Forum Topic

"Roads were built for a reason and the more options we have to get from place to place, the better, though some mathematical analysis might try and disagree." Your assumptions are spectacularly off in the case of Bedford Park. The street layout predates the advent of the motorcar - the reasoning behind the geometry was to adapt the existing farm tracks for use as access for domestic services while maintaining good connectivity by foot or bike to public transport. It was most certainly not designed as an optimum solution for large-scale private motor-vehicle use and there is no "natural" process that could drive it in that direction, even if such a solution were to exist: there will also always be a conflict between the interests of residents who live in a neighbourhood and those who want to drive through that neighbourhood as their shortest route.  It's not better for everyone to have as many options as possible; mathematics and  aesthetics and would agree!  Given the way Bedford Park was laid out, it is very reasonable to limit motor vehicle access and that's been done by the closure at the end of Woodstock that quietens Jayne's Street. I doubt many residents on Woodstock now put their loss of the fastest route to TGT above the peace they enjoy, but apparently some originally objected. As for Chiswick Park, how do you currently get to and from your homes in Antrobus, Rothschild, Cunnington and many other streets north of Chiswick Park station? It's already heavily restricted in terms of car travel, with Acton Lane the only route between Bath Road and Bollo Road, but somehow you already manage.

Is the loss of motor vehicle access to South Parade so unbearable compared to the significant improvement of the quality of life of those who live on it, the better service for those who travel its length by bus, as well as value to all the residents of Bedford Park of the improved access to Acton Green that we once enjoyed but was given away when cars took priority?

Tom Pike ● 1441d

Tom, if you keep closing roads then you merely further concentrate traffic on the roads that remain. The elephant in the room as ever, that you continue to ignore, is the mass of traffic that drives through W4 to get somewhere else. We see on a daily basis now the total gridlock for hours each day of traffic diverting off the A4, nearly all through traffic. These queues dont seem to impact your home or your journeys so it seems you dont really care. The increased traffic on South Parade is not just due to the A4 but also the result of closing Fishers Lane and the reduced capacity of the route along central CHR due to CS9 and new light phasing. If you close South Parade then where does that traffic go? No more traffic can use CHR, and the A4 is often itself jammed. As you noted in your post, the nature of Chiswick's layout, compounded by the tube lines and A4, is that there are few routes open to vehicles in the first place. The A4 often spills traffic into Chiswick before the roadworks and will do afterwards. This causes gridlock and it will simply get worse if more roads are closed. Buses also then become unusable.It is very hard to remove through traffic from select streets while allowing access to local vehicles unless you can create a more clearly defined area such as GP, assuming residents want it. Unless you do this, then local residents themselves suffer greatly. Not just if they need a vehicle themselves for legtimate reasons, but for trade and deliveries.You refuse to acknowledge this as your statistics dont capture gridlock. In fact vehicle counts will often then suggest no increase in traffic as the number of vehicles able to pass along a certain road has fallen. Many key routes and junctions are already at or close to capacity and that capacity can fall when overloaded. This is the reason behind your often repeated fantasy that closing bridges causes traffic to evaporate. Unless action is taken to reduce the number of vehicles driving into London each day, then continuously closing roads can only increase congestion. There is a reason bus speeds have been falling for a decade despite more bus lanes and bus priority measures.You talk about the improved quality of life for South Parade, but again where is that traffic going? Who then suffers and who is deciding this and on what basis? What level of polluton and congestion is then acceptable?

Bill George ● 1441d

The aim of reducing traffic is entirely laudable and some restrictions on driving has to play a part in this but I don't see how this is possible in this particular area.Whatever the national or London-wide trend, there are pressures operating in South Parade and Acton Lane pushing in the opposite direction. New phases of Acton Gardens are starting to be occupied and more are being built, the massive TfL Bollo Lane scheme is about to break ground and there are multiple towers being built in the Sterling Road area as well as huge development near the Acton Town train depot. In the other direction plans for a big development in Ravenscourt Park have just been revealed.I'm not sure if Tom's proposal to close South Parade is him just being provocative for effect or if he really means it, but it is a truly daft idea. As another poster has pointed out, the Bedford Park/Acton Green area was one of the original LTNs in which residents in expensive homes were protected by there being no through road to the west end for  the laundry carts from Acton Lane. Southfield Road/The Avenue and South Parade acted as the distributor roads for this traffic and to close one would put intolerable pressure on the other (as we will see demonstated later this month).The jury is out as to whether reducing road capacity reduces pollution and congestion but the claims that it does seem to  be based on a confusion that a vehicle taking 10 minutes to undertake a journey has the same impact that it would if it takes one minute to do the same trip. Tom is right to celebrate a 6% reduction in car usage from peak but as that has occured at the same time as increased journey times, there are now more cars on our road at any given point.If it takes half an hour to drive from the Tabard to the Duke of Sussex pub you will of course see a drop in the number of vehicle journeys local roads but at the cost of a huge increase in pollution on Southfield Road and The Avenue.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1441d

Tom. can you clarify how the London Travel Survey relates to the DfT road traffic stats that show total vehicle miles largely flat in London pre COVID and certinaly no annual YoY decline (these seem to have already been udpated for the minor road review). You also claim that traffic speeds have edged upwards, which is contrast to that on bus reliability and speeds that have been getting worse over recent years despite more bus priority measures. So its hard to square that circle. Its funny we all (or most of us) agree there are too many vehicles on the road but you continue to ignore the motorway and other major A routes that deliver a constant stream of vehicles into W4. As long as routes through W4 are faster at any time than the alternatives (A4/ M4/ north and south circulars) then we will have significant congestion. The odd local journey is then irrelevant. The only solution you advocate is to create congestion and hope that traffic goes elsewhere. This suits the lifestyles of certain professional types who are not directly impacted by the resultant pollution/ congestion nor need to use buses that suffer in the gridlock.When I walk past queues of traffic I see a lot of single occupancy people and do question what they are doing, especially as most of them at present are out of London commuters. But I am cautious of the 'discouraging' local trips mantra that always assume you know what someones physical health is or the exact purpose of the trip. Again, if we only manage that by congestion then the suffering to those that need to travel (trade, health concerns etc) or use public transport is not acceptable.

Bill George ● 1441d

"What I was trying to get across was that if you close South Parade you create the risk of static traffic between the two pubs from Bedford Corner, up The Avenue, along South Parade [I think you mean Southfields] and down Acton Lane but this would be for vehicles which had a start point and destination elsewhere."It's difficult to imagine what destinations you have in mind. North/South traffic through Bedford Park currently either goes down Acton Lane to the High Road or along Southfields to the bottom of the Avenue followed by TGT or Bath Road and onwards. None has any reason to take South Parade in the first place so no change there.East-west traffic on the High Road or southwards would not loop round Southfield just because South Parade is not available. Bollo Lane and Bath Road traffic can simply go down Acton Lane or TGT to the High Road and onwards rather than take a much longer loop up round Southfield. So where are all the points elsewhere you had in mind that would require a loop up to Southfields and back if South Parade were closed?We have an actual example of a local neighbourhood, very similar in size to Bedford Park, that has welcomed a much larger restriction on its driving. The permanent closure just announced by Royal Parks, of Sheen Gate to traffic means there is no route to the south for all the East Sheen residents south of Upper Richmond Road. The B351, Sheen Lane, like the B409, South Parade, was not intended for motor vehicles, and the closure has meant a much improved quality of life for those living along Sheen Lane as well as improved, safer, access to the green space of Richmond Park for East Sheen residents. The Sheen Gate closure means a much greater diversion for both local and through car trips than a restriction on South Parade - clearly the demand that motorists must have the shortest route between two points has not been given  priority.  Most people, and not just East Sheen residents, would welcome that.

Tom Pike ● 1440d

Tom, of course east-west traffic would loop around. Look at what is happening now, that may be extreme but after the last 12-18 months the question is when are there not significant road works on key routes around W4. This statement is absolute nonsense:'Bollo Lane and Bath Road traffic can simply go down Acton Lane or TGT to the High Road'CS9 has materially reduced traffic flow through the central stretch of CHR, TGT southbound also has an even shorter and less regular green phase. The A4 and Hogarth Roundabout already at and at peak times well over capacity. You just create even more congestion and destroy what is left of bus services. Acton Lane had very long and near permanent queues even before the A4 closures, but thats not really the point here.Please stop with your amuteur traffic modelling and maybe explore the local area a bit. Piecemeal and uncoordinated road closures will continue to displace traffic and increase congestion until the city can no longer function. Remember just because you can WFH or cycle to work many cannot. Trade for shops and home services/ delivery need to be able to travel. You keep ignoring the issue of the commuter traffic that is the cause of most of the current chaos. Its not going anywhere and with another large round of fare increases to come it may even get worse.Also, false equivalents between closing a through route through a park and along an important B road serve no purpose. That B road has become even more important as the alternatives have been reduced.

Bill George ● 1440d