Forum Topic

Disabled parking

I am hearing on the grapevine that disabled parking spaces on Devonshire Road are going to be increased from 0 to 6. A few people on this forum have stated a view that we need to have a culture change where those who can use their cars less often on local journeys do, and ensure that those who can't, have better access than before. I think this is a great move in that direction.Some people will undoubtedly say what about the elderly who do not yet have blue badges but may do so in the near future? Well hopefully they will feel somewhat reassured that we are moving to a society that values the needs of people with reduced mobility much more and expects those with more mobility to compromise, change and even accept minor inconvenience to enable that. And also they will be able to use the loading bays to pick up or drop off any heavy loads.

Paul Campbell ● 2330d11 Comments

Ezxcellent news if that were to happen.

Jennifer Selig ● 2330d

Not sure this has been thought through. The assumption seems to be that the bays would not be used particularly often and therefore the changes would contribute to a reduction in traffic on the road. However, don't forget that if you are reducing parking spaces overall then that has an impact on blue badge holders who can park for free where they like. There is likely to be a change in behaviour when blue badge holders realise that they have a much better chance of getting a parking space on Devonshire Road than anywhere else.I couldn't find any numbers on how many blue badge holders there were in Hounslow but the number given out each year in the borough is between 1-2,000. A conservative assumption for the total in the borough would be 6,000 and therefore around 1,000 for the Chiswick area. Blue badge holders are far more likely than the average motorist to drive to park to shop.It is therefore not unlikely that there will be a regular flow of traffic coming up Devonshire Road to park which reduces the overall benefit of closure. Presumably these disabled bays will be on the south side of the junction with Prince of Wales Terrace because bays on the north side will have to be removed to allow for the two way flow of traffic that is being introduced there. Very little or no pedestrianisation appears to be happening and no extra space for social distancing is being created.The more details that the Hounslow traffic department leak out about this scheme the more marginal the benefits appear.  The cost, just to remind people, apart from the damage that local traders claim the changes would do to their business, is the extra traffic that will be directed towards the Fishers Lane, Duke Road junction. Speaking as a cyclist who uses that on a regular basis, it is dangerous enough already.

Andrew OSullivan ● 2330d

Andrew, in a parking survey done for Chiswick Flower Market around the corner in the car park in front of the George IV, none of the 3 disabled spaces were occupied even when the rest of the car park was full which suggests demand for these spaces is less than the others. Even with the same demand as free parking at the George IV car park, which is a space turning over every 45 mins on average, 6 spaces would mean 7.5 cars per hour. That volume of traffic isn’t going to create much of an issue for people walking in the middle of Devonshire Rd (although there will also be traffic for loading as well)On your other point about Fishers Lane, you’ll be glad to hear that closure of Fishers Lane to motor traffic came up in the Ealing Council Cabinet meeting last night and the leader confirmed he had mentioned it to officers.However it is just one of many items on Ealing’s list and they like other councils have yet to secure funding from DfT/TfL. Measures on Fishers Lane would need coordination with Hounslow.

Michael Robinson ● 2330d

"It is therefore not unlikely that there will be a regular flow of traffic coming up Devonshire Road to park"? This is 6 parking spaces, so if they are occupied for 30 mins, that's 12 cars an hour, more a dribble than a flow.You'd be wrong to assume the traders are all against the scheme. There is vocal opposition by a few, who also don't like the improved planting on DR. More traders can see the opportunities. I agree there is a potential issue with traffic on Fishers Lane, but for different reasons. With the imminent closure of TGT to cars (incidentally, we're not hearing much vocal opposition of the traders there) there will likely be increased traffic under the bridge, already a bad pinch point for both pedestrians and vehicles. A similar restriction there would reduce traffic down South Parade, improve bus reliability  (on top of what we'll see from the TGT closure) and reduce traffic on what I agree is a notorious junction at the CHR end.

Tom Pike ● 2330d

"Presumably these disabled bays will be on the south side of the junction with Prince of Wales Terrace because bays on the north side will have to be removed to allow for the two way flow of traffic that is being introduced there. Very little or no pedestrianisation appears to be happening and no extra space for social distancing is being created."What's your source for this information?  Guy Lambert said 10 days ago that "the plan is not to make Devonshire two way but to make it access only".  There are currently 16 parking spaces in front of the shops. If these are replaced by 6 disabled spaces, that's still a reduction by 10 spaces which can be used to provide for social distancing.

Richard Jennings ● 2330d

I thought the plan was for anyone accessing PoW Terrace to go both in and out via Chiswick High Road. I may have imagined this but my recollection is that someone reasonably authoratitive described the scheme this way on this forum. My point has been missed about demand for disabled spaces. There may have been little usage of the bays previously but if you restrict availability overall and concentrate supply in a particular area many blue badge holders will now use Devonshire Road as their first option when choosing where to park. I agree this will only result in a trickle of traffic but that is pretty much the current situation.As you know I find it hard to believe that restricting one or both of the north south access routes will not increase traffic on South Parade but we have discussed that to death elsewhere. If the roads have to be reopened because delays do start occurring would you then accept that, because there has been no reduction in pressure on the  Fishers Lane/Duke Road junction that the extra traffic directed that way due to the closure of Devonshire Road needs to be considered again?

Andrew OSullivan ● 2330d

Hopefully there will not be a concentration of disabled spaces on Devonshire Road as we will see more new spaces on other restricted entry roads in the vicinity as more of these ETOs get implemented. That is what I would expect to happen as there is consensus that the measures should encourage those who can walk and cycle to use their cars less frequently and make it easier for people with reduced mobility to have clear access to their amenities.

Paul Campbell ● 2330d

Andrew,There weren't any disabled parking bays on Devonshire Road previously.  The George IV car park has 3.  The availability is being increased, not restricted. Can you define what you mean by a "trickle" in terms of vehicles per hour?  I don't have previous traffic along Devonshire Rd however the total westbound traffic from Devonshire Rd to Glebe St, Fraser St, Bennett St and Wood St had a peak of about 100 vehicles per hour. If the previous southbound traffic along Devonshire Rd was similar, that is still about 10 times more than the maximum traffic that could be expected from these parking spaces.  Clearlyy preventing through traffic and reducing general parking space will reduce previous traffic.Also clearly, preventing traffic along Fishers Lane will reduce movements on the section of CHR between Fishers Lane and Duke Rd.  I gather there is a letter from Hounslow also saying there will be no entry (except cycles) onto Duke Rd from CHR (I haven't seen the letter yet myself).  That will further reduce movements on this section of CHR.Government guidance is clear on the priorities to improve streets for walking and cycling.  There is nothing about it being unacceptable to delay motor traffic.  The road closure measures being introduced such as Wellesley Rd delay motor traffic because it means some journeys now take longer.

Michael Robinson ● 2330d

Just had a letter from LBH this morning.It gives information on all the Hounslow Street Streetspace Programme (Chiswick)It clears up some questions, but doesn't quite fit whats been said on this forum.

Bernard Allen ● 2330d

As I said, I think it likely that traffic along Fishers Lane will increase with the closure of TGT. If traffic there is also restricted, then all the issues you mention are mitigated. If at the end of this the traffic on South Parade has become worse, then I'll most certainly reassess my understanding of the traffic flows there, as I'm sure you will if the traffic improves. At least we don't need to speculate for too long. One of the best aspects of this new approach is the ability to try things and reverse them if they don't work out. This is very likely going to lead to an improved Chiswick. After all, I can't think of many traffic restrictions on our local roads that are now opposed, even if they were at the time. Either the Councils have got it exactly right, or we've being slow in getting needed improvements implemented. I would guess the latter.

Tom Pike ● 2330d

"I thought the plan was for anyone accessing PoW Terrace to go both in and out via Chiswick High Road."As far as I could follow Guy Lambert's postings, there is no plan to change the direction of traffic, just to make Devonshire Road access only, which IMHO is a recipe for confusion. Therefore cars leaving Capital Motors would still turn right from PoW Terrace into Devonshire Road and then left into Ingress Street.

Richard Greenhough ● 2330d