Forum Topic

TRAFFIC ON ACTON LANE

A letter I have just sent to Deirdre Costigan regarding the appalling traffic we've been experiencing in Acton lane for a great deal of time. I have written to her many times on this issue as she spearheaded the closure of Fishers Lane:Re the traffic - I’m not actually angry about it at all. I am instead just astonished and dismayed by how our counsellors demonstrate at high volume (via their total radio silence) how little they actually care. Well, why would Deirdre care, like we’ve said before, she doesn’t live here, she never sees and feels the affects of her botch jobs.No reply. No comments. No attempt to appease. No attempt to empathise. No attempt to ease the situation when in fact they do have the ability and means to do it. Zero exchange.What else can we conclude that you don’t give a stuff Deirdre. And I say this as I write at 1435 on a Saturday afternoon (and since I got up this morning) the traffic has been sitting and inching along …. all day so far, like every other day.Do you know why many people have given up on Chiswick Deirdre? Well not those who seem happy to sit in these silly queues to plough through our area, but the people who used to see Chiswick as a destination. I have many friends who moved further afield because property prices became so high here. They still love Chiswick, they came back regularly but since you people have got your hands on it they literally refuse to come back. They can’t even get here on a bus because your measures have so badly impacted us. I went to visit one such friend yesterday who lives in Isleworth. A distance of 3.5 miles and it took me 1 hour and 25 minutes to get there on the bus. 1 hour and 25 minutes - now I understand why my friend has said she won’t come here any more.What is your intention exactly? It seems to me you want to cripple the capital rather than make it a more user friend place. And you say nothing to the contrary. You only seem to be loud and vocal when you’re welding your axe and trying to get more roads closed.

Anthony Letterese ● 1450d158 Comments

Francis, I cycle down from north Chiswick across the High Road on an almost daily basis and have done for years.Generally I meander through Bedford Park back streets to get to South Parade and cut through the Fishers Lane underpass.When traffic tails back east pass the Fishers Lane mini-roundabout I have to dismount or, if I think such tailbacks are inevitable I take an alternative route across the parks.This has happened from time to time for decades but far more regularly since the underpass was restricted and currently is a near daily occurence.Reeopening Fishers Lane would make tailbacks of this length less common and I would certainly like this to be done while the A4 works are in progress. Any advantage to cyclists of the restrictions are negated by the fact that we can't ride to the underpass.Obviously this will lead to more traffic on Fishers Lane but that can be circumvented by cyclists using Belmont Road. In addition, if I do proceed to the Fishers Lane junction with CHR (which I do less often these days because I think the positioning of the bus island makes it much more dangerous) I prefer to have a car on my right hand side to shield me as I cross over to the cycleway.After the A4 roadworks are over, I don't have a strong opinion about what should be done on Fishers Lane. It has served to concentrate traffic on Acton Lane and South Parade but as long as it flows that is not a problem cycling. We did use to do the 'big shop' at Sainsbury's using the cut through in the car and now go to Acton but we wouldn't switch back should Fishers Lane open because the value is much better.

Mark Evans ● 1450d

Francis, the issue is likely to be cost. Making a station accessible can be difficult and expensive and TfL has made slow and steady progress in upgrading their network. This may come to a pause now with the financial situation. I can't comment on the effort made so far is acceptable but one criticism that seems to me justified is that it seems to have been very target focused (i.e. to be able to boast about the number of stations converted) and not very strategic (i.e. concentrating on where investment would have the maximum benefit).Disabled people living in Chiswick have suffered from this strategy as there is no accessible station. For the tube I think Gunnersbury and Chiswick Park present individual problems but Turnham Green could have been looked at. My suspicion is that the cost would have been in excess of that for converting two or three less used stations and, for TfL, it is a numbers game.I take your point about the problems at the underpass when it was opened but, earlier posts about Fairlawn Grove just show these kind of snafus have been transferred elsewhere. I'm not convinced that a permanent reopening is necessary but, when traffic on Acton Lane/South Parade spreads beyong the mini-roundabout it has two principle undesirable effects. Firstly it delays the 94 bus getting to the terminus and this has had a significant impact on bus reliably recently. I was waiting at Turnham Green last week to go east and initially my app told me a 94 would be there in 3 minutes. In the event it took 24 and I watched three 94s go in the opposite direction, presumably to get stuck on South Parade. Opening the underpass would reduce the queue on Acton Lane so more often than not these buses would have a clear run to the turnaround point.The second issue is South Parade becoming inaccessible for cyclists. When traffic queues westbound, they can't progress along it and therefore can't actually get to the underpass. As the main justification for the restriction was that Fishers Lane was now part of an East Acton to Chiswick cycle route, this has to be seen as a fatal flaw.For these two reasons I would say that, while traffic queues are reaching past the mini-roundabout by Fishers Lane, the restriction is causing more harm than benefit to all types of transport user. It therefore should be suspended while the A4 works are in progress.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1448d

"Francis, the issue is likely to be cost. Making a station accessible can be difficult and expensive and TfL has made slow and steady progress in upgrading their network. This may come to a pause now with the financial situation. I can't comment on the effort made so far is acceptable but one criticism that seems to me justified is that it seems to have been very target focused (i.e. to be able to boast about the number of stations converted) and not very strategic (i.e. concentrating on where investment would have the maximum benefit)."I agree, it's definitely cost, but I disagree that there's been 'slow and steady' progress. I mean, I was on Crossrail and there's no phone signal down there. There is phone signal in the Yerevan metro for Pete's sake! I know it's not their fault, public transport has been a disaster in this country for ages and TfL is one of the very few - if not the only one - public transport system in the advanced world that needs to rely on fares for most of its income... but I'd still argue they have AMPLE margin for improvement with the funds they have. People compare London with NYC, but that's a bad example in my opinion. Compared with Tokyo or Hong Kong, TfL just gets a battering. "I take your point about the problems at the underpass when it was opened but, earlier posts about Fairlawn Grove just show these kind of snafus have been transferred elsewhere. I'm not convinced that a permanent reopening is necessary but, when traffic on Acton Lane/South Parade spreads beyong the mini-roundabout it has two principle undesirable effects. Firstly it delays the 94 bus getting to the terminus and this has had a significant impact on bus reliably recently. I was waiting at Turnham Green last week to go east and initially my app told me a 94 would be there in 3 minutes. In the event it took 24 and I watched three 94s go in the opposite direction, presumably to get stuck on South Parade. Opening the underpass would reduce the queue on Acton Lane so more often than not these buses would have a clear run to the turnaround point."That's definitely true. Although I do think that by solving the 94's problem you'll then create an issue for the bus line (my memory is drawing a blank, sorry) that goes through Fisher's Lane. "The second issue is South Parade becoming inaccessible for cyclists. When traffic queues westbound, they can't progress along it and therefore can't actually get to the underpass. As the main justification for the restriction was that Fishers Lane was now part of an East Acton to Chiswick cycle route, this has to be seen as a fatal flaw."I see your point but I don't think that simply getting traffic out of South Parade will move cyclists out of the park (where, in my opinion, they shouldn't be). As a cyclist I find the tarmac of South Parade/Acton Lane to be awful, and I'm grateful to be riding a gravel rig these days when I pass there. Then there are too many 'blind' intersections where car drivers joining South Parade simply don't (or can't, due to parked vehicles) look. And then there's the 3 roundabouts, where it seems that as a cyclist you just don't get given any right of way when you need it. I think the best way for bikes to be out of Acton green - again, where they shouldn't be - is for the park to be made totally off-limits to them. But I doubt it'll happen.

Francis Sheehan ● 1448d

While I agree with you about the quality of the road surface on South Parade and issues with emerging traffic from side roads, I would always prefer to use it rather than cycle across the park - although cyclists (at the moment) are perfectly entitled to do this. I say at the moment because I think a case is still progressing in which a cyclist sued a dog owner after it ran in front of his bike on Acton Green and one of the defence's arguments is that, as it is common land, cycling isn't actually legal.However, currently it is often simply impossible to cycle on South Parade and nearly always on Acton Lane these days because the road isn't wide enough to progress past static traffic. If you are heading west in the north of Chiswick, this creates a problem because Bedford Park was designed to stop all vehicles cutting through it - apparently because back in the day they were worried about the carts from the laundries on Acton Lane being driven through. This means that the next access east-west from South Parade is Speldhurst Road, which could be quite a detour depending on your starting point. However, if you had your wish that cyclists were banned from the park and the traffic continues to block South Parade that would be the only available route. You should be aware that the East Acton to Chiswick cycleway, which the Fishers Lane underpass forms a part of, also incorporates the path on Acton Green as part of its route (the rather complicated crossing procedure at the bottom of Rusthall leads onto it). Although, I don't think any cyclists actually use the designated route, it does demonstrate that the council see riding through the park as a set part of the local cycling network.

Mark Evans ● 1447d

When I say 'slow and steady' I am referring to the gradual conversion of stations to be accessible which TfL have been doing for the past few years. I'm sure if I was disabled I would find the pace of progress unacceptable.There was a consultation on step free access on the tube network held earlier this year which I participated in. A report on the consultation was promised for September but nothing has yet appear.With reference to the buses - it is the 272 which goes through the Fishers Lane underpass - you are right to say it will be potentially delayed by conflicts occuring here if traffic is allowed through again. However, these delays may be less than the hold ups it is currently experiencing when travelling along South Parade which would be mitigated if the underpass was opened.If Fishers Lane was reopened permanently, it might be an idea to give priority to southbound traffic. Most of the delays that I've seen occuring here in the past is caused by the unwillingness of drivers to reverse back when they come face to face. If priority was established there would be no doubt who needed to give way. I must say I'm very surprised to see you advocating the banning of cyclists from Acton Green. Your only allies in that particular cause are likely to be Maggie Dodge and, if she was still with us, Anne Smith, the lady who used to live in a car and would screech at cyclists, including small children, if they dared cycle past her on Acton Green or Chiswick Back Common.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1447d

Tom, your concerns about traffic backing up to South Parade from Fishers Lane are unfounded. When there was severe traffic in this area pre underpass restrictions the queue on Fishers Lane never reached the northern end of the road I presume because if the line of vehicles was that long many drivers would leave it at Belmont Road or, if they were heading east, turn up Chiswick Common Road.When gridlock did occur at the underpass it was because two stubborn drivers refused to give way to each other.I still think you haven't got my basic point which is probably down to the way I am explaining myself. I am not saying that temporarily opening up Fishers Lane will solve the overall problems currently being experienced. Over the last couple of weeks the queue at peak times westbound on South Parade is generally east of the Fishers Lane Roundabout but rarely reaches the junction with The Orchard. This means you only need to shift about 15 vehicles from this queue to free up access for cyclists to the underpass and the 272 and perhaps another 15 to give the 94 a clear run to its terminus. I think you are getting a mistaken impression of what is happening by looking at the situation on Google Maps. You should come and have a look in the morning and evening rush. Admittedly this isn't happening every day for an extended period. I got a clear run through yesterday as the queue was only at Rusthall Avenue when I arrived. Relatively mild weather makes the traffic lighter but if you are there on a rainy day you will see exactly what the problem is.

Mark Evans ● 1447d

Tom, obviously if you close a road then the number of collisions on that road are going to fall. What may be happening is that the risk is being spread to other locations. There is too little data on this to reach any firm conclusions.While it is true the volume of traffic coming through the junctions along South Parade and Acton Lane may be smaller on an individual basis, the extra difficulty in navigating these junctions particularly when there is a static line of vehicles to merge into is increased. My observation is that whilst one area has got safer, another has got more dangerous.With regard to the Fishers Lane junction, there are definitely fewer cyclists using it than before the cycleway was introduced. I myself use it less often as it has become much more challenging due to the positioning of the bus island. This is in the context of an overall increase in cycling in the area - people are just choosing alternative routes.There has been a serious accident involving a cyclist in the last couple of weeks and, although I don't know the circumstances, it is clear that there is a severely elevated risk at the junction with Duke Road as there is almost constantly a vehicle laid across trying to join the queue of traffic on the High Road.Part of the reason that this has got worse is the banning of the right hand turn out of Duke Road. If there was heavy traffic and a vehicle was turning right that would allow two or three vehicles turning left to move forward as well if there was space. Now drivers who are queueing westbound are very reluctant to let vehicles join from Duke Road particularly as they are aware of the short phase on the Dukes Avenue lights. People using the cycleway are often forced to pass in front of a frustrated driver whose primary focus is moving forward onto the High Road.Despite this, I think the banning of the right turn has been a good move and may be the principle reason why collisions at this junction have fallen until the A4 closure caused the constant issue at the Duke Road junction.More traffic emerging from Fishers Lane may actually help cyclists. When turning right out of this junction I always use a vehicle on my right which is also turning right as a shield. The presence of the vehicle makes it easier to cross the two lanes of traffic into the cycleway and discourages 'sling-shotting' around a bus waiting at the eastbound bus stop.It also could serve to improve the flow out of Duke Road and unblock the cycleway. If a vehicle lays across the eastbound carriageway after coming out of Fishers Lane, westbound traffic is more inclined to give way to it than a vehicle laying across the cycleway. This gives an opportunity for the vehicle on the cycleway to move forward reducing the queue on Duke Road. I've observed this happening on several occasions as I've negotiated this junction.You therefore can't really make a convincing argument that a temporary opening up of Fishers Lane would compromise the safety of cyclists because it would serve to reduce the risk at what is currently the most dangerous point - where the cycleway crosses the Duke Road junction.

Mark Evans ● 1446d

Tom, the counts you give are for the Fishers Lane underpass not the Fishers Lane junction with CHR. The latter is in Hounslow Borough.The counts produced by Ealing were quite controversial as they  seemed to come from randomly select dates and were part of a report from the council justifying making the restrictions permanent. As far as I am aware, no comprehensive data has been published.For the record I don't dispute that an overall increase in cyclists using the underpass has occurred although the extent was maybe exaggerated by Ealing's figures. There are clearly more people using it for leisure purposes on a bike particularly to visit Rocks Lane or visits to Sainsbury's.This doesn't mean that use of the Fishers Lane junction by cyclists has occurred. I can only offer in evidence the experience of regular use and my own reasons for using it less often which I think would be common to many.It is one of the more difficult junctions to access the Cycleway because of the positioning of the bus stop and increasingly the congestion around Duke Road.Left turns here are tricky because you are very liable to meet head on a moped, van or car trying to get around a bus at the bus island.Also, as I've said before, it is easier to turn right at this junction if you have a car making the same manoeuvre. There is less likely to be a car turning at the same time as you since the Fishers Lane closure.Despite the risky nature of this junction before the cycleway was introduced, there was a regular flow of cyclists through it. Since then I can't recall the last time another cyclist was using it as the same time as me.Leisure cyclists tend to dismount or briefly go the wrong way up Dolman Road into Clifton Gardens to join the cycleway. Not strictly legal but probably safer. For all the above reasons I believe it is not inconsistent to say that, while the number of cyclists on Fishers Lane has risen, the number using the junction with CHR is down signficantly.

Mark Evans ● 1446d

“When I say comprehensive data would help that would include figures that would allow a range of year on year comparisons by month. These weren't provided, rather there was a limited number of monthly measurements giving rise to the suspicion among some that they were cherry-picked. My own view is that the number of cyclists has indeed risen although your claim that very significant and consistent increases have occurred can't be justified by the published data.” TFL have been doing yearly counts on South Parade, Tom keeps highlighting the stats for the High Road, not sure why he didn’t want to use those stats for South Parade, there is much more detail available. In June 2019 374 cyclists were recorded. In September 2020 461 cyclists were recorded and in May 2021 534 cyclists were recorded. So between September 2020 and May 2021 there was an increase of 36-37 people recorded in a day. Although the numbers have gone up, they don’t tell you how many were cycle couriers that have had a huge increase since 2019. With the TFL stats, they are recorded in 15 minute slots, so you can see when the increases are. From 8am to 9am the amount of cyclist has decreased from 68 in 2019 (36 in 2020) to 54 in 2021. From 10am to 3.30pm the amount of cyclist has decreased from 133 in 2019 (126 in 2020) to 103 in 2021.  Then between 3.30pm and 7 there is a huge increase from 104 in 2019 (158 in 2020) to 228 in 2021, and from 7pm to 10pm there is another huge increase from 26 in 2019 (56 in 2020) to 60 in 2021.  So when looking at these increases it is probably worth considering the most popular delivery times as these stats do not give that information. It does look like the closure hasn’t encouraged any local cyclist, its just an increase in cycle deliveries.

Colin Potter ● 1445d

Tom, once again you have succeeded in using a carefully selected piece of data to 'disprove' what everyone else knows to be true. There were hardly any cycle couriers delivering food three or four years ago and there was an explosion over lockdown and this trend has continued since. Walk along anywhere in west London after dark and you will observe that at least half the people cycling are making deliveries.As for the figures provided about cyclists on South Parade, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make but as the Fishers Lane underpass closure came into force in July 2020, it can't be the principle reason for any change in usage between 2020 and 2021.Right now, if cyclists who normally use South Parade are telling you they can't navigate along it because of the traffic, then you may have to prepare for a drop in the number of cyclists in future data releases. I don't know the area particularly well but I have to say I find the undogmatic approach of Mark and others provides the most convincing explanation of what is actually going on. He is certainly right about the Fishers Lane junction at the High Road - I cycled through it once since the changes were made and will never make that mistake again.Ealing Council aren't going to change their mind about even a temporary reopening of Fishers Lane and, at this stage look as though they will persist with this policy when South Parade is shut. This has all the appearances of a decision which is financially driven.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1445d

The problem with Fishers Lane is not just the bridge but also the junction with the High Road as many people have mentioned. I vaguely remember CCF posting about how he was trying to get TFL to move the bus stop so the junction could be redesigned, how long ago did he leave? Personally I think they should of closed it 20 years ago when they introduced a lot of the one ways in Chiswick, rather than wait for the cover of Covid to do it. I don’t think keeping the bridge and the junction open was an option, if they had closed the junction with the High Road they would have had to reverse the one way in Dolman Road and introduced one ways in Belmont Terrace, Windmill Road and Elliot Road. Closing Fishers Lane at the bridge was definitely cheaper and possibly less controversial than closing the junction with the High Road.  With the bridge now closed I would divert the busses and would rip up the tarmac and extend the parks either side of the bridge, however if it remains open to busses it should be reopened if Acton Lane or Turnham Green Terrace are closed temporally. As both are currently open I doubt it would have much effect with the current traffic. At the junction of the High Road and Duke Road I think they have got the layout slightly wrong. The one way in Bourne Place should have been reversed, with vehicles entering Duke Road, rather than exiting on the High Road. Currently anyone exiting the Glebe Estate and heading towards the A4 on Dukes Avenue has to cross the cycle lane twice, anyone joining the High Road could do so at Dukes Avenue lights reducing the chance of them blocking the cycle lane as they try to exit Duke Road currently. At the moment anyone trying to drive down Duke Road from the High Road to the Glebe Estate gets blocked if two or three cars are trying to exit Duke Road. If they were entering directly into Duke Road rather than Dukes Avenue, Bourne Place they are less likely to be stuck waiting for cars to exit and they are less likely to block the cycle lane when entering Duke Road. It’s a change that would benefit cyclists, but as it would also benefit vehicles it’s is unlikely to be changed.

Colin Potter ● 1445d

“Also you haven't said if you are referring to ATC site 17 towards the west of S Parade or ATC site 18 towards the east.” The data is taken from the TFL Outer London Cycle Counts, location OUTCY114.  It is to west of South Parade, with the junction of St Albans Avenue I think, but I’m not sure. It is not a count for Fishers Lane, but it is close enough to be relevant.  “RC: I really cannot figure our what point you're trying to make. Is ut that cycle couriers somehow aren't "real" cyclists? Or that they're not "local"? Or do you consider that if they weren't cycling around, they'd be delivering on foot, rather than by moped, car or van etc? You can argue against the closure of FL as you wish. But when those who defend the closure do so on the basis that it encourages cyclists, it is disingenuous, if not fatuous, to try to refute this by blithely disregarding all those cyclists who are also couriers. (Btw, I say "all those" - do you have any evidence as to how many are actually couriers, and what percentage they make of the undeniable increase of all cyclists now using FL.)” I never claimed to have any evidence that the 36-37 extra cyclists were all couriers, but businesses and cycle couriers have been beaten with a different stick to the rest of us for the last two years. If I were trying to promote cycling I would be concerned that the daytime counts are going down. The increase in cycle couriers is likely to have happened without any changes. The repeated claim has been that these changes will promote cycling, but the stats do not appear to support that claim. Why did you think I was arguing against the closure of Fishers Lane? I was trying to point out the stick we have all been beaten with hasn’t worked and maybe they should rethink about how they are trying to promote cycling.  If it turns out that all the costs of the changes are just a subsidy for business, I would imagine most people would have preferred the money to have been spent on lifts for tube stations. It would probably have created more active travel than the cycle lane has and wouldn’t have divided everything in half. “I don't see how you can say the undoubted increase is all down to couriers. You've picked an odd time, and particular years to reach a conclusion that's not consistent.” Are you trying to suggest I’ve manipulated the data? I’ve used the data for the last three years, 2022 data is not available yet. The data is recorded in 15 minute segments and I’ve used 8am to 9am as that would be the time people are cycling to school or work. 10am to 3.30 pm would mainly be leisure cyclists rather than commuters or deliveries. 3.30 pm to 7pm could be cyclists returning from school or work, but as there is no increase in cycling in the morning that would be unlikely. TFL list 7am to 10am as AM Peak, 10am to 4pm as Inter-peak, 4pm to 7pm as PM Peak and 7pm to 10pm as Evening. If you pick a 15 minute segment or a three hour one it doesn’t hide the fact that from 6am to 3.30 pm, between 2019 and 2021 the count only increased by 2 (244 in 2019, 247 in 2020 and 246 in 2021) and from 3.30pm to 10pm it increased from 130 to 288, an increase of 158. With such huge spikes and discrepancies during that day compared to previous years it would probably be a good idea to consider what external events caused this, rather than picking a different time segment and ignoring the fact there is almost no change for most of the day.

Colin Potter ● 1445d



Francis Sheehan asked What I’d like to understand from those who propose for it to be removed is “then what?” What can ensure that cyclists don’t mix with motor vehicles, thus maintaining their safety?
The London Borough of Hounslow’s urban road network, covers a total of
432 km of roads, https://www.vinci-concessions.com/en/infrastructure/hounslow-road-network CS9 as originally envisaged running between Kensington Olympia and Brentford
covers a distance of 9.016 km It's difficult to see how any decision regarding CS9 can have any impact on
cyclists using the other 423 km of roads in Hounslow While previously Francis Sheehan claimed " The cycle lane, whether people on this forum like it or not, is an improvement on safety for cyclists." Which is questionable on two grounds. Firstly in this specific instance the layout has been shown to be particularly hazardous at various points requiring "far higher levels of concentration on the part of motorists". Which most decidedly "isn't" a safety feature.
And second, the objection is the same as has always been raised against dedicated cycling facilities* by mainstream cycling organistions. That by segregating cyclists, that simply encourages a belief among motorists that cyclists aren't legitimate users of the road-space at all and so don't need to be affored any courtesy. Basically they shouldn't be on the road at all You can witness this on here already. Aside fron yobbos riding in the pavement, many experienced cyclists forced to use CHR for some reason, avoid using CS9 having recognised the hazards, and stick to the roadway instead, And are berated on here accordingly.
michael adams * Around the Hammersmith gyratory its maybe arguable; but then again most were using an alternative route already




Michael Adams ● 1444d