Tom, this cut and past argument applies to towns and their suburbs, or US cities, not really to London and areas like Chiswick. There is no 'out of town retail' that is readily accessible, unless you want a day out. In many towns in the UK there is, so people do then have a choice once they get in a car, which I think is the point the argument you copied is trying to make.Chiswick and most of London was built before mass car ownership. The issue in Chiswick, which many choose to ignore, is that its not just a shopping destination but its location means there are large volumes of through traffic. So closing TGT just displaces a lot of this traffic, it doesn't remove it. And as more roads are closed the few remaining routes become ever more congested. Fishers Lane is now noticeably busier, and when this is closed it will move onto Acton Lane.Also, as is evident in Chiswick by all the parked cars, people arrive by different modes of transport. The free 30 mins on TGT was a welcome local scheme that attracted shoppers, not put them off. That is not theory, that happened. CS9 will attract more cyclists, at least we hope so. As would a safe north-south cycle route, which we still lack and which scarce resources could have better been spent on. Many people south of A4 will now likely abandon CHR and drive to Richmond, I find myself doing that more. And for now there is no sign of Richmond following LBH in closing roads. You want to put everything as a binary choice, car bad, everything else good. Encourage cycling for sure, but unless action is taken to stop the mass of vehicles coming into London every day and diverting through Chiswick, these piecemeal solutions will achieve nothing. In fact, they risk making things worse and buses will also get stuck in the congestion.
Paul Green ● 2306d