are all losers overall when anyone feels it's necessary to get into a car to shop: a proportion will inevitably then drive to car-focussed retail such as at Kew. We have a unique opportunity here to see the High Road shift to operating on a more sustainable basis, both environmentally and in retail terms. If it doesn't work out we can switch back, but I suspect we will wonder why it wasn't done sooner!

Tom Pike ● 2340d

There's a distinction between a temporary solution to help with the virus restrictions, and longer term and more wide ranging traffic measures that deserve greater consideration.  It now seems that cutting off Capital Motors was never part of the plan, and Orford Road in Walthamstow and many other examples of 'traffic calming' seem to work, still allowing access to premises and for buses. The advantage of the new legislation seems to be the ability to try things out a short notice and see what happens, rather then spending months in theoretical and sterile 'consultations' before embarking on expensive and irreversible structural work. Roll out the bollards!

Peter Evans ● 2340d

"If it doesn't work out we can switch back, but I suspect we will wonder why it wasn't done sooner!"That assumes that no businesses are lost to this experiment...Paul isn't scaremongering but pointing out potential consequences of rushed through schemes when there are so many unanswered questions- see posts by Francis Rowe and Paul Corcoran

Loraine Pemberton ● 2340d

No, access to Prince of Wales Terrace and Capital Motors is an answered question! It's certainly scaremongering if people knowing this try to suggest otherwise.

Tom Pike ● 2340d

I was responding to Peter's suggestion of just plonking down some bollards not whatever the council have planned. He didn't say to put it in a position that wouldn't compromise Capital Motor's access.As has already been pointed out, worrying possible consequences would not be an issue if the council were keeping people up to date.

Paul Corcoran ● 2340d

And Peter was remiss in not precluding putting planters in front of fire stations! Why did you pick the one location we know for sure, thanks to Guy, we won’t see planters!

Tom Pike ● 2340d

Guy, if you could please answer a question for me: when and to what degree are local councillors or stake holders informed of these plans and details? On too many occasions, we've seen info from other mere mortals that is more in depth than that which is made available to our representatives. We've also experienced the cold shoulder from the likes of Mark Frost and then reading Paul Campbell boast about his open line of communication with him. As a resident and a business owner, surely Mark is obligated to respond to me the same as any other resident in W4. And yet he falls woefully short of that. Take me out of the equation and we still see Mark not engaging with residents other than those whose views he shares. That is in no way fair and balanced.

David Lesniak ● 2340d

"I can’t quite believe what I’ve read. They are amoral."From the emails I've read, Paul, you're not that innocent. I do love watching a grown man play coy. Sorry, a grown rich-ass man, that is.

David Lesniak ● 2340d

For the record I have never said that I have an open line of communication to Mark Frost. I said that I wrote to him about social distancing on Turnham Green Terrace. I copied Ronnie Mushisho and Sam Hearn. He replied asking if he could share my email with the local Councillors to which I agreed. And that was that. Perhaps your style of communication is not effective at eliciting responses from Council officers. I’ll ignore your unnecessary rudeness on the other comment on this thread and note once again that the ad hominem attacks from opponents of these schemes are predictably escalating.

Paul Campbell ● 2340d

Francis,I have zero insider information about the plans for Devonshire Rd, TGT and all of the other places you mention.I do have some experience working with transport plans and traffic data so anything I have posted is simply thinking through the options carefully and making an educated guess.It seemed pretty obvious to me that access could be maintained to PoW Terrace by putting the restriction somewhere around Glebe St and Devonshire Road reverting to two way traffic.I appreciate that this may not be as obvious to others.So sorry to burst your conspiracy theory.  What I'm doing is nothing more than applying some previous experience, being aware of things that have been done elsewhere, being familiar with borough, TfL and government policy and thinking things through logically to make educated guesses.I appreciate that may seem like insider information to some but it really isn't.  It just means, I hope, that it will tend to be right more often than it is wrong.Hence I tend to be quite critical and sometimes a bit too cutting when I see uniformed speculation being presented as fact.

Michael Robinson ● 2340d

Francis,Some items on your list seem to be remarkably similar to items on an email from the Turnham Green ward Conservatives.Did you really come up with all the items on your list by yourself?Cllr Biddolph has had direct discussions with Hounslow officers on the plans so it would be concerning if she was the source of misinformation, particularly in these times..

Michael Robinson ● 2340d

'Capital motors in an essential business and should not be affected by any alterations to access of Devonshire road.'Stop stirring. It won't be.

Ken Munn ● 2340d

The plan is not to make Devonshire two way but to make it access only - to Devonshire, PoW Terrace and I believe Glebe St. Most parking will be removed. Not disabled or loading.The Chiswick councillors have had at least one meeting with Mark Frost so they likely know as much as I do (see Sam Hearn's quote on the home page).I am perfectly certain if they asked Mark about anything they don't know the answer to they would get a rapid response, though Chiswick is only 3 of 20 wards that Mark has to concern himself with.The details have been worked up over the last 2 or 3 weeks. I don't know who suggested that access to Capital Motors/PoW Terrace would be stopped, because that was never in the plans. If local councillors were suggesting otherwise that was quite irresponsible. I am not a Chiswick councillor and this is not my cabinet portfolio, but I have intervened on this website because I was concerned about the misinformation and anxiety that was being spread about a scheme which is intended to support local businesses and help keep residents safe.

Guy Lambert ● 2340d

Guy, too much speculation. What we need is facts. Too much passing the buck, too.Yes, two of us have met, virtually, two officers for a briefing on Friday, 29th - long after the consultation started.  Many on this forum believe that local councillors will automatically have been told.  Not so.  Not only that but, imagine my surprise when, a few minutes after the briefing ended, I checked on this website and saw a story that announced aspects of the proposals we had not been told about in the briefing.  The press release must have been signed off before our briefing. We asked probing questions, listening for what might not be being said, and still didn't have the full facts. Surely we should at least have been given the same information as was in the press release? It's a bit like you not knowing whether access will be allowed to Glebe Street and, if so, what the entry restrictions are for.  The whole truth hasn't been revealed to us - or, it seems, to you.  Anyone can say they need access to Glebe Street and carry on driving through. So if, as you think, this will continue, what are the entry restrictions for?  Is it about stopping access where the shops end to the rest of Devonshire Road or Ingress Street?  I don't know who said access to Prince of Wales Terrace would be stopped.  I certainly didn't.  I did say, and I can still say, that no-one knows what restricted access means.  Even you don't know, Chiswick councillor or not, cabinet portfolio or not.  We - councillors, traders, residents, people who come here to work - just don't know.  Why aren't the proposals on the consultation map?  Why the secrecy?  If there is any misinformation it is because of the opacity of the council. Why not publish the facts?

Joanna Biddolph ● 2340d

Cllr Biddolph,Have you any comments about an email from the chair of the Turnham Green Ward Association that claimed (amongst another things) there were plans to:"Duke Road. No entry from Chiswick High Road (CHR); exit onto CHR only by left turn.Dukes Avenue. No exit onto CHR. "Where did this information come from? Was it your meeting with Hounslow officers?The Hounslow press release of 29 May says:"The team is also exploring further options to reduce through traffic around the Duke Road/Dukes Avenue area and on Fishers Lane.”Exploring to me implies that options are just being looked at. Can you explain why your ward association is presenting this as fact?This seems to be blatant misinformation.

Michael Robinson ● 2340d

Good luck with this question.Operation duck and cover usually happens about now.

Tony Smart ● 2340d

"I appreciate that may seem like insider information to some but it really isn't"Michael - in the interest of full disclosure, you have received awards from the Hounslow Cycling Campaign, a division of the London Cycling Campaign. The award may have been from LCC. Perhaps you are paid for your efforts.You had prior knowledge and discussion with LBH and TfL on CS9 as is demonstrated by the TfL report. Businesses along the route were never (let's make that NEVER) contacted at the same time you were. Instead it was during "consultation" which amounted to a box-ticking exercise. So, indeed, you had an inside track.So you get a seat while businesses and other residents get the scraps tossed from the table. And then we're told to like them. When we beg for more, all you and your buddies can do is rap our snouts.Whether you realize it or not (though I suspect you do) this perpetuates "us" vs "them" in an effort to trivialize the point of view of your "opponents." It does not give equal say to your neighbors. You create an adversary where there is none. And it is genetically related to the energy responsible for the current demonstrations. You're clever and smart enough to know that.

David Lesniak ● 2339d

>>Stop stirring. It won't be.<

Gordon McDonald ● 2339d

David,I’m certainly not paid for efforts to improve the street I live on and cycling in the local area.To correct your other mistakes, if you read the TfL consultation report it says “We met with a number of stakeholders to discuss the plans, update them on the scheme and discuss other aspects of the proposals. These meetings took place before and during the consultation.”Note the word “during”.The consultation was released on 21 Sep 17 and there was a meeting between TfL and reps from Hounslow, H&F, Ealing and London Cycling Campaign on 9 Oct 17 (upstairs in the Stonemasons Arms in Hammersmith if you want to know where).Of the 15 or 20 groups listed, I really don’t know who met with TfL before the consultation other than the Chiswick councillors because Cllr Hearn blogged about it.We certainly didn’t have the access to decision makers that you did, including, a personal tour of other London cycling infrastructure with the TfL project manager, the mayor’s walking and cycling commissioner and local MP.As to why your interactions with decision makers weren’t successful, I’d suggest some introspection on your own interpersonal skills, as evidenced by this and many other of your communications.

Michael Robinson ● 2339d

When I get briefed about something, I generally ask some follow up questions.  Joanna, what questions did you ask?

David McLoughlin ● 2339d

Gentlemen, the problem here is not the woman asking awkward questions but the men in authority not answering them. You can put your pitchforks away because there isn't going to be a dipping in the village pond or the pilloring of Jo Biddolph in the stocks. She isn't frightening the peasants she is trying to find out answers to questions that are causing people concern. That answers are not forthcoming inevitably make people believe they would contain something they aren't going to like.

Anita Blake ● 2339d

Ah, a disciple of Cllr Biddolph as Cllr Biddolph also sometimes implies sexism as a distraction from her own mistakes.The issue here isn’t Cllr Biddolph asking questions but spreading misinformation either in emails to traders or via her ward association.Not having an answer to a question isn’t justification for making things up.Cllr Biddolph has met with Hounslow officers and presumably did ask questions at those meetings. Maybe she just didn’t like the answers.

Michael Robinson ● 2339d

"Ah, a disciple of Cllr Biddolph as Cllr Biddolph also sometimes implies sexism as a distraction from her own mistakes."A truly shabby response to the poster, but not a surprise."Cllr Biddolph has met with Hounslow officers and presumably did ask questions at those meetings. Maybe she just didn’t like the answers."Maybe she just didn't get the answers!

Loraine Pemberton ● 2339d

Sorry Michael. Not a member of that particular coven. So let me get this straight - what you are now saying is there are answers to the questions that are being asked and Cllr Biddolph has been told them but is choosing not to tell us because she wants to spread fear and anxiety? Wouldn't it be a very clever way to undermine her fiendish plan by tell the rest of us what is being planned?

Anita Blake ● 2339d

"...she is trying to find out answers to questions that are causing people concern."No, it was left to Guy to reassure Paul at Capital Motors. I don't know why Councillor Biddolph was unwilling or unable to allay one of her constituents very reasonable concerns, but it wasn't because she was refused an answer.

Tom Pike ● 2339d

"The plan is not to make Devonshire two way but to make it access only - to Devonshire, PoW Terrace and I believe Glebe St."So - I take my car to Capital Motors, coming into Devonshire Road from CHR, turning right into PoW Terrace. When I collect it, I come out of PoW Terrace and turn right into Devonshire Road, following the one way signs, pass the main shopping section and turn left into Ingress Street. So precisely what is being changed under these proposals?  Just the removal of parking spaces, with no change to the traffic flow ? That hardly seems like it is going to improve the shopping experience.

Richard Greenhough ● 2339d

Er no, I'm simply saying that Cllr Biddolph had a meeting with officers and presumably asked questions.  If information from officers was different from the information Cllr Biddolph is spreading, there would appear to be a problem.

Michael Robinson ● 2339d

Yes, but if you carry on down Devonshire or turn into Ingress Street (without having made an access stop) you will have transgressed. Quite a lot of the traffic down Devonshire is people looking for a parking space in Devonshire or Brackley so that will be eliminated as will people heading for Fraser St etc.It would be preferable to close the section from PoW Terrace to Ingress Street more fully but the concern is the potential impact on Duke Road if it becomes the main access to Glebe estate from the High Road, especially given impending changes related to CW9.By taking much of the parking out and providing more space for people, and by reducing the traffic flow on Devonshire we should certainly improve the pedestrian experience and provide more space for social distancing and potentially retail/hospitality uses.Providing access for loading is also important for those retailers which sell heavier stuff and this should actually make this access easier.

Guy Lambert ● 2339d

GuyCorrect me if I'm wrong, but I dont think you replied about parking on Devonshire Road for those of us who don't hold Blue Badges but aren't  able enough and need to deliver and collect heavy items from say Top Hat and collect bulk food items etc from Chiswick Pets.What provision is being made for us ?Thank you

Loraine Pemberton ● 2339d

"Yes, but if you carry on down Devonshire or turn into Ingress Street (without having made an access stop) you will have transgressed."So, if I have collected my car from Capital Motors I am free to drive down Devonshire Road to Ingress Street, but if I have not, then I will be ticketed for driving down that same section of the public highway ? If that isn't a recipe for confusion I don't know what is. Presumably cameras will be set up to catch the unwary motorist. How long would my car have to be at CM to avoid the ticket ? There have been occasions in the past when I have paid them a short visit to get their opinion before booking the car in for a later date.  This begins to sound like one of LBH's money-making schemes, rather than any attempt to improve the ambience of the area.

Richard Greenhough ● 2339d

Have you considered a right in right out at POW and block the through movement?

Tony Smart ● 2339d

Loraine I thought I'd covered that by saying "Providing access for loading is also important for those retailers which sell heavier stuff and this should actually make this access easier."You will be allowed to stop for a short time in designated spaces to load/unload. Hope that's clear now.

Guy Lambert ● 2339d

Michael -Thanks for pointing out "before" and "during." No businesses were contacted before and during can be chalked up to our efforts at asking for a conversation. LBH and TfL never reached out. At that, when we asked your guru, Will Norman, who our TfL contact was once the original liaison departed, we never got an answer. Notable because in other areas like Kensington, there is a dedicated person to engage with the local community. As for my personal tour, it was three of us. Neither Ruth nor Will followed up with promises made. That has nothing to do with my gesture of trying to learn more about strategies and facilities, but more to do with their double-speak.Thanks though, as ever, for the personal dig. It proves my point about your tactics far more elegantly than my lacking skills ever could.

David Lesniak ● 2338d

"Ah, a disciple of Cllr Biddolph as Cllr Biddolph also sometimes implies sexism as a distraction from her own mistakes"Again, Michael, a more brilliant example of privileged white male than can ever be made by another. Let me ask you, what did you do as to engage with all local businesses as a member of the Hounslow Cycle campaign? Did you reach out? Did you schedule meetings? Or did you cherry pick one or two because you knew they'd be onside?If the latter, your engagement was agenda-driven, not community based. You can't build a community if you opt to shut out its parts.Which circles back to your response to Anita.

David Lesniak ● 2338d

London Cycling Campaign is a membership organisation and there are a large number based in Chiswick. It’s crass to suggest someone isn’t part of the community because they want better cycling infrastructure.Anyway, Cycleway 9 construction restarted yesterday and we are grateful for all your efforts that helped make it happen. Your interpersonal skills and rapport with decision makers were a big factor.

Michael Robinson ● 2338d