Forum Topic

Urban Movement

What weight will the report being submitted to Hounslow carry? A few people chatting on a forum cannot mirror the views of the majority of residents and retailers, and we have already witnessed the mayhem and distress caused by the disastrous closure of Turnham Green Terrace, Fishers Lane and Devonshire Road by people who don't know the area. Urban Movement work with the London Cycling Campaign and have a very clear agenda. Plans to fundamentally change Chiswick have been in the making for many years, but residents and retailers appear to have been unaware of them. It's important for the town's future that people are more aware and engaged when plans are proposed. Phase 1 shows pavement widening, more loading restrictions and no reinstatement of parking for shoppers. Phase 2 shows the re-routing of the E3 to Fishers Lane, making the bus a single decker and narrowing Turnham Green Terrace to a single lane. No-one knows what London will look like post pandemic but public transport will continue to be vital for the majority. Residents should get involved now, and have their say.

Mandy Waters ● 2138d28 Comments

Whatever the associations of the Urban Movement, the report seemed to me refreshingly undogmatic. The workshop has concluded that access restrictions are a bad idea and an attempt has been made to retain as much parking as possible. However, if you are going to widen pavements then there isn't really much option to lose parking spaces and decrease the number of loading bays. I don't know how many local retailers were involved in the workshop but it is said at the outset that their interests are paramount. The implementation of the plan would therefore be dependent on alternative parking provision being provided, even to the extent of building a multi-stoery car park as they have done in Brentford.There are a number of possible quibbles on the CGI images presented with the report. I can't see how a taxi rank could be retained outside the station with widened pavements and a zebra crossing added. Also the loss of the bay in front of the station might be something we come to regret if it was ever made fully accessible as it would no longer be possible to drop off people with mobility issues.The report should carry significant weight as people with expertise in the field have spent a lot of time and effort drawing it up. However, it doesn't claim to provide an 'oven ready' solution and states rather it is a basis for further discussion.

Mark Evans ● 2137d

MandyDoesn’t it seem strange that groups of people with various names are emerging from the depths of Bedford Park.If so they don’t represent the majority of Chiswick people, who only get to know about such plans if they are ever passed by the local council.

Bernard Allen ● 2137d

At least the want us to tinker with their grand LCC plans...“ Create a brief for every scheme and consider its purposeAssemble a team not just of engineers and designers but of engagement and communication experts too.Collect lots of data on the areaTalk to residents and businesses about their aspirations, likes and dislikes regarding their areaCreate scheme principles based in evidence and policyGive the public optionsLet the public speak, tinker and debateListen and reflect the public’s views in the final schemeLearn as you go and monitor the scheme for benefits and negativesFix mistakes, roll out more schemes, faster”https://www.lcc.org.uk/articles/lcc-and-urban-movement-launch-new-engagement-and-consultation-guide

Russell Pearson ● 2137d

Read the report before leaping to conclusions. A past association between the Urban Movement and the LCC would only be relevant if this was a blinkered design based on the principle that cycling was paramount. It isn't and accepts as a starting principle something that most of us would agree is correct, that TGT needs to remain open for traffic.These are very complex issues and there is no silver bullet answer. Any change is going to have negative impacts for some but intelligent, well-informed proposals like this will help us get closer to the best possible solution.I don't necessarily agree with the reports recommendations but it is an honest, undogmatic attempt to change the way that TGT operates because it clearly has potential to be much better. The authors deserve credit for putting retailers at the top of the priority list for the impacts of the scheme. The council didn't even bother to warn them what they had planned.

Mark Evans ● 2137d

Apparently they plan to reroute the E3 bus. They only have two real options for E3 buses coming from the Acton direction. (1) to send them straight down Acton Lane instead of going along Southfield Road, which would mean anyone living around the Southfield Road/top of the Avenue would have quite a long trek to get to the bus stop as well as a long walk to the centre of Chiswick or (2) to send it down The Avenue as now but then turn right onto South Parade,joining the High Road by the Packhorse, adding to the congestion and pollution of South Parade.  Of course, that won't matter to those involved in this plan who live in Bedford Park as TGT is a very short walk indeed for them. Or they could get the E3 t, as now, go down the Avenue but then turn left along Bath Road and then right and back onto the High Road but that would be an enormous detour. A final but unlikely option is persuading TFL to make them all single deckers so they can get under the Fisher's Lane Bridge.  Why don't they just put TGT back the way it was before?  It was fine.

Claire Moran ● 2137d

The idea of rerouting the E3 was for the second phase of changes and Peter Murray acknowledges that it would need to switch to single decker buses. This is extremely unlikely to ever happen.Just because the changes made on the road recently have been ill-thought out and counter-productive doesn't mean all change is bad. Everyone can agree the road could be made better - getting rid of some of the unnecessary street furniture would be a start.

Mark Evans ● 2137d

One takeaway from the report for me was the need for parking. If it is to be taken away, then it should be given back elsewhere. So much so that a multi-level structure was mentioned.This is something I have advocated many times yet received endless drubbings for as a result. So given this workshop had a very vocal cycle campaigner and the LCC behind it, I wonder if they get drubbed or is the issue, at long last, on the table where it belongs?

David Lesniak ● 2137d

So how much will all this cost? Are we not going to be broke post pandemic and after the road closures are reversed? Why are these people looking to make changes that aren’t really necessary at such an inappropriate time? We can’t even get the streets cleaned or deal with everyday stuff like fly tipping. Are they drumming up business.

Maggie Dodge ● 2137d

Assuming TGT is not to be 'closed' again, to reduce traffic along it, dare I suggest that access from TGT to Chiswick Common Road and Windmill Road could be opened up to take some traffic from TGT itself, which could then potentially become one way and thus more easily accommodate the wider pavements and pedestrian space that people seem to yearn for.

Peter Evans ● 2137d

Which people year for this exactly.

Maggie Dodge ● 2137d

for year read yearn

Maggie Dodge ● 2137d

As all of the filthy rich residents of Bedford Park are coming up with Ideas to stuff the rest of Chiswick.Maybe the Acton Green side could be pulled down to make way for a supper market complex.The Bath Road side could be pulled down to make way for the multi story car park.Like reusing the old railway line that runs beside Firestone in Brentford. No one ever mentions the old railway line that ran across Bath Road and into a goods yard on the Chiswick high road.It would be a rather large investment in reinstating the infrastructure, but much better than than the transport system that's being created now.

Bernard Allen ● 2137d

I remember when you could access Windmill Road from TGT.  I think they closed it as so many cars went up and down Eliot and Windmill Roads and along by the common.  Probably the first attempt at an LTN in Chiswick!  The road there is quite narrow with parking all along it.

Claire Moran ● 2137d

Yes, it is quite unsuitable for increased traffic. It is a very good way for a cyclist to avoid the busy junction at the south end of Turnham Green Terrace and I often use that route. Some signage indicating that it is part of cycling route would improve things for everyone.

Anita Blake ● 2136d

I listened in to the webinar presenting the report. During the Q&A someone said said there should be a multi-story car park at Sainsburys.  The question was asked how busy this car park was at the moment.  The feedback was that it wasn't actually that busy.The diagram in the report shows 25 car parking spaces along TGT so I don't think a multi-storey car park would be needed to accommodate those....

Michael Robinson ● 2136d

That would be because of the time limit when parking at Sainsburys.

Janice Evans ● 2136d

Michael, I have been regularly dropping off stuff at the recycling bins at the far end of the car park as part of an effort to reduce clutter. This, as you may be aware, is right at the far end away from the store so the last place people will park. For the last six weeks or so, even during the week, there have been a limited number of spaces at this end of the park indicating it is close to full.I can assure you therefore that the Sainsbury's car park is consistently very busy.

Anita Blake ● 2136d

It's not suitable car park for shoppers visiting Chiswick,

Janice Evans ● 2136d

Unfortunately, Michael, you are nothing more than a mere cycling campaigner.Those involved in the seminar are trained professionals involved in that art and technique of urban planning, design and development. Something you know nothing about as you have demonstrated repeatedly over the years.Maybe Hounslow Cycling didn't get the memo from London Cycling with regard to the issues put forth in the workshop.

David Lesniak ● 2136d

Why not! A good place to build a multi story car park. The physically fit would have no trouble reaching most parts of the high road.A motoblity scheme could be set up to enable the lest able to get around, and the blue badge holders can park near to the shores in Disable bays.That doesn’t cover everyone that uses the high road, but it’s a starting point

Bernard Allen ● 2136d

Bernard, sorry never made that clear, I don't think it suitable as it is.  A multi-storey would be the answer.

Janice Evans ● 2136d

Michael is typical of the cycling lobby, writes whatever he thinks will achieve his aim. Whether it makes sense or is true is neither here nor there.

Maggie Dodge ● 2136d

Michael is reporting what was said at the workshop which has been recorded if you are disputing his account.That the feedback was from a limited number of people and clearly mistaken, in my view, is another matter.

Mark Evans ● 2136d

You should look at the stats for the use of Turnham Green station.  I believe it is three times as much as some of the other nearby stations.  It has poor access with those steep steps and no lift.  There has been for a long time a campaign by Chiswick residents for the Piccadilly Line to stop there much more than just the few times that it does now.

Philippa Bond ● 2136d

The more people who watch/listen to the recording of the workshop the better.

Philippa Bond ● 2136d

I agree with Bernard.  It does not have to be enormous tall and ugly like the Brentford one.  If you have to have car parks I'd prefer them to be underground and out of sight so that the shops, cinemas, theatres and restaurants etc feature on a main street and behind them some of the access needed for services to them (instead of waste and deliveries and collections having to be on the main street).  Blue badgers should be able to park nearer to the supermarket or in any parking closer to the other shops they choose to visit.  Motability too.Really safe cycle parking is also necessary as I remember several posts about people having their bikes stolen from Sainsbury's.  This is often cited as a reason for not stopping.  Many cyclists have baskets or crates on the front of their bikes and many pedestrians know how much they can carry and cyclists how much they can take on their bike.  If there was quicker pedestrian access to the tube station - Chiswick Park - that would also help commuters.The danger could be attracting too many cars into the area when the idea for years has been to keep the numbers down as there isn't enough road space.  For special occasions eg the markets a school car park has been used.I suppose however that developers will be trying to get even more titchy apartments in with no parking as they make more money out of numerous apartments.  I thought it was family homes that were in short supply.

Philippa Bond ● 2136d

The problem is not too many cars coming into Chiswick from nearby areas so people can shop, go to restaurants etc.  They should be welcomed.  The problem is that Chiswick is, and always has been, a stop on the way to the West - Heathrow and beyond (including Windsor Castle) - via the A4 and M4. Traffic on the High Road would drop enormously if it were only local traffic and traffic from immediately surrounding areas rather than through traffic.  And if R3 goes ahead it will be much, much worse.

Claire Moran ● 2136d

I did try Phillipa but it is very long!It was pleasing to hear that they aren't adhering to the bonkers view that making it easy to drive and park doesn't help local retailers. Hounslow Council also have ditched that dogma apparently with the approval of a multi-storey in Brentford. With the Empire House development cracking on it may not be long before we hear what is going to happen to the Sainsbury's site and the opportunity must be taken here to enhance and increase parking availability in Chiswick. A multi-storey could replicate the number of spaces in the existing car park and, if more reasonable charges for longer stays were possible, that would be a substantial boost to local retail.The alternative nightmare scenario in which the car park is wholly taken up with new flats would end any prospect of a proper recovery for the town centre.Even if a multi-storey car park was available at the Sainsbury's site, which is really the only place it could go, the authors of this report are wrong to suggest it would represent a viable alternative to on road parking on Turnham Green Terrace. It is simply too far away.The council have shown with their attitude to the ad sign near the Old Packhorse that they are now indifferent to social distancing measures and they consider pavement space offered there, which is greater than on Turnham Green Terrace as being okay. Therefore now is surely the time to return the parking provision on Turnham Green Terrace to what it was previously.

Francis Rowe ● 2135d