Forum Topic

Fingers crossed for the reopening of Fisher's Lane

Fantastic news about the likely reopening of Fisher's Lane as the next step of returning Chiswick to its former glory. Common sense seems to be prevailing, but we must keep the pressure on to ensure all these frightful and selfish schemes are ditched as soon as possible.

Mark Edwards ● 1982d69 Comments

That's funny I remember that those living along the route you like to take feel the same about the queueing traffic outside their homes that you seem to like sitting in to get to where you want to go.

Philippa Bond ● 1982d

Quite right Phillipa, this whole thing has been a nightmare for those living on Acton Lane and the roads off it.

Anita Blake ● 1982d

The notional reason now for the closure appears to be the East Acton to Chiswick safe cycle route which in principal is an excellent idea.However, although I cycle along Rusthall Avenue quite regularly I have never seen anyone using the new crossing to cycle over. The designated route directs you towards two blind corners one at the end of Rusthall Avenue and one by the underpass so I don't think it has met the test of making cyclists safer.The route will bring you to the junction of Fishers Lane and the High Road which has always been a hugely problematic junction but it was just about navigable. Now it is completely unusable for a cyclist except for going east as long as you don't try to join the cycleway.

Mark Evans ● 1981d

Hi Mark. I disagree. I live on Rusthall and our family use the build out bike zebra almost every day. Did it twice yesterday with my 11 year old in the rain. As for the Fisher’s Lane CHR being unnavigable I totally disagree. It’s an order of magnitude safer now. Yesterday the Bedford Park Bike Club crossed very easily 25 people with ages ranging from 8 to 77.

Edward Seaton ● 1981d

Edward,Do you think you are more confident and happy to use the build out zebra because you live nearby and are really familiar with it?

Andrew Jones ● 1981d

Possibly Andrew. But the arrows on the road are very clear, there are also brand new blue bike direction signs and the big difference is that the pavement has been built out at the corner making the turning circle for cars tighter and protecting anyone using the crossing. These little things make quite a big difference to safety.

Edward Seaton ● 1981d

Edward,I'm afraid that I have to strongly disagree on the Bike Crossing.I also live on Rusthall Avenue and probably use that crossing as a Pedestrian about 4 times a day - in the many month's that the Bike Crossing has been in place, I have seen a total of 4 cyclists - yes just 4, of whom I believe 3 may have been the same person anyway - using it. Can't say that I've ever seen multiple people (so possibly your family) using it at the same time - also, I have not seen a single cyclist use it as a crossing for months...What I have seen is any number of cyclists simply turning left at the bottom of Rusthall Avenue onto South Parade - so not using the crossing at all. I couldn't see if they were then using Fisher's Lane or simply continuing on South Parade at that point.As for the Fisher's Lane underpass, with all the recent rain, that has frequently been flooded (as has always been the case), making it very, very difficult for cyclists to use at all.In the mean time, the number of Pedestrians using the underpass far, far outnumbers the cyclists using it and yet nothing - yes absolutely nothing - has been done for these people, who, with the very narrow pathway, simply cannot socially distance at certain points - is it any wonder that many pedestrians have simply decided to walk in the road instead?

David Noades ● 1981d

Totally agree with your last two sentences, David.

Claire Moran ● 1981d

I use Fishers Lane all the time, incl today.In order to maintain social distancing, all it takes is a little patience and courtesy i.e. if there's already someone on the footpath coming towards you, just wait until they're through before proceeding.A smile or a nod when someone waits for you does no harm, either.

Richard Cathcart ● 1981d

Yes Richard - I totally agree.Except that now that everybody is out and about a lot more, there are frequently huge numbers of people walking through the underpass there, and whilst I (and many others) are happy to stand-aside and let somebody already on their way through past, unfortunately, many others just take the decision to follow them through in their 'slipstream', as it were, and you would just end up waiting for ever at busy times of day - meanwhile, the cyclists can just breeze on through without any such problems.You will remember that among the 'pedestrians' that use the underpass are a number of 'otherwise-abled' people who can neither cycle or drive - it was the complete failure of TfL to take these people into consideration in making their road-use changes in Bishopsgate that led to a Judge overturning the changes there...

David Noades ● 1981d

I assumed one of the reasons for 'closing' Fishers Lane was to allow pedestrians to avoid the narrow raised pavement by allowing them to walk in the road. Either that remains a good reason for keeping it 'closed' or, now Coronavirus restrictions are being lifted, the scheme should be removed.  It seems rather underhand for the authorities to now produce other justifications for keeping the scheme, like 'cycling quiet-ways' or 'encouraging traffic evaporation and modal shift' or other generalised 'making the world a better place' scenarios.

Peter Evans ● 1981d

Edward, I'm pleased you are using the crossing although the convention is on a normal zebra crossing is that you stop for a parent with a child so the extra markings make little difference. Anyone who ignored the convention before is still going to ignore it now.It does seem to me to be shoehorned in as part of an attempt to make out there is an East Acton to Chiswick route. My children are older but I'd have been reluctant to take them on the designated routes because of the two blind corners mentioned before. It is a shame that things like better crossings for cyclists coming out of Southfield Park onto Southfield Road weren't prioritised. They do seem to be on the plan.I'm sorry but if you think the CHR/Fisher's Lane junction is safer you are living in a parallel universe and I sincerely hope you don't take your children with you when you use it. Crossing the High Road there for years and it is has never been something that you can negotiate casually but after just two attempts I vowed never to use it again in its current configuration. The first time an eastbound cyclist was reluctant to give way as I attempted to join the cycleway leaving me stranded in the main traffic lane. The second time a frustrated driver accelerated around a bus at the bus stop requiring me to move quickly across the road to avoid being hit. It's a complete mess.

Mark Evans ● 1981d

Agree about Southfield Playing Fields. Cyclists just come out of the park and continue on the pavement.

Claire Moran ● 1981d

Unless I'm mistaken I believe that all the local road measures (apart from LTNs) introduced under emergency covid-19 legislation were designed specifically to facilitate 2 metre social distancing. Encouraging cycling and walking were also part of the plan as we were told not to use public transport unless absolutely necessary. It would be a brave person who claimed the pandemic is over but buses and tubes are getting back to normal and the very fact of removing the restrictions in Turnham Green Terrace shows that Hounslow council has taken the view that they are no longer necessary. If any of the remaining measures are to be retained they should be consulted on and justified in the traditional manner.

Bruce Hammal ● 1981d

I am in 2 minds on this one.Ever since it was proposed to close Fisher's Lane I have been in favour of the closure if only on safety grounds, it has always seemed to me to be accident waiting to happen and encouraging people to use that route to access CHR means using the junction with CHR which has always been dangerous.  Personally I would have no traffic except emergency vehicles.On the other hand the evidence is that LTNs work best when there is strong support from within the community - and in this case the strongest support, by a very large margin, is to re-open Fisher's Lane.Reluctantly I suppose this is a case where the clear majority should set the rules

Justin Stephenson ● 1981d

A number have people have commented on how dangerous the junction of Fishers Lane is with CHR, but as I have mentioned previously in a post, that particularly junction is still open to cars, it is only the underpass that is closed.You can drive along Dolman Road and turn onto the High Road, and also along Chiswick Common Road. The problem is the underpass provides a valuable route to these roads and the shops on this part of CHR, that otherwise would require a journey along Acton Lane or to TGT, hence the increase in traffic on these roads.Also, again as mentioned by many others, it is not safe to walk on the road going through the underpass, so closing it has no real benefit, particularly now certain measures are being relaxed. Hence the majority of people wanting it reopened.

Mark Edwards ● 1981d

A clinical person (like me) might think a fair proportion of these measures were rushed through to grab a grant and to be seen to be doing something. Anything.

Adrian Irving ● 1981d

"Personally I would have no traffic except emergency vehicles.".I demand the retention of the 272 bus! From unpromising beginnings, (I was one of those protesting against its route down Emlyn Road) as it turns out this "back roads" route between Grove Park and White City/Shepherd's Bush is incredibly useful (especially for Hammersmith Hospital). It serves otherwise neglected streets and mostly avoids the High Road, which is good. For this reason alone Fishers Lane can never be traffic-free. I think it should be possible to have a one-way at a time system through the pinch point under the bridge, rather than relying on people's common sense, which is often seriously lacking.

Bruce Hammal ● 1981d

Justin, more like a noisy minority, who want to maintain their right to drive 300 meters for a shop.

Carl Wynne ● 1981d

"Unpromising beginnings" - Indeed!In its early days there were plenty of times when I cursed this bus as I could have walked from Wood Lane to Chiswick faster than the time I spent waiting for a 272 naively believing that its timetable might bear some resemblance to reality!The various bus tracker apps (and increase in frequency) changed all that.

Andrew Jones ● 1981d

Carl, whatever the rights or wrongs of reopening, why do you claim it's a minority?

Bruce Hammal ● 1981d

Because it is.

Carl Wynne ● 1981d

I'm afraid you'll have to do better than that! I thought feedback to the Councils had been massively against the closure.

Bruce Hammal ● 1981d

Exactly, Bruce. But they can't do any better.

Claire Moran ● 1981d

I'm afraid that I will do as I like. Anti safer streets people are a noisy minority, One%Chiswick even more so.

Carl Wynne ● 1981d

Sir, I bow to your flawless argument of the case. Just for the record though:"The Council had 1,124 responses on the change at Fisher’s Lane, closing it under the railway bridge to vehicular traffic except buses. An overwhelming 88% strongly opposed it, with only 7% strong supporting it. 84% said they thought it should be stopped or reversed immediately."

Bruce Hammal ● 1981d

Fishers lane is NOT about shopping it’s connects local residents north of the High Road otherwise we have to drive up to 30 mins due to traffic congestion to get to the same spot in 5 mins if fishers lane is open. It’s really simple keep traffic moving reduce congestion reduce pollution. Many of the LTNs are actually creating gridlock and new rat runs in what was quiet residential streets. Residents should be consulted  before any of our money is spent!

Jayne Thorburn ● 1981d

Remind me Bruce, what's the population of Chiswick, both Hounslow and Ealing parts? Let's check those %.

Carl Wynne ● 1981d

Jayne, I fear you'll find that you're a member of the noisy minority!Oh, by the way, all that congestion? It doesn't exist.

Bruce Hammal ● 1981d

Hi Mark,We don't live in a parallel universe, but seem to have different views on aspects of this one. Fair enough.To me the Fisher's Lane/ High Road junction is very much safer on a bike. The three reasons for this are1. Reduced traffic volumes on Fishers meaning you don't have the two-by-two queue of cars on Fisher's waiting to turn onto CHR. The cars used to regularly encroach into the painted cycle filter on the left, and filtering in the past sometimes quite scary.2. Reduction of CHR from three to two lanes, making the turn much safer and more predictable, especially when going right. If a bus stops at the bus stop, the traffic behind is held.3. Dukes Road being No Entry and left turn exit only, which eliminates the risk from the dangerous staggered junction completely.We can wait for that data which I think will show a reduced number of crashes and injured people.

Edward Seaton ● 1981d

Irrelevant Captain. If you don't vote you've got no right to complain about the result. If all those who you claim support this closure had bothered  to register their opinion there might have been a different outcome.Anyway we were always assured it was a temporary measure and subject to review at which point all arguments and factors will be taken into proper account. You seem to have been under the impression that it was there for good with no further questions asked. You can't change the rules half way through.

Bruce Hammal ● 1981d

The population Bruce? If you have lived in Chiswick for any length of time, which I believe you have, you'll know that the High Road is and always was, often congested.

Carl Wynne ● 1981d

Bruce sadly I end up sitting in the congestion that doesn’t exist ha! Closing fishers lane has impacted us massively we have to allow 30 mins more to do the same journey due to the closure it is simply mad to close it. Happy to be in the noisy gang and will continue to be a member 😂😂😂

Jayne Thorburn ● 1981d

Never mind Bruce, better luck next time.

Carl Wynne ● 1981d

Yes Carl, I have lived in Chiswick for over 30 years and rarely seen the level of congestion which is becoming a constant on the High Road and TGT. So thankfully common sense and democracy will prevail and fishers lane will be reopened. Traffic levels are still not back to normal levels so it will only get worse locals should be able to use local roads.

Jayne Thorburn ● 1981d

It's well known that OneChiswick organised opposition to active travel measures and encouraged negative responses. They say they are anti-cycling, yet oppose every local safe cycling measure, and are deeply unpleasant towards people expressing support for safe cycling.The measures were introduced under Experimental Traffic Orders. The statutory consultation process is not a referendum. It requires only the objections to be considered. I didn't feed back because I know this and support the schemes, and an expression of support would have been superfluous to the process. It tends to be angry opponents of changes who make the most fuss about them.

Edward Seaton ● 1981d

type corrected..It's well known that OneChiswick organised opposition to active travel measures and encouraged negative responses. They say they are NOT anti-cycling, yet oppose every local safe cycling measure, and are deeply unpleasant towards people expressing support for safe cycling.The measures were introduced under Experimental Traffic Orders. The statutory consultation process is not a referendum. It requires only the objections to be considered. I didn't feed back because I know this and support the schemes, and an expression of support would have been superfluous to the process. It tends to be angry opponents of changes who make the most fuss about them.

Edward Seaton ● 1981d

I'll leave you boys to it. I think this is heading in a familiar direction and there might just be something on Netflix I haven't seen yet.See you at the barricades.

Bruce Hammal ● 1981d

:) Well said, Bruce, I will be there too :)

Claire Moran ● 1981d

Wrong, as usual, Carl.  Why do you live in Chiswick when you disagree with the vast majority on just about everything?

Claire Moran ● 1981d

Because most people are better than you.

Carl Wynne ● 1981d

Ugh. Neanderthal response. Sorry, neanderthals - you are better than that.

Claire Moran ● 1981d

I've no interest in getting into a boring spat with you. Go and find somebody else to row with.

Carl Wynne ● 1981d

"deeply unpleasant towards people"This sounds just like you, Ed, when you respond to anyone daring to challenge these measures. To be fair, it dovetails nicely with Tom's recent mention of DARVO tactics used by many of you.Don't get me started on Paul's boycotting and his advocacy for permits in some LTNs but, by God, not in others especially if he doesn't live there.

David Lesniak ● 1981d

I'm really struggling to work out how any cyclist could find the new configuration at the Fishers Lane junction safer. It has managed not to deal with most of the existing problems and introduce a whole series of new ones. The no right turn out of Dukes Road is helpful and that should be retained but the rest of it has made a bad situation worse. The reduction of traffic out of Fisher's Lane hasn't helped. Previously, if I was turning right I would position myself on the left hand side of a car doing the same turn. Doing this turn without a car in company makes it far less likely that traffic going either way will let you merge either because they don't see you or don't want to let you in. Ironically it is cyclists travelling eastbound who are the least likely to let you start to cross. In congested traffic there is no guarantee that westbound traffic will let you merge even if you are halfway across the eastbound lane. Although Fisher's Lane has fewer vehicles CHR is consistently more congested which means more weaving through cars, vans, buses and lorries all the time on the lookout for a Deliveroo moped rider doing the same at speed. The sling-shotting around buses picking up passengers at the bus stop is also a major issue. Once the driver commits to overtaking they are very reluctant to slow down and you have to move pretty sharpish to get out of their way. It is just too tricky to join the cycleway at this point particularly if your view is obscured by a bus so I started remaining in the general traffic lane when turning right. This had the benefit of avoiding the interminable red light phase for cyclists at the Dukes Avenue junction. Ironically the nearest thing I came to a collision was when I was nearly wiped out by another cyclist going through the red light as I turned left into Dukes Avenue from the main traffic lane. I'm now avoiding using Fisher's Lane altogether, even though it is often the most direct route. It isn't worth the risk of saving a few minutes.

Andrew OSullivan ● 1980d

Just a question:Given all the talk of signage and bad design, wouldn't it make sense to simply ban cyclists at this junction to force them to use a safer route? A sign with a cycle and the big red slash should do the trick.

David Lesniak ● 1980d

Don't think they would do that but it is moot as far as I am concerned because I've banned myself. The best solution in my view would be to offer an alternative by banning the right turn from Dolman Road and reversing the direction of Clifton Gardens plus adding a contraflow cycle lane connecting Fisher's Lane to Clifton Gardens. The junction with CHR could then be properly integrated with the cycleway if it is still there.

Andrew OSullivan ● 1980d

Back to the subject, there's no point opening Fishers Lane as we're not supposed to travel into or out of Hounslow.

Peter Evans ● 1980d

I thought those signs about checkpoints were a joke but it appears not!

Francis Rowe ● 1980d

It's not a minority - in fact it is at least an 88% majority. Hence the probability it will be opened again soon. And not before time.I for one am very much looking forward to driving 30 meters to do a shop, rather than walk...

Mark Edwards ● 1980d

Mark, your ass will get fat. 

John Hall ● 1980d

Mark, your ass will get fat. 

John Hall ● 1980d

What a nice post. So great he posted it twice. Ugh.

Claire Moran ● 1980d

Are donkeys allowed in Fishers Lane?

Bruce Hammal ● 1980d

Not sure Bruce but the last time I looked you could use a kayak.

Adrian Irving ● 1979d

On the whole 'driving to the shops thing', we've stopped doing the 'big shop' at Sainsbury's as we used to because more often than not you get stuck in a queue on Acton Lane. If there is one advantage to the closure it has led to us discovering more about Acton particularly Churchfield Road. You can park nearby for free, load up your shopping and then go for a coffee. There are lots of very interesting food shops once you know where to look and you realise how expensive Sainsbury's can be.You could argue that Ealing Council may feel the economic benefits to Acton businesses outweigh the local opposition to the closure. Either way I will probably permanently shift to doing more shopping in Acton.I still walk to the shops in Chiswick regularly but it is mainly now to go to the stalls to get fresh produce which is better here than in Acton but even those trips are blighted by South Parade being a much busier road than it used to be.

Anita Blake ● 1978d

More signage being installed today for Fishers Lane at South Parade. It appears that the small vocal minority has not managed to put forward a compelling argument against this scheme in the consultation during the interim review period. What a surprise.

Paul Campbell ● 1978d

Mark is a very lazy sod !

Chris Vessey ● 1978d

I've got the answer. Let's get all these damn cars and bikes and whatnot off the streets of Chiswick and put them to the purpose God designed them for. https://youtu.be/06Dx4KZgktA

Bruce Hammal ● 1978d

'It appears that the small vocal minority has not managed to put forward a compelling argument against this scheme in the consultation during the interim review period.'Paul, I'm confused now I thought you were in favour of the restrictions?

Anita Blake ● 1977d

That's OK Anita. I've noticed that Chiswick's anti-safer streets cmapiagners are easily confused.Yes I am one of the 44,000 Chiswick residents who did not register any objection to the scheme during the six month consultation period. You can call us the 98% if you like :)

Paul Campbell ● 1977d

Seriously?

Anita Blake ● 1977d

Oh yes very serious. Did you know that fewer people objected to the Fishers Lane scheme than voted for Ruth Mayorcas in the last Turnham Green Ward election? 227 fewer to be precise. But it would be harsh to criticise Chiswick's anti-safer streets campaigners for their innumeracy when they have so many other flaws to contend with.

Paul Campbell ● 1977d

Again. Seriously?

Anita Blake ● 1977d

Hooray - apathy rules!

Bruce Hammal ● 1977d

When I walked by a couple of days ago on the north side I noticed that the sign was partly obscured by a tree coming into leaf.No doubt all part of a cunning plan.Fiendish swine!

Adrian Irving ● 1977d

Sadly, Anita, Paulo is serious.Per Bruce's comment about apathy, he's absolutely correct.With people like Paulo badgering ad nauseum many people will be turned off from voting. It's a ploy. To wear people down to the point they don't care. How did he put it..."Yes I am one of the 44,000 Chiswick residents who did not register any objection to the scheme during the six month consultation period. You can call us the 98% if you like :)" And he tossed in that adorbs emoji, to boot.He's anti-community, anti-Chiswick and anti-business. Not sure why. Maybe his bestie Ronnie can shed some light on that one.

David Lesniak ● 1977d

Maybe, just maybe the vast majority of the 44,000 people never use  Fishers Lane and therefore would have no reason to object. I being one of them.Possibly, just possibly the folk that did object use it on a regular basis.How many voted on the the basis they hate the idea of safer streets we will never know.

Adrian Irving ● 1977d

If I recall the invitation was for residents to register all opinions. Limited voiced opposition does not equate to an abundance of unspoken support.To ressurect poor old Edmund Burke again - “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

Bruce Hammal ● 1977d