Forum Topic

If you are going to criticise Francis for his post it should be that he was so equivocal in making his point. It is not a likelihood that private hire drivers and delivery drivers make up a substantial proportion of the people being fined on Hartington Road, it is an absolute certainty.Department of Transport figures show that 40% of vehicles in central London are private hire and 15% in outer London. Lets conservatively assume the lower number for the A316. The last number I saw for light goods vehicles on local roads was about 13% but this was pre-pandemic so let's once again conservatively assume 15% and that two-thirds of drivers are self-employed or employed but personally liable for fines incurred. Therefore about 25% of traffic falls into the category of low paid professional drivers. However, as a high proportion of these drivers are likely to be unfamiliar with the area and most local people are now wise to the restrictions, at the very least a third of fines will be going to these kind of vehicles and probably around a half. Even the lower figure could reasonably said to be a 'substantial amount'.This issue has been raised in other boroughs where similar measures have been instituted and Freedom of Information requests have been submitted to try and get a more accurate number but both the drivers' unions and other trade bodies believe it is a serious issue and is contributing to a shortage as many drivers are giving it as a reason for quitting the industry.The use of PCN revenue to cover financial shortfalls by borough council amounts to what is a highly regressive tax which disproportionately targets lower income workers. Labour authorities should be very careful about their increasing reliance on these sort of measures as they are underestimating how much they alienate part of their traditional voter base.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1875d

While I'm pleased those clever people at Oxford and Imperial have discovered riding a bike emits less carbon dioxide than driving a car, I'm not sure whether that is something that was ever particularly under dispute.What research might be better directed at is working out whether changing travel patterns are actually good for air quality and preventing climate change. The received opinion appears to be that driving to do the family shop is bad and virtuous non-car owning households are an example to the rest of us. However, if car trips are simply being replaced by van trips then have we necessarily taken a step forward?Modern cars have much more effective filters than larger vehicles and issue negligible amounts of particles and NOx compared to a light goods vehicle. A single trip to the shops in a car will be direct whereas supermarket delivery is organised by time order is placed and not to minimise journey times so we appear to have ended up with vehicles with higher toxic emissions and much higher CO2 emissions due to the need for refrigeration driving back and forth across the area where we live.Initially I was an enthusiast for supermarket delivery but I soon realised that short use by dates on fresh produce was leading to undue wastage and there is all extra plastic bags that an order generates. I am convinced that by driving my low emission car to the supermarket when I am buying more than I can carry and putting it in bags for life is a better option environmentally than having it delivered.

Paul Corcoran ● 1874d

Don't think anyone has ever claimed that South Parade/Acton Lane is currently gridlocked every hour of every day, if they have they are deluded. The reality is that South Parade only occasionally has queueing traffic and Acton Lane is flowing for most of the day.However, despite Tom's statistical gymnastics there has been an increase in Acton Lane traffic since the Fisher's Lane closure. The Steer report puts it at around 20% which chimes with my personal observations. We have no numbers for South Parade to make a similar comparison but it would be impossible to make an argument that traffic hasn't risen there at around the same level as Acton Lane particularly as there has been a massive rise in vehicles using Prebend Gardens according to Steer which has to be down to Fisher's Lane.A 20% rise in traffic does not necessarily fundamentally change the nature of a road but it does has generated more consistent queueing on Acton Lane.Obviously Fisher's Lane has benefited and there is no denying that directing cars away from a playground is a win. Therefore we can put Fisher's Lane residents and parents and children using the playground as beneficiaries.As for cyclists the picture is more complicated. For a confident cyclist the reduction in traffic through Fisher's Lane isn't much of a benefit. The potholes that used to riddle the underpass were a far bigger discouragement from using it. I don't believe the new arrangement of the junction with Fisher's Lane and the High Road is an improvement for cyclists but I know others disagree (although not necessarily people who cycle this way regularly). On the other hand the increased traffic on Acton Lane/South Parade is a disbenefit for cyclists because when traffic is static the narrowness of the roads means you have to pick your way through narrow gaps to progress. I should point out that over the last 3 months on what must have been over 100 journeys I have only had to do this a few times on South Parade. However, on Acton Lane it has become a regular occurrence.I can see the argument that fewer vehicles travelling under the underpass makes it less intimidating for nervous cyclists and children but the problem for me is that most trips to use the underpass will require the use of South Parade/Acton Lane and the risk for all cyclists has been raised by the only means of getting to the underpass having more traffic on it.Even if we assume that inconveniencing motorists is not necessarily a bad thing the list of people who suffer from the Fisher's Lane closure is far longer than the ones that benefit from it - residents of Acton Lane and South Parade, users of Acton Green, residents of Prebend Gardens, anyone regularly cycling along Acton Lane and parents and children at the nursery by St Alban's Church.Consistently the supporters of this scheme try to portray opponents as SUV driving petrolheads desperate to save a few minutes driving but most of the people I know in the area who feel really strongly about this (to the extent of writing to councillors and MPs rather than sounding off on social media) are not really bothered by any detour but are upset about the extra traffic going past their front door.The Steer report provides all the evidence needed that this scheme should be scrapped but it was commissioned by Hounslow, not Ealing. The latter are the ones benefiting from the consistent flow of PCNs (I cycled through it earlier today and was overtaken by a big Mercedes). They are also under intense financial pressure from the government not to abandon lockdown traffic trials funded from Department for Transport grants so the Fisher's Lane closure is probably here to stay despite all of the above.

Mark Evans ● 1869d

Bruce, if you look at the interim report by Steer you will see there has been a very significant increase in the number of vehicles using Prebend Gardens since the closure of Fisher's Lane. From memory it is in the region of 60%.In absolute number terms this is not huge but people who live on this road are up in arms and are in no doubt the Fisher's Lane closure is responsible. Hounslow did briefly consider an LTN for the area but seem to have gone quiet on that.The reason the road has seen such a big increase in traffic is probably Sat Nav related. The short phase at the bottom of TGT means there are often queues there so anyone on Acton Lane/South Parade aiming to head west on CHR towards Hammersmith is directed that way.Also anyone who is still giving Tom Pike's claims any credence should refer back to the Steer report. Mark is quite right to say the council's independent traffic consultants analysis showed an increase in vehicles using Acton Lane of 20% Tom's claim that he has misrepresented the figures is a quibble over semantics not fact. The report shows that traffic was 20% higher than would have been expected given the general decline in journeys at the time the comparison was made.Also it is worth bearing in mind Steer themselves give a health warning with the INRIX data. It may well indeed show no significant change of speeds on South Parade but that doesn't contradict Mark's observations. What the data is telling us is that would can't increase traffic by 20% on Acton Lane without a significant increase in queuing traffic but you can do on Acton Lane.There appears to be a local folk memory that South Parade regularly gets jammed from early implementation of these schemes when the phasing of the lights gave more priority to vehicles on CHR at the Acton Lane junction. These were quickly changed and rather than queues on South Parade there is the Acton Lane bus gate queue. The queues that we have on Acton Lane currently are occurring despite a longer phase favouring traffic on that road with the junction with CHR.

Francis Rowe ● 1868d