Forum Topic

Chiswick Predictions for 2024?

Anybody care to share their predictions of things they believe might happen in Chiswick in 2024? We could revive this thread in a year's time and see who was on the money.Mine would include Sainsbury's finally disclosing what they are planning to do with the store and the car park and that Labour will specifically mention Hammersmith Bridge in its election manifesto.

Mark Evans ● 420d42 Comments

You are not wrong. It was a good weekend for the Bees but next weekend could change things very quickly with a visit to the Emirates. Luton have had a tough run of fixtures but looked quite good so could conceivably get the 16 or so points they need to be safe.

Francis Rowe ● 358d

April 20th at Kenilworth Road could be quite crucial.

Richard Greenhough ● 362d

Nobody predicted Brentford to be relegated but the latest news about Ben Mee on top of all the other injuries and the Everton points reprieve now mean that Bees fans will need to cheer for whoever is playing Luton until the end of the season.

Francis Rowe ● 362d

Having been brought up in the Wirral and my dad working in Liverpool (and me a bit later) I was aware in c 1970 that Queensway, the original Mersey tunnel, was built in 1934 and had a temporary charge, to pay back it's construction cost (it was then said to be the 8th Wonder of the World).In the 1960s my dad, who drove to Liverpool every day was grumbling but the plan was that the fee would be abandoned as it had paid for the cost many times. A car today costs £2 each way

Guy Lambert ● 368d

I'm sure there will be moans about the sound coming from Gunnersbury Park Saturday 17/8 due to Peggy Gou.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4Sm1lTkf1I&ab_channel=MontblancSo take this as a heads-up and get tickets on presale now/general release tomorrow or a warning and get away that day.

Hans Lund-Sorensen ● 369d

Last Friday, as soon as Toney's (initials I.B.E.T.) 8 month ban for betting was over he told manager Frank " I'm fit, able and willing to play in the team's 2-2 draw this coming Sunday Boss".

Denis I. Fox ● 396d

The Marks and Spencer Store on Chiswick High Road to be extended in size ... taking over the "Up and Running" shop next door.

Jim Lawes ● 397d

Cyber Attack. Country knocked out. Chaos. Russia & China blamed..

Michael Brown ● 398d

Toney to Chelsea

Andrew OSullivan ● 398d

More council taxes spent on rainbow paints and the first sighting of a Bobby back on he beat…

Emma Elizabeth ● 401d

I do hope that pop riveted atrocity that resides outside St Michael and All Angels Church is replaced with something classier.

Mark Frost ● 408d

Would it begin with 'b'? One thing that can be predicted and is something to look forward to is the opening of the super sewer. However that is scheduled to be until 2025.

Felicity Caborn ● 414d

Could add in something on Thames Water!

Nicholas Beard ● 415d

I'm going for more confusing unhelpful and dangerous coloured lines, certainly to passing through traffic and the visually impaired; more cycle lanes; pot holed road infrastructure getting worse and possibly more local authority wasting hard earn tax payers' money on ridiculous nobody really cares projects; more flats/apartments being built to add to Chiswick's already sardine tin congestion

Carl Johns ● 415d

Yes, the piers and abutments are 200 years old, dating from Tierney's original structure. Bazalgette added some concrete protection and iron cladding at the potential impact points of the piers but the weight-bearing structure and foundations were designed and constructed in the 1820s.

Tom Pike ● 417d

Thanks for the correction.  I think it is correct to say that the current Hammersmith Bridge uses the same pier foundations as the previous bridge.

Michael Robinson ● 417d

The bridge in Budapest is the same design as the original bridge, the current bridge replaced, because the original bridge was no longer fit for purpose.  It was realized in the 1930s the current bridge was no longer fit for purpose, but then WWII happened and afterwards there was no money for a replacement.

Christopher Shea ● 417d

The assumption that a Labour government will commit funding to repair the bridge seems to be a tenuous one to me, and seems to be based upon wishful thinking rather than a compelling political justification, let alone actual indications.I don't think anyone is saying that a toll is realistic to cover the full cost of reopening the bridge to motor traffic but to make up the difference, as mentioned, Hammersmith Bridge isn't in TfL business plan, not even as a 'subject to government funding' item which applies to Piccadilly line signalling and Bakerloo trains replacement.

Michael Robinson ● 417d

Andrew, I’m going by LBHF’s own published figures and on the existing public commitments to fund the restoration. That’s hardly arcane detail, even though you choose to ignore it. You are instead just choosing to speculate what might happen once those commitments run out after March. The idea that TfL and/or Labour are standing by with an alternative plan to restore the bridge at that point is to say the least rather unlikely.

Tom Pike ● 417d

Tom, I think you are getting far to buried in the arcane detail of a subject you don't really have any specialist knowledge of. Perhaps it would be better to step back and look at this from a wider perspective. We don't know whether the bridge rebuilding will be funded by a toll but the reason why we are talking about it is because it is assumed, that a Labour government commits to this project, it will want to suppress the headline amount being spent on London based projects. Therefore the primary reason the bridge may have tolls is political rather than financial. It is not critical that the bridge is fully funded by revenue over the life of the loan. That means that TfL won't be forced to set an unrealistically high toll to cover whatever costs you want to throw in. If there is a shortfall initially that is not a problem as over the course of the next few decades inflation will make it progressively easier to raise tolls. I don't think TfL will look at financing cost when deciding what toll to charge on Hammersmith Bridge but they will seek to maximise revenue and that alone will determine whether it costs 50p, £2, £5 or £10 to go across.

Andrew OSullivan ● 417d

The bridge was never designed in the first place for the volume and weight of motor traffic it was carrying.  Blame those Victorians for not predicting 2 tonne SUVs instead of horse and carriages.The 'sister' bridge in Budapest no longer permits private cars to use it.

Michael Robinson ● 418d

The bridge should never have been allowed to get in this state of disrepair, PERIOD. This is (allegedly) the sixth largest economy of the world, or something like that, and it's beyond belief that IN ITS CAPITAL we have a bridge shut since 2019 while we talk about ferry crossings, electric rickshaws, trusses inserted in the current bridge...And about tolls and so on... For Christ's sake, is this 2024 or 1024? Are we also having to employ Little John to check that every chariot pays the penny!? The Hammersmith bridge situation is a farce, a travesty. Heads should roll over it.

Francis Sheehan ● 418d

Andrew,  I'm not overestimating anything. These are LBHF's own figures:https://democracy.lbhf.gov.uk/documents/s125859/5%20-Toll%20order%20cabinet%20report%20final%20061023.docx%20V1.pdfThis is from a November cabinet meeting so presumably form the outline business case that was submitted to government last April but is still pending approval.Even on your figures, that do not allow for either capital repayment or maintenance, if a £2 toll covers a £100m loan, that equates to a £5 toll to cover a £250m loan, the full estimated cost of the strengthening to allow a return of motor vehicles across the bridge. As has always been the case, that is simply not a viable toll level. Francis just messed up the calculations to try to prove otherwise.There's now less than three months left of the 20-month commitment made by DfT in August 2022 to fund two thirds of the bridge costs, half directly and half through TfL. But agreement to proceed still depends on the geotechnical report confirming the 200-year-old foundations can take the weight of two bridges and on gaining planning permission from both LBHF and RBRUT as well as approval from English Heritage as a listed structure. The application was about to be put in back in October 2022 but has still not appeared. Whatever else, this is cutting it very fine.

Tom Pike ● 418d

Thanks Andrew. I would have replied myself but I don't have Tom's stamina to argue a point.The irony is that we are in basic agreement that funding Hammersmith Bridge will be fiendishly difficult but just disagree on the specific reasons. I hope Mark is right about the manifesto committment and there are good reasons to believe he is, but without it there is very little chance of progress over the next few years.

Francis Rowe ● 418d

You are significantly overestimating the toll charge that would be needed due to a number of factors. The PWLB rates for longer term loans is currently around 5% The statutory requirement for minimum revenue provision is based on the need to be prudential. It would be justifiable to make no provision in the early years of operation in the expectation that toll income would ultimately meet capital repayment costs. Although LBHF (which is presumably what you mean rather than LBH) might like to have their maintenance costs covered, it looks like Labour is going to go down the route of having the maintenance of key bridges handled by central government so this would be funded separately. There is no profit element to cover as there are no shareholders involved in what would be a debt funded project. Operational costs will be insignificant. There is a danger of over complicating this but essentially 8,000 crossings with a basic toll of £2 would generate £16,000 a day easily enough to conver interest on a £100 million loan. This doesn't take into account fine revenue which based on ULEZ would be significant. It also assumes a standard fixed toll per vehicle —  but the charge will be higher for lorries and vans and season passes are likely to be sold. Toll pricing will almost certainly be dynamic with rates varying depending on time of day and over the course of 30 years would be incorporated into a London wide road pricing model. Toll rates can rise over the life of the bond issued but the coupon paid will remain the same. Therefore, Francis is right in saying that the risk in this project is not that tolls won't cover debt and interest repayments. The risk is in outlying events such as a terrorist attack, a Thames Barrier failure, the invention of the flying car. The hard part will be deciding where liability in these sort of catastrophes resides.

 

Andrew OSullivan ● 418d

Paul Campbell will continue to live in a private estate and X ecco chamber.

Mark Talbot ● 418d

No they won’t. But thank you for illustrating my second point so perfectly.

Paul Campbell ● 419d

No they will like some of the changes in 2024.

Janice Evans ● 419d

All the same people will still be moaning about street changes and predicting that they will be reversed or halted as more are announced and implemented.

Paul Campbell ● 419d

We will see more EV charge points.

Janice Evans ● 419d

Tom, bridge is open to cyclists it's just we have to dismount and walk for five minutes.Most dismount but a fair few seem to think walking is for lesser mortals.

Adrian Irving ● 419d

Yes, Francis' sums were some way off: LBH estimated that just to cover the construction, let alone the maintenance, they needed to raise £7.5m a year from tolls (based on 5.8% interest and 3.2% minimum revenue provision on a £83m loan over 25 years). That could be funded for a £2.60 charge each way for 8000 crossings a day which would leave £0.65 for maintenance, operations and any profit in LBH's benchmark £3.25 toll.Traffic on Chiswick and Putney Bridge is still below preclosure levels, so for a return toll of £6.50 a day it's already not obvious that the demand is still there. If tolls were used to pay the full whack of the estimated £250m, then they'd be even fewer takers at close to £10 each way. Tolls would have to fund the full amount if the current government continues to let the clock run down, now just to the end of March, on its commitment to pay two-thirds for the bridge costs. And evidently Francis no longer thinks Labour will be backing the bridge to topple Greg Hands. It would be good to see the roadway opened up to cyclists this year - that was originally supposed to happen in 2022!

Tom Pike ● 419d

I thought from the previous discussions on this subject that it was pretty apparent the total cost of the bridge wouldn't be covered by tolls (by that I mean the toll would need to be so high that few people would use the bridge).There were some questions if Francis Rowe had done his sums correctly, I seem to remember.  If the tolls are only covering a proportion of the costs, then the point about TfL/government needing to pay for the remainder still applies.  And as mentioned, there is nothing about this in TfL business plan.I think the rest of your post is wishful thinking.  The rest  of the country is hardly that bothered about Hammersmith Bridge.  If Labour is going to commit more money to London than the current government then new Bakerloo line trains that created and preserved jobs in the N of England would be the obvious choice.

Michael Robinson ● 419d

I don't think Hammersmith Bridge reopening would qualify as pork barrel if much of the cost is covered by tolls. In fact if Labour don't specifically put it by name in their manifesto  it is probably because they are anxious not to be seen as spending on London projects. The emphasis of infrastructure spending (or pork barrel if you insist) will be in the Red Wall seats.Getting rid of Greg Hands might be seen as a good thing but I think you are wrong in suggesting it is driving Labour's infrastructure policy. The value electorally will be sympbolic. It'll be coming up to the fifth anniversary of closure by the time of next year's Boat Race the one time the rest of the country is aware of the Bridge's existence and nothing could be a better metaphor for Tory incompetence or Labour's effectiveness than an accelerated plan for reopening. We'll see in the autumn I imagine.

Mark Evans ● 419d

I don't think Hammersmith Bridge will be a factor for Greg Hands either which is why a Labour committment of £250M+ for Hammersmith Bridge would be somewhat pointless pork barrel politics.It would also be pointless for the Richmond Park constituency on the other side of the bridge as Labour were a distant third with only 5% of the vote in 2019, so very unlikely to be on their target list, I would have thought.

Michael Robinson ● 419d

Not sure about 2024 but i think something we waited so long for maybe in a tricky situation given the issues others are having and only one or two big takings in 2023 and big losses for the giants who create them. Other ideas may be needed to survive

Julian Pavey ● 419d

Not sure Hammersmith Bridge will be much of a factor in the demise of Greg Hands. He has largely nullified the issue by, unfairly, blaming H&F Council for failing to maintain it. He'll be hoping for a Uxbridge style ULEZ boost due to the South Fulham Clean Air Neighbourhood scheme but boundary changes have already doomed him.On predictions, I think Chiswick will lose a significant number of well-loved and long established shops and restaurants in 2024 and in some cases they will be replaced by businesses that are just fronts for money laundering. Sadly, this won't be a W4 specific phenonmenon.

Francis Rowe ● 419d

It would make sense to put a larger capacity cable in now for future proofing.Communications industry did this when it was expanding. So my prediction is they will come back and dig up the road again for other facilities.

Paul Jennings ● 419d

TfL doesn't need to be responsible for the asset for their financial outlay to appear in their business plan.  TfL doesn't own borough roads but the business plan still contains investment for cycle lanes on borough roads and other funding that goes to the boroughs.If TfL were planning to fund up one thirds or (two thirds once the government walks away) of Hammersmith Bridge then yes, I would expect it to appear in their business plan.The investment for Bakerloo line trains is "subject to Government funding" so it won't happen unless this is provided, just like Piccadilly line re-signalling.

Michael Robinson ● 420d

Michael, I'm aware that Hammersmith Bridge isn't in Chiswick but Chiswick Bridge and Kew Bridge are and there will be reduction in traffic on both if Hammersmith Bridge reopens.TfL don't own Hammersmith Bridge so you wouldn't expect it to appear in their investment plan.The factory in Goole will probably be up to capacity with the Piccadilly line order but it seems likely, that if it proves effective, it will commencce production of the Bakerloo line trains afterwards.I agree £250 million would be a bit steep to get rid of Greg Hands particularly as he is likely to lose his seat without the extra boost opening the bridge would give to Labour in Chelsea and Fulham.

Mark Evans ● 420d

Hammersmith Bridge isn't in Chiswick.However, on this point, interestingly there wasn't a single reference to Hammersmith Bridge in TfL's business plan published a couple of weeks ago with investment priorities from 2023/24 to 2026/27.If Labour wanted to distribute some 'pork' around, then new trains for Bakerloo line would be the obvious choice given employment it would generate in the Siemens factories in the N of England.  £250M+ just for Greg Hands seat doesn't seem like very good value.

Michael Robinson ● 420d

I agree about the Sainsbury's development. I chatted to one of the workmen when Acton Lane was closed late last year and he said the capacity of the new cabling being put in was huge, much bigger than was needed for the Empire House development.Another one that I think could finally happen this year is the development of the Post Office on Heathfield Terrace. I think the lease they have on the building has now expired or is about to expire.

Anita Blake ● 420d