Forum Topic

Bedford Park Society

The Bedford Park Society has just written to its members suggesting they respond to the council regarding the proposed Covid19 measures for Safer Streets by suggesting that ‘any reduction in road access would seem to be inadvisable’, local roads ‘should continue to be open to vehicles’ and ‘parking spaces should be preserved as far as possible’.Bedford Park was founded in the 1880s and described the ‘healthiest place in the world,’  attracting artists and idealists. In the midst of the most serious public health crisis for over a century, the Society seems to be promoting a return to the 1980s. The equivalent of adding lead back into petrol. No thanks.

Edward Seaton ● 2343d62 Comments

Absolutely agree with you there Edward.  But stand-by for noise from the fixed pro-car lobby.  I'm also supporting the experiment to pedestrianise TGT and Devonshire Road.  I just want to see what it's like in practice and how it works and if it will benefit a majority. I suspect it will be wonderful.    But if not, we can always go back to square one.  The clincher for me was the idea (from someone on here) to re-route the E3 via Stamford Brook and the new health centre..

Stuart Kerr ● 2343d

Both history and geometry are on the side of closing Turnham Green Terrace to through traffic. It promises to make TGT a much more pleasant environment and will reduce traffic along the Avenue. Stuart's right, if it is the disaster some predict, it can be reversed. I don't know if BPS opposed at the time the closure of Woodstock/Priory at St Michael's, but would they want it reopened now?

Tom Pike ● 2343d

I’m a member of BPS and not happy with them taking this stance on my behalf, who best to write back to on this?

John Hall ● 2343d

Did the Bedford Park Society consult the newly reincarnated Bedford Park Bicycle Club about this statement? I see from the BPBC website that they 'Support and encourage peaceful, non-polluting, joyful and safe bicycling in ‘the healthiest place on earth''.

Peter Evans ● 2343d

The Bedford Park Society committee signed off the release with...Contact us: information@bedfordpark.org.uk

Edward Seaton ● 2343d

The Bedford Park Bicycle Club was not consulted.

Edward Seaton ● 2343d

Don't really see how the society could do anything other than oppose these changes. More congestion on Acton Lane, South Parade and Bath Road which would result if TGT closed would increase rat running through Bedford Park plus Acton Green could be much less attractive as an amenity space if the closure went ahead.It's unfair to paint them as pro-car or pro-pollution as they do need to represent their members by trying to stop displaced traffic heading their way. I don't live in Bedford Park but I'd be surprised if many people who do are in favour of these plans as the area would be a clear loser.

Dan Evans ● 2343d

"..local roads should continue to be open to vehicles"Does that mean the Bedford Park Society would be against a few judiciously placed planters, should they prove necessary, to stop more through traffic using 'their' roads?

Peter Evans ● 2343d

The Hounslow consultation has complaints from people about cars cutting through some of the streets in Bedford Park as a short cut between Bath Rd and The Avenue.Nothing from the Bedford Park Society about that.

Michael Robinson ● 2343d

It's not a 'short cut' or even a 'rat run', but a legitimate and efficient way of getting from one place to place another - until, for the greater good, it's decided that it isn't!

Peter Evans ● 2343d

Peter EvansHave you seen the size of the plattershttp://www.brentfordtw8.com/info/images/dukesmeadowsclosure.jpg

Bernard Allen ● 2343d

It may be that the BPS are not making such a big deal of the rat running issue because they fear to do so would exacerbate the problem by publicising the possibility. If so they are probably privately lobbying both Hounslow and Ealing. Assuming this is the case I won't mention the road that is currently worse hit by the problem but it clearly will get much worse if tailbacks are increased at South Parade/Bath Road. Like Dukes Avenue, use of these residential roads is being increased by sat navs which pay little heed to whether a road is residential or not. Ones like Waze and Google Maps dynamically update route recommendations depending on traffic conditions and will recommend a right turn on Bath Road before Bedford Corner if there is congestion at that point. Think this is another reason why Ealing Council are unlikely to agree to a closure of the Fishers Lane underpass. It would cause another step up in the amount of traffic in the residential streets to the north. As for the Bedford Park Bicycle Club — they may want to bear in mind that people who actually do cycle through Bedford Park might not be necessarily that keen on more cars in the area.

Kevin Howard ● 2343d

It strikes me that shutting main roads is a rather drastic short term-ism way to limit cars.  What is needed is a longer term programme to change people's attitudes to driving.  Main roads are built for traffic.  If they are shut, drivers will use minor residential roads. Being told to avoid the crush on the Tube and buses in rush hours (which is several hours in London) and then shutting driving routes is not thought through properly. I agree that people living in Chiswick should not need to use their cars all the time.  Make the children walk or cycle, buy a shopping trolley (obviously, those who can't walk need to use a car and need parking), but many drivers will be from beyond Chiswick and visiting the shops or driving through Chiswick en route to work, schools or somewhere else.  Shutting main roads and parking is unhelpful to through-drivers and a nuisance for local residents and will increase local pollution levels.This issue need coordinated planning within LB Hounslow and across other boroughs too.

Lucy Chambers ● 2343d

If Turnham Green Terrace and Fishers Lane are closed to through traffic, there will inevitably be a drop in the north-south traffic that used these routes, particularly  to the benefit of a quieter Avenue. I'm afraid you're a bit late to try to keep Abinger/Blenheim secret as a rat run. Less traffic on the Avenue will help here, but even better would be blocking through access to Bath Road. I don't think any resident on either Woodstock or Priory Road wants direct access reopened up to the Avenue, and I think those who live on Abinger and Blenheim Roads would likely feel the same.

Tom Pike ● 2343d

As discussed on another thread, the idea of Local Authorities being able to inform SatNav databases of 'virtual' road closures and no-go areas without actually blocking the roads was thought to be quite appealing, and would at least stop strangers being told to 'nip through Bedford Park'.

Peter Evans ● 2343d

'If Turnham Green Terrace and Fishers Lane are closed to through traffic, there will inevitably be a drop in the north-south traffic that used these routes, particularly  to the benefit of a quieter Avenue.'Can you explain why?

Dan Evans ● 2343d

I suspect in practice it's mostly regulars and often locals taking the rat runs. I'm sure most residents would prefer living on a quieter, cleaner and safer street to cutting a minute off a car trip.

Tom Pike ● 2343d

For example, traffic that is currently turning into Southfield Road and then taking St Albans or the Avenue to Fishers Lane or Turnham Green Terrace will just stay on Acton Lane. It's really difficult to understand why the Bedford Park Society are opposing this.

Tom Pike ● 2343d

Nobody would use St Albans Avenue to drive north to south as Acton Lane or the Avenue would always be much quicker.  Traffic approaching from the north intending to go generally west would continue to take Acton Lane as they always have done. If you close Fishers Lane and TGT traffic intending to go generally east would either take the Avenue or Acton Lane and then the whole length of South Parade. This isn't theoretical. Everytime there is a closure of the Fishers Lane underpass or TGT, South Parade gets much more congested. I've observed this scores of time in the decades I've lived in the area.

Andrew OSullivan ● 2342d

Seems the Bedford Park Society has withdrawn its request that members should fight to retain the freedom to drive on TGT.

Ken Munn ● 2342d

I’m pleased to say that the Bedford Park Society has apologised and hastily backtracked. It has now issued a further letter to members after receiving multiple complaints. Thank you. ‘We would like to apologise if we have given the impression that the Society is in any way wishing to promote the use of cars’ ‘This initiative is driven by government guidance aimed at increasing travel on foot and by cycle while the use of public transport is likely to be restricted for the foreseeable future. The Government would prefer that people did not use their cars as an alternative, and councils are being encouraged to take steps accordingly and to implement temporary measures, reallocating road space.’Chiswick Calendar is leading on the full story this morning. https://chiswickcalendar.co.uk/bedford-park-residents-split-on-car-ban/

Edward Seaton ● 2342d

"The Bedford Park Bicycle Club was not consulted."That's too bad, Ed. Seems there is a lot of not consulting that goes on in Chiswick. Gets your ire up, doesn't it?

David Lesniak ● 2342d

Nobody who knew Turnham Green Terrace was closed would take Southfield/Avenue/South Parade as an alternative to going straight down Acton Lane. Traffic responses to unexpected and temporary closures are quite different to longer term shifts as the traffic adjusts.Excellent news that the Bedford Park Society has backed down from opposing these plans. Not only are they moving back towards the progressive ideals of those that founded and first lived in Bedford Park, but they will become much more attractive to the younger residents who see a future beyond personal car ownership.

Tom Pike ● 2342d

Getting mailbox full message!

John Hall ● 2342d

As these measures are supposed to be temporary I am not sure that the longer term is that relevant.However, the mechanism for traffic to adjust would require the availability of alternative routes of which there are none or the switch to other modes of transport. As public transport can no longer be seen as the automatic and obvious alternative this isn't likely to happen.There must already be a big question mark over the ability of Acton Lane, Bath Road and South Parade to cope if traffic rises to above what they were before lockdown as restricted capacity on public transport leads to more car journeys. It doesn't seem to me sensible to exacerbate this problem.The shame is it may have been a worthwhile exercise to implement these changes a couple of months ago when traffic volumes were lower but the timing now means that the closure(s) may now be coming into effect just as traffic starts to build up again. I don't think we can afford to take the view if jams start to develop there will ultimately be an adjustment. While that is happening the local bus routes will not be functioning as they should leading to extra risk and inconvenience for key workers.

Andrew OSullivan ● 2342d

"As these measures are supposed to be temporary I am not sure that the longer term is that relevant."Andrew, "temporary" in this context applies to the measures used to close roads.  The longer term plans for the road is a separate point.For example, a road could be closed with a temporary fugly concrete bollard.  If the Experimental Traffic Order process decides the closure should be permanent, this could be replaced by a parklet with planting, seating and something generally more aesthetically pleasing than concrete.The closure itself is done under an Experimental Traffic Order and the council has 18 months to decide whether to make this permanent, revert to the original situation or indeed change the arrangement.Government guidance says they will only fund temporary (= cheap) measures.  There is nothing about whether an  Experimental Traffic Order should be made permanent or not as that is left up to the decision process on a case by case basis. Indeed a requirement of an ETO is that measures must be capable of being easily removed.

Michael Robinson ● 2342d

This isn't a closure for just a few weeks, so the number unaware of the closure and zigzagging to find a way through will fall away. In this case satnav will help, not hinder, the situation.The current traffic along Bath Road and South Parade to and from Fishers Lane and Turnham Green Terrace won't be travelling these routes and their traffic levels will fall, not rise.You make a good point about the buses. They are very often held up Fishers Lane and Turnham Green Terrace by other traffic. If your major concern is to prioritise buses I might have thought you would be strongly supportive of restricting the other traffic along these roads.

Tom Pike ● 2342d

I don't think this is the Bedford Park Society of old, I think the old guard of heavyweight long-term residents got outnumbered by pushy newcomers and gave up. The pushy newcomers now rule the roost.

Viv Griffiths ● 2342d

'The pushy newcomers now rule the roost.'Rather like Parliament, then.

Ken Munn ● 2342d

Not at all. It was some of the most established residents who had become increasingly dismayed by some of the unrepresentative pro-car statements from the Society who took a stand on this. It really was putting the Society on the wrong side of history when Bedford Park had originally prided itself on being ahead on the curve. Well done to them. We will be rejoining.

Tom Pike ● 2342d

I'm really struggling to understand how it could possibly be argued that closing north south access at any point could reduce traffic on Bath Road/South Parade/Acton Lane. This seems to me to fly in the face of logic as well as the actual experience we have of previous closures. There won't be more car journeys in the area but most drivers heading north/south will have to travel further east/west to get to or from the access point. So if TGT shuts the driver who would have used that earlier will have to either drive along Bath Road to Prebend Gardens or South Parade to Fishers Lane. If Fishers Lane was also shut the journey would be along South Parade/Acton Lane. I'm not sure how Experimental Traffic Orders work but the article on these plans states that the government is funding a six month trial which means that any closure would run to the end of the year.  I'd be quite happy to be proved wrong and the access restrictions led to no significant increase in congestion on these roads. In which case a permanent closure would clearly be justified. However, if I am right is there any mechanism for ending the trial early and what would it take to prompt you to call for one?

Kevin Howard ● 2342d

If Turnham Green Green and Fishers Lane are closed, that north-south traffic will then take the next shortest route to get under the lines at Chiswick Park or Stamford Brook. In most cases that will reduce travel along Bath Road or South Parade compared to before.Traffic is often modelled as fluid flow. If there is an obstruction, directly behind it the flow drops. The overall result depends on road geometry, and drivers finding the shortest route, but Bedford Park will benefit from generally reduced traffic by the stopping of flow through through Fishers Lane and Turnham Green Terrace.

Tom Pike ● 2342d

Tom, the problem is that the next shortest route is along Bath Road or South Parade.

Andrew OSullivan ● 2342d

Turning down these roads will no longer be quicker for all the traffic coming south from Acton Lane or down Goldhawk Road. They’ll keep going down to the High Road rather than make their way across to Turnham Green or Fishers Lane as they currently do. Only those journeys starting or finishing close to Fishers Lane or Turnham Green will contribute to higher traffic on South Parade and Bath Road.  All other north-south traffic will no longer travel along these roads.

Tom Pike ● 2342d

Sorry. It is probably me being dense but I didn't understand any of that. Isn't there a danger of over-complication here? Surely if you have a certain number of access points along a series of roads and you reduce it, the average length of journey to reach an access point will be increased?

Andrew OSullivan ● 2342d

Andrew,It’s not that simple...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess's_paradoxIt is entirely possible that more routes can make journey times longer and fewer routes make them shorter. I don’t know if it will apply in this case but it is a recognised scenario in traffic engineering.

Michael Robinson ● 2342d

There is perturbation and music on the streets of Bedford Park.

Stewart Jones ● 2342d

Just think of an arrow pointing south at the top of Acton Lane and representing the flow of traffic coming down along that route and heading south of the tube lines.  With Turnham Green Terrace and Fishers Lane open this arrow feeds flow across Bedford Park. If they’re both closed the arrow just continues straight down to under the lines at Chiswick Park. Hence closing these two routes reduces this flow of traffic across Bedford Park.  You can then repeat the exercise for Goldhawk Road. I hope that’s clearer.

Tom Pike ● 2341d

It's a clever theory but doesn't apply to the situation we have here. It really isn't complicated - if you have fewer routes, the routes that remain will have more traffic. The only questions that need answering are how much will the increase be and do the roads onto which the traffic is being displaced have the capacity to handle it.

Andrew OSullivan ● 2341d

There will be less overall traffic. For example, for some the choice of driving down to the High Road rather than walking or cycling will tilt away from jumping in the car.As soon as the choice is made not to get in a car, local retail benefits. That’s why all the old photos show a thriving High Road despite a much lower population. It’s a negative-sum game for the high streets to encourage people to shop by car in an attempt to draw in more customers. While one high street thinks it might gain a competitive advantage over another, the net result is more people driving to shop off any high street. Every trip to Kew Retail Park takes a purchase away from the high street. It’s a classic tragedy of the commons where while every high-street retailer might want parking outside their premises, the overall effect is a loss to them all.

Tom Pike ● 2341d

Thing is, the theory has been shown to happen in reality. Adding routes have made journey times worse, removing routes have made them better.That’s why it is called a paradox because there are real life examples with the theory showing why, that contradict your statement.I’m not claiming that it will apply in this case because it is all specific to the particular network and traffic volumes.In this context, capacity translates into journey duration, so if journey durations increase, the question is how many drivers will give up and take another route, decide the journey didn’t need to be taken by car, change the journey time, until an equilibrium is reached.

Michael Robinson ● 2341d

Okay, I think I've got it. It could be that is one subset of traffic flows for which there might be a marginal benefit but even then I'm not convinced this can be assumed. Traffic travelling south along Acton Lane intending to veer west or south west would continue to stay on Acton Lane as it always has done. Traffic intending to go east or south east might use Fishers Lane or TGT. What you are hoping is that if one or both are closed then more of these journeys will be done via Acton Lane turning left onto Chiswick High Road. This could happen but the offset is that those who choose to turn left at the Duke of Sussex junction will now be on South Parade/Bedford Corner/Bath Road for longer.The junction of Acton Lane and CHR already can get congested and the roundabout by Chiswick Park tube is a nightmare so I am not convinced that many more people will take this route even if their options to go east/south east are reduced.Still don't understand your point about Goldhawk Road. Surely anybody approaching from the east intending to get to Chiswick High Road wouldn't continue along Bath Road but would turn left at the Duchess of Cambridge.

Andrew OSullivan ● 2341d

Why would any southbound traffic on Action Lane wanting to get under the tube lines only decide to turn left along South Parade *after* Fishers Lane and Turnham Green Terrace were closed? There's just not going to be the offset you suggest.From Goldhawk Road, southbound cars now head along Bath Road if their current route is down Turnham Green Terrace or Fishers Lane. If these are both closed those cars will keep on Goldhawk Road down to the High Road.I return to the general principle that if you put in an obstacle across the general direction of travel, flow will be reduced behind that obstacle. In this case, Bedford Park would be expected to benefit and that's confirmed it you look at the road layout in more detail.

Tom Pike ● 2341d

"As soon as the choice is made not to get in a car, local retail benefits. That’s why all the old photos show a thriving High Road despite a much lower population"Except for the fact that in olden days you didn't have Amazon, Ocado, Deliveroo, Uber, etc. Surely, Tom, you know people don't shop the way they used to when only sepia prints were available. Now we have smart phones.

David Lesniak ● 2341d

Except for the fact that in olden days you didn't have Amazon, Ocado, Deliveroo, Uber, etc. You may have a fair point on Amazon however I don't agree that Deliveroo is a  replacement for the hight St.  The experience of going out to your favourite restaurant far outweighs getting a takeaway and cost wise Deliveroo is not great either as its actually pretty expensive.  Speaking to the owner of my favourite restaurant I got to learn just how much of a cut deliveroo take its pretty shocking.

Matthew Swain ● 2341d

All I can say is that Chiswick is truly blessed to have so many traffic flow experts as residents.

Carl Wynne ● 2341d

I know the most retail damage I inflicted on the high street came from when I would hop into a car. Now partly as we get the basic weekly shop delivered I don't even need a car and instead walk or cycle down to TGT or the High Road and spend much more than I used to there. Altogether a more pleasant and healthy way of living.The real competitor to the high streets is retail focussed on car access. High streets win if jumping in a car to go shopping is no longer the preferred option.

Tom Pike ● 2341d

'Why would any southbound traffic on Action Lane wanting to get under the tube lines only decide to turn left along South Parade *after* Fishers Lane and Turnham Green Terrace were closed? There's just not going to be the offset you suggest.'It's not that more cars will do so but that they will have to travel further along this section of road. For instance a car that previously might have gone south on TGT could choose to do so on Prebend Gardens."From Goldhawk Road, southbound cars now head along Bath Road if their current route is down Turnham Green Terrace or Fishers Lane. If these are both closed those cars will keep on Goldhawk Road down to the High Road."Nobody would drive this route. If you were intending to get to the High Road you would stay on Goldhawk Road to do so.I am expert in very little, if anything, but I have walked, driven and cycled on these roads for decades. Going through the likely patterns of drivers in the area most of them would result in increased use of Bath Road, South Parade and Acton Lane if one or both of the north south access points were shut. Looking at a map and trying to work out how things might work isn't going to give you the full picture - it led you to believe St Albans Avenue was a viable cut through as well as the error with Goldhawk Road.I'm convinced closures at either or both TGT and Fishers Lane will led to serious congestion on these roads as they always have done in the past. I may be wrong but as at least the TGT plan looks very likely to proceed we are going to find out. My concern would be that there will be an inflexible response to any problems that develop. The excuse that traffic would need time to adjust and the congestion will go away cannot be used because the conditions will be very favourable initially due to partial lockdown, summer holidays and good weather. What trigger would be necessary for you to say the trial wasn't working and needed to be abandoned immediately?

Andrew OSullivan ● 2340d

Hi Andrew, only 20 years of experience here but anyone with local knowledge would know that a substantial proportion of the traffic along Bath Road from Goldhawk Road continues down Turnham Green Terrace or Fishers Lane. It's rather bizarre to suggest otherwise.I think you might be right that some issues might not be evident initially due to the lighter traffic, though it's reasonable to expect some teething problems. And I think you would in turn agree that the E3 would certainly benefit from the absence of queues at the junction with the High Road. If the longer term balance is clearly detrimental, which would take into account the effect on retail on Turnham Green Terrace as well as well as changes to traffic flow and active travel, then there is the opportunity to reverse these measures. It is to the credit of our government that they have opened up this opportunity for some exciting possibilities for Chiswick. Trialling them and then making those that work stick is both progressive, flexible and eminently sensible.

Tom Pike ● 2340d

Tom, I'm pretty sure you are wrong about the flow of traffic from Goldhawk Road. It would make little sense to carry along Bath Road to get to CHR. There are usually tailbacks at Bedford Corner and then a very short phase at the lights at the bottom of TGT. It would always be quicker to continue along ro the end of Goldhawk Road and turn right.There would be a benefit to the E3 due to ease of progress at the end of TGT but that could potentially be counteracted by more congestion at Bedford Corner. We'll find out soon enough.Entirely agree with your last sentence though as long as the need to be progressive doesn't outweigh the need to be sensible and flexible.

Paul Corcoran ● 2340d

I have driven from Goldhawk Road to Fishers Lane on my way home countless times to avoid the lights and often congested junctions with CHR at Goldhawk Road, the bus gate, Chiswick Lane And TGT. I doubt I’m the only local who knows that this is a handy and often quicker route. I won’t miss it though and much prefer the idea of Fishers being closed and Chiswick Common and Acton Green being linked as a continuous wide open green space for people to enjoy.

Paul Campbell ● 2340d

"It would always be quicker to continue along ro the end of Goldhawk Road and turn right."Paul, it's currently showing on Googlemaps you save a minute if you take Bath Road and Turnham Green Terrace to the High Road. Of course the optimum route will change with traffic conditions, but it often makes sense to take Bath Road.

Tom Pike ● 2340d

Possibly with clear roads the difference would be marginal but as soon as there is any traffic you would encounter delays at Bath Road and need at least one phase to get through the lights at TGT. Going via CHR you would encounter one extra set of lights but traffic tends to flow and if CHR is congested you can always count on TGT being more so. At rush hour you would be more delayed by the pedestrian crossings at Bedford Corner and TGT than you would on by the lights at Chiswick Lane. Experience would teach any regular user of this route during busy times to avoid TGT.Paul Campbell's route is just preposterous. If he really has been going this way he has wasted a lot of time.  As a general principle motorists should be encouraged to avoid residential roads as much as possible and stick to main thoroughfares so going this way wouldn't just be dim it would be anti-social.

Paul Corcoran ● 2340d

Paul, Google maps is showing both the route down Turnham Green Terrace and Fishers Lane as quicker than going down Goldhawk Road. These might not be the quickest under all circumstances, these routes are going to be responsible for traffic down Bath Road.

Tom Pike ● 2340d

“Preposterous”? I think this word does not mean what you think it means.“Dim” not when it is quicker. I lived off Acton Lane for ten years before moving to Grove Park ten years ago and it took me just a few trips via Goldhawk to CHR to Chiswick Lane or continuing along the High Road to realise that half my old route would make for a quicker drive. Especially during busy hours. Bath Road to Fishers Lane and then shimmy onto Dukes and Barrowgate to head over Sutton Court Road. I know that lots of people know this route because I have followed cars using it and have been followed. It is why the right turn out of Fishers is so popular. Wave has caught up with my local knowledge now. “Anti-social” yes I couldn’t agree with you more. We are all sinners and discouragement has not proved to be an effective strategy to stop people using residential roads to shave even seconds off their journeys. Not even for me the scourge of the fixed Chiswick car lobby. Hence the need to close these routes downs to us sinners and free them for the local residents.

Paul Campbell ● 2340d

"Bath Road to Fishers Lane and then shimmy onto Dukes and Barrowgate to head over Sutton Court Road. I know that lots of people know this route because I have followed cars using it and have been followed"Irony knows no bounds. Paul details his intricate, repeated rat-running and then rails against others doing just that adding they will get overly irritated and turn to cycling. And how dare they rat run in the first place. It's better than binge watching anything on Netflix.

David Lesniak ● 2340d

As a sinner I am qualified to comment on the phenomenon of rat running and the solutions to it. It’s the benefit of being multi-modal in Chiswick for 20 years. I’ve said before plenty of times that measures that inconvenience me slightly as a driver are worth the sacrifice for the greater good. I didn’t say the other stuff. I don’t really care if they turn to cycling or not and I have also never expressed outrage at the personal decision of a driver to rat run. Always focused on measures to improve our streetscape by removing the option for people to do it.

Paul Campbell ● 2340d

Have to say I was surprised to see that the journey times were the same for using TGT to get to Goldhawk Road as I would never have considered using that route. I'm sure those who say the TGT route would get slower relatively when traffic builds up are right but even so it probably does mean Tom is right that a significant amount of traffic uses this route. This would mean that there would be some reduction in the amount of vehicles using Bath Road, South Parade if TGT and Fishers Lane were closed BUT if only TGT were closed there would be the opposite effect. That's because a proportion of vehicles coming from Goldhawk Road would carry on past Bedford Corner. The Great and the Good aren't confiding in us what their plans are but I remain sceptical that closing Fishers Lane to general traffic is practical or something that Ealing would agree to. However, without that closure there would be an increased flow of traffic from Goldhawk Road through the Bedford Park area.

Kevin Howard ● 2339d

It's just about always faster to turn off the High Road, past the Health Centre and up Fishers Lane, South Parade and Bath Road to get to Goldhawk Road. You avoid all lights you'd face if you just kept along the High Road.So I'd agree, the best option is to restrict both Fishers Lane and Turnham Green Terrace to reduce traffic through Bedford Park. Yes, it would require agreement with Ealing but given the advantages I seen no reason why that would not be forthcoming. Bus only through access would also certainly speed up the service.

Tom Pike ● 2339d

Ealing have just announced there will be a cycling exemption any traffic restrictions on Fishers Lane. I think it's reasonable to assume they're in agreement with Hounslow on this and both Fishers Lane and Turnham Green Terrace are going to be closed to through traffic.

Tom Pike ● 2339d

Can't find this announcement anywhere — can you point me to where they have made it? If it is as you describe, it is a bit of a non-statement. They might have well have said they have no intention of painting the road orange — nobody was suggesting that this was a possibility.

Kevin Howard ● 2338d

Sorry for the massively long link....Document providing background to current situation and (long) list of schemes under consideration.https://ealing.cmis.uk.com/ealing/Document.ashx?czJKcaeAi5tUFL1DTL2UE4zNRBcoShgo=a7OTnTNl4C%2foE3Me9qIEBmmuUg1Lg1yRISCB6Uvv1TIaqIZrD9ewtA%3d%3d&rUzwRPf%2bZ3zd4E7Ikn8Lyw%3d%3d=pwRE6AGJFLDNlh225F5QMaQWCtPHwdhUfCZ%2fLUQzgA2uL5jNRG4jdQ%3d%3d&mCTIbCubSFfXsDGW9IXnlg%3d%3d=hFflUdN3100%3d&kCx1AnS9%2fpWZQ40DXFvdEw%3d%3d=hFflUdN3100%3d&uJovDxwdjMPoYv%2bAJvYtyA%3d%3d=ctNJFf55vVA%3d&FgPlIEJYlotS%2bYGoBi5olA%3d%3d=NHdURQburHA%3d&d9Qjj0ag1Pd993jsyOJqFvmyB7X0CSQK=ctNJFf55vVA%3d&WGewmoAfeNR9xqBux0r1Q8Za60lavYmz=ctNJFf55vVA%3d&WGewmoAfeNQ16B2MHuCpMRKZMwaG1PaO=ctNJFf55vVA%3d

Michael Robinson ● 2338d