Forum Topic

I'm happy to take your word for it, Bill. But you should also take my word that there were roadworks with queues a couple of weeks earlier at the same time. It is odd that the driver of the van decided to make an illegal u turn yards before the roundabout, especially as your other photo, I presume taken at a similar time, shows the route ahead on Wellesley Road was relatively clear. But drivers don't always make rational decisions.In fact your photos far from indicating all the roads were gridlocked rather show tailbacks to the bottom of Sutton Lane North, eastbound on Wellesley Road and westbound on Heathfield Terrace. I hope you'd agree that's not a recent phenomenon, whether or not the bus gate has made it worse.I've lived in Chiswick for over 20 years, including five years on Wellesley Road. I wish they'd closed it off earlier at the west end as traffic would speed down it as a short cut to the A4/M4. When traffic was bad on the South Circular it would back up to the roundabout at Brooks Road, and sometimes beyond. Now a good portion of that traffic will be heading to the A4 earlier rather than passing through the streets of Chiswick.Overall, the evidence indicates less traffic is coming off the A4 and driving through Chiswick, both east and westbound. We agree there's less flow on the High Road, and little sign of displacement to South Parade, the only parallel alternative and close to where I now live. There's also evidence of a modal shift away from cars to active transport. As a resident of Chiswick, these are all encouraging trends in the right direction.

Tom Pike ● 1954d

No problem, Bill. As I said, I accept that you took the photo after the roadworks were finished once you made that clear, and that's why I asked for confirmation that you took the picture. You were clearly unaware that there had been roadworks at that spot a couple of weeks earlier, and those roadworks undoubtedly caused queues at the time - I was in one! But I was at fault for assumming that what I saw was the result of those previous roadworks, and I'm happy to apologise to you and the Councillor for my mistake. And if you think I have not acknowledged previous errors, please point them out.Thanks for confirming that "all the traffic queueing was trying to get up Sutton Lane North to reach Acton Lane." What you are describing is not displacement of traffic from the High Road, but delays in traffic crossing the High Road at Acton Lane/Sutton Lane North, which is rather different to what is described in the Councillor's blog. But he is correct that prioritising bus travel down the High Road is leading to increased delays for other traffic. Whatever the road layout, that will always be a trade to make.The A4 carries most of the east-west traffic through Chiswick. The only other two routes now are along the High Road and South Parade. Wellesley Road was an alternative westbound route, but that is no longer available. We know pollution and therefore very likely traffic is down on the High Road. We also know that there has not been a significant increase in traffic along South Parade, judging by bus travel times of the 94 in the interim StreetSpace report. Taken together, that provides reasonable evidence that the A4 is carrying a larger proportion of the through traffic across Chiswick. The traffic counts will be able to confirm this.

Tom Pike ● 1954d

"Can someone please explain to me rationally why it was a good  idea to get rid of the bus lane in Chiswick when we were all encouraged to to get out of our cars and use public transport."Good question.  We hear a lot about how the removal of the bus lane has severely impacted bus speeds and increased congestion.  The short answer is that there was no bus lane on Chiswick High Road - certainly not contiguous East / West dedicated bus lanes.There were some short stretches around the bus stops, but if you ever got stuck, as I regularly did (mostly on Friday evenings), on a bus going Westbound to the point where you had to bail out, you'd know that it was traffic blocking the way and not other buses or cyclists.It was better going Eastbound - but going Westbound the cycle lane did not take over an existing bus lane.What did the Cycle Lane directly replace on the Westbound route?- Chiswick Lane (Outsider Tart) to Cranbrook Road - A cycle lane- Crabrook Road to Brackley Road (Metro Bank) - Parking spaces, Bus Stop (no lane) and Cycle Lane- Brackley Road to Old Market Place - Cycle Lane and Carriageway- Old Market Place (level with George V) to Linden Gardens - Bus Lane- Linden Gardens to Heathfield Terrace - Carriage way and a bus stopThe cycle lane largely replaced carriageway and parking on the route of the old cycle lane.  It also removed dedicated bus zones on the Eastbound route, and you can go on Streetview to see that.Has the loss of bus only zones or carriageway impacted bus speeds?  I looked up data for the 237 bus:https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/buses-performance-data#on-this-page-4237 Bus Speeds Average All Times / Peak Time 0700-1000 Mon-Fri:May 2021: 9.4mph / 8.4mphMay 2020: 11.9mph / 12.3mphMay 2019: 8.9mph / 8.1mphMay 2018: 9.3mph / 8.3mphMay 2017: 9.0mph / 8.0mphThis is summary data for the full route and not just CHR - I'm sure other people have more detailed info they can share.  It doesn't appear to me that bus speeds have changed significantly (yet) since the introduction of the temporary cycle lane.

Ed Saper ● 1953d

Tom, I am grateful for the apology. To note, I was fully aware of the roadworks, I did not see any relevance to an event nearly a month ago to what happened last week. Its odd again you 'assume' that I was not and seemed so determined to disprove photographic evidence.The second point is jibberish. Of course its traffic displaced from other routes, primarly the High Road and also other routes to the north of Chiswick, namely via Fishers Lane and TGT. The flow of traffic off the western end of CHR and onto Wellesley can be seen every morning, as lots of cars and even lorries avoid CHR in favour of Wellesley and then SLN. The bus gate and new light phasing often let as few as 5-6 vehicles through each green phase. Of course people avoid this route. The buses coped perfectly fine with the Acton Lane junction, the bus gate is not about bus priority but stopping non bus traffic. The trade off is preventing total gridlock for vehicles on the central stretch of the High Road, versus more congestion and pollution on the roads to the west of Chiswick.This is exactly what the councillor has described. Why do you continue to make stuff up when local residents are relating what they see on a daily basis. One reason the A4 may be carrying a larger proportion of traffic is that the remaining routes through Chiswick are at capacity, hence the queues shown in the photographs. A traffic count up SLN whould show little 'traffic' at that point, given the log jam. Please stop making up silly explanations  to meet your fixed views. We cannot have a sensible debate with someone who makes such incorrect statements.We have no idea of traffic flows on South Parade, bus travel times from last year tell us nothing. A good proportion of the traffic going north on Acton Lane head up Bollo, then another load carries on north on Acton Lane at the Duke of Sussex. The remainder carries on along South Parade. So only a proportion of initial Acton Lane traffic reaches South Parade, and with no major traffic lights or choke points,  there would be no eastbound delays for buses.

Bill George ● 1953d

Paul isn't literally riding up and down CHR to inflate the counts.(That's not how the counts are done anyway.)I've just visited his Twitter page and the pinned tweet reads:"Shocking scenes of terrible devastation caused by Hounslow Council’s traffic management scheme on Devonshire Road, Chiswick. Imagine how much better this would look filled with parked cars. #ChiswickChaos"https://twitter.com/PauloCampbell/status/1388494192813432835However, the short video does not show "terrible devastation".  Paul is making the point that the road looks better without cars.  He is not advocating for more parking or traffic.The satire is that there are often hyperbolic claims that Chiswick has been devastated - even "raped" - by the various changes, but that often isn't the case.I do get that sometimes subtle satire can be missed by people skimming posts and not keeping track of who said what and when.  However, in the case of Paul's claim to "Own a car but only to troll local bike haters", I don't think there is much subtlety there.  He obviously doesn't own a car solely to annoy people who hate cyclists - that is absurd.  When Paul suggests that Beverley Road be opened up to traffic, again he is using satire to make the point that all the arguments against LTNs introduced since 2020 are equally valid against those introduced before that date.That's an argument that the anti-LTN crowd have not really engaged with because it is quite a flaw.  The only coherent response I've seen is that the pre-2020 LTNs were introduced with more consultation or with greater support among the people impacted.Not a strong argument, because the main thrust of the antis is that every LTN displaces traffic from those roads onto other roads, so it doesn't matter if those who live in the road support it or were consulted.  Use of satire and humour (or at least attempts to do so!) help make this forum more engaging and interesting.  I don't think we want or need everything said to be exactly literal.

Ed Saper ● 1953d

TfL's concern will be the flow of traffic eastbound not westbound so they would have had no problems with the restrictions at the end of Wellesley Road or Stile Hall Gardens. As far as I can tell, these have had no meaningful impact on westbound queues out of CHR and onto Chiswick Roundabout anyway.As I tried to explain previously their main concern will be the danger of eastbound queues on CHR snagging up Chiswick Roundabout. I am unaware of this happening yet but the queues are getting close and traffic levels will rise more from this point. It is not unreasonable therefore to expect that at some point they will reach the roundabout and the reason will be the throttling of traffic at the Acton Lane bus gate.I'm sorry that you find my use of the phrase safety valve as objectionable but I think it is the most appropriate in the circumstances. Cars avoiding queues on CHR using residential roads relieve pressure on CHR and stop the traffic jam reaching Chiswick Roundabout. Obviously more cars on residential roads makes them less safe but that is an unavoidable consequence if you wish to restrict flow on CHR.Rather than playing a reactive game of wack-a-mole and responding to the problems that one measure creates it would be better to have a cohesive strategy for the High Road. LTNs assume traffic will be diverted to distributor roads so don't really work if you are restricting flow on those roads at the same time.LTNs will become more necessary as traffic increases and technology directs it to where more people live but that doesn't mean restrictions will be introduced without any thought. TfL's policy priority will continue to be the main arteries that it is responsible for flowing and will not allow access restrictions to be introduced that compromise that objective.

Paul Corcoran ● 1953d