Forum Topic

Speed Limit on the North Circular from Chiswick Roundabout to Hanger Lane to be dropped to 20 mph

Why?

Sam Hearn ● 3d35 Comments

I'm told that pushing a stick into their front wheel is a good way to stop a cyclist, though maybe it's not among the Police approved techniques, and possibly not effective against motorised e-bikes!

Peter Evans ● 10h

I'm guessing your answer to stop motor vehicles encroaching the cycle lane at King Street is to remove the cycle lane?

Paul James ● 12h

"There needs to be more enforcement (automated and non automated).."About the only way to provide enforcement to stop cyclists jumping red lights or failing to stop at zebra crossings would be to have a squad of police waiting there - and even that would be tricky as the police are under instructions not to risk the safety of the cyclist if they refuse to stop. I don't think number plates on cycles are a viable option, but without them, it is very difficult to identify cyclists breaking the highway code in these ways.

Richard Greenhough ● 13h

And yet another non-answer from Paul.Shocking.

David Lesniak ● 13h

And it is a long way to walk beside a busy road from Chiswick Roundabout to Popes Lane.  So not a strange comment at all Simon.

Philippa Bond ● 13h

There needs to be more enforcement (automated and non automated) in general everywhere for pretty much everything.Does that help?

Paul James ● 14h

The change down to 30mph from 40mph seems reasonably sensible as long as it is well signposted. Given the relatively short stretch of road, it will only make a few seconds difference to anyone adhering to limits.The one concern I would continue to have is that it will affect the route calculations done by Sat Navs - those few seconds could cause some journeys to be redirected on residential routes or the already congested Chiswick High Road. Hopefully TfL has considered this including the impact on bus journey times.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 14h

Well, Paul, if we're looking to enforce, how about we crack down on motorcycles (the real ones) using the cycle way on King Street? The other day, two sped past me simultaneously.After all, with the Weltje proposal the concern is casualties.Odd the concern isn't fatalities which has been the case with motorcycles on the cycle lane on King Street.So much for LCC advocating for safety. Surely by now, that Kool Aid must be rancid.

David Lesniak ● 16h

That reduction makes more sense. Poor Paul James. He will just have to live with his disappointment. Maybe mummy should have told him you can’t get everything you want in life.Enforcement is always the issue on any road. The LCC answer is to shut as many roads as possible, but even that doesn’t guarantee nobody will speed. Even residents on an LTN road are known to do it.

Simon Hayes ● 1d

TBH it is rare that the traffic speed is above 30mph along most of the road between Chiswick roundabout and Hangar Lane.  Other than very early in morning or very late at night I do wonder how many people will even notice.

Justin Stephenson ● 1d

Ah, that's disappointing.Hopefuly this will be backed up by proper enforcement, aka average speed safety cameras.

Paul James ● 1d

For clarity, the speed limit is to be dropped from 40mph to 30mph (not from 30mph to 20mph).

Joanna Biddolph ● 1d

In my previous post, I did not explain that I had challenged TfL on the current speed limit, which I understood to be 40mph, as I wanted to be absolutely sure because there had been some background discussions, and some temporary changes, though they were some time ago.In 2014 I took part in a campaign led by residents to enforce the speed limit on Gunnersbury Avenue. At a meeting with TfL and the Met Police, organised by our then GLA member Tony Arbour, TfL suggested lowering the speed limit from 40mph to 30mph to be consistent with the A406 between Gunnersbury Lane/Popes Lane and Hanger Lane, and between Chiswick roundabout and Kew Bridge. After that meeting, TfL withdrew the suggestion and the 40mph speed limit remained. However, it was reduced temporarily to 30mph while Power Road bridge works took place. I have had a reply to my challenge of the current speed limit, from TfL:"Thank you for raising this. You are absolutely right to have questioned it."The confusion was caused by an error in an early draft of the letter, for which I apologise. In that draft, I mistakenly stated that the proposed speed reduction was from 30mph to 20mph. Before the letters were issued to residents, however, we identified the error and corrected it to reflect the actual proposal, which is a reduction from 40mph to 30mph."Please be assured that the proposed change is from 40mph to 30mph, and residents will receive the correct letter containing the accurate information tomorrow."I will also be contacting other stakeholders later today to explain the error in the earlier communication and share the corrected version of the letter that will be distributed to residents." Back to earlier times, which some might remember, and picking up on comments above about revenue generation ... speeding continued despite enforcement cameras one of which was crowned, in January 2017, "Most Prolific Revenue Generator" raising over £1m in five months which became £1.5m in six months. https://www.chiswickw4.com/default.asp?section=info&page=conroad220.htmhttps://metro.co.uk/2017/01/03/londons-most-prolific-speed-camera-has-raked-in-1-5-million-in-just-six-months-6357822/

Joanna Biddolph ● 1d

As others have suggested, it would make more sense to change the single lane stretch of the NCR from Gunnersbury Lane up and over to the Hanger Lane gyratory to 20mph.Most of the original guidance for 20mph limits and zones suggests that there should be some visibly apparent justification or support for them, such as on narrow residential roads or near a school, or with constructed narrowings or chicanes.  To put them on a wide thoroughfare seems to go against this. It's the arbitrary and ad hoc nature of 20mph limits that can change from borough to borough on the whim of a local authority, that make them more difficult to follow, which might almost be intentional!

Peter Evans ● 1d

The section between Popes Lane and Chiswick Roundabout is currently 40mph. It won’t be anything to do with safety but simply a cash grab via speeding fines. If the signage is as inadequate as that on the section of the A316 that was reduced to 30mph last year it will be easy money. If you join the 316 from the Isleworth direction there is no signage whatsoever advising of the 30mph limit.

Simon Hayes ● 1d

The source was an email from Hounslow Council to Chiswick Gunnersbury ward councillors telling us that TfL was about to announce a reduction of the speed limit from 30mph to 20mph between the junction of Gunnersbury Avenue and Gunnersbury Lane/Popes Lane and Chiswick Roundabout, with work starting early in 2027.Email from Hounslow council:Dear Chiswick Gunnersbury Councillors,I trust you are well.  Please note the attached notification from TfL to LBH about their intention to lower speeds on the A406/Gunnersbury Avenue within your ward.  This is part of TfLs programme of lowering speeds across their network in London and follows speed reductions in some sections of the A4 .  This letter is being despatched by TfL to residents and should land on doorsteps this week.  You may also receive this via TfL communications but we wanted to share this with yourselves too."End of emailWatch out for a letter from TfL which should be landing through letterboxes from 4th September.

Joanna Biddolph ● 1d

The news report about cyclists failing to stop at red lights gave a good indication of the prevailing attitude of the cycling lobbyists. Entitlement was the word used.Simon Munk should be ashamed for blaming pedestrians trying to cross the road making it dangerous. The fault lies entirely with his cycling chums not obeying the rules of the road. They bleat on enough about dangers to them but never accept responsibility for themselves.And claiming cyclists don’t cause danger is laughable. Perhaps Mr Munk would care to stand in front of an e-bike travelling at full pelt to see how well he feels after it hits him.I wonder how many of those cyclists take their cavalier attitude to signals and road markings into their motor vehicles? Quite a few, no doubt. Maybe they need to be educated better.Clearly all that cycling doesn’t improve one’s intelligence, Mr Munk.

Simon Hayes ● 2d

That’s a very strange comment Philippa. The road exists to keep motor vehicles off those quiet residential streets. I wonder when you last crossed it. It’s not very difficult to get over by Chiswick roundabout, or further up where it meets Popes Lane, not difficult after dark either.

Simon Hayes ● 2d

It is not a road I'd like to cross at night on my own at all - whether over a pedestrian bridge or elsewhere!

Philippa Bond ● 2d

Jeremy, there is an existing pedestrian crosswalk that goes up and over Gunnersbury. Ramped, even.

David Lesniak ● 2d

Pedestrian crossing would be a bit pointless on the dual carriageway section of Gunnersbury Avenue because for most of its length you would just encounter the wall to Gunnersbury Park. Further down there is Gunnersbury Cemetery, which could do with improved pedestrian access, but as there is hardly any residential property across the north circular from it - a crossing isn't the answer.Crossings would also deliver the same problems as speed limit - transferring traffic flows from a dual carriageway designed to cater for large volumes of traffic into local residential streets.No source for the suggestion of speed reductions has been forthcoming and, for the reasons above, it would be plain daft to reduce the limit between Chiswick Roundabout and Gunnersbury Lane. However, there might be a case for a reduction between Gunnersbury Lane and Uxbridge Road where it is currently 30mph - this is single carriageway and lined by people's homes on both sides. Traffic rarely gets up to 30mph anyway at peak times so the overall effect would be minimal. Perhaps this is what is being considered and the intent has been lost in Chinese whispers.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 2d

Seeing is believing!!!! Thanks for u tube.

Nicholas Beard ● 2d

Julian Pavey ● 3d

Oh yes, pedestrian crossings. The ones that cyclists never stop at. How’s that going to work?

Simon Hayes ● 3d

>On a road like the North Circular 20mph is a bit low!Not when they've added a few pedestrian crossings.

Paul James ● 3d

Why dont they try a 30mph limit. On a road like the North Circular 20mph is a bit low!

Nicholas Beard ● 3d

Just like Wimbledon Parkside - why is it 20mph, other than to raise money? We've been taken over by lunatics. There are large detached properties one side - and a forest on the other side of the road.

J Morse ● 3d

Mouth breathers like Paul see all cars as evil and you’ll find that he and his LCC chums spend inordinate amounts of time licking the balls of various transport decision makers in London to make driving almost impossible for anyone. No doubt this proposal - which isn’t reported anywhere yet - is yet another aspect of it.Doubtless a benefit will be the extra revenue from drivers inadvertently straying into reckless 21mph speeds has been considered by cash strapped TfL.Paul’s frequent lament is ‘too many cars’, yet he never says what an acceptable number of vehicles would be. Mainly because he’s unable to provide such information. He’s also happy to drive when he feels like it, thus contributing to the very problem of which he complains. One imagines he doesn’t insist on visitors to his home in Hanwell travelling by any other method than car. The rank whiff of hypocrisy always lingers round these types.Considering it’s a major trunk road carrying a massive volume of traffic - keeping them off those precious ‘residential roads’, eh Paul - the accident rate is remarkably low, and those incidents that do occur are usually nothing to do with speed limits.Paul has been regularly challenged for his extremist views on the Ealing Today forum. He rarely posts there now, as he’s been rumbled and can’t keep repeating his nonsense. It seems Chiswick is his new playground.

Simon Hayes ● 3d

I don't know Paul. Enlighten us.I couldn't find any other reference to this proposal but if it is confirmed it seems very ill-conceived. Aside from it being unlikely to make the A406 safer - removing the speed differential with local roads (in some cases bringing it below) would mean that travel apps will tend to direct more traffic off the large duel carriageway intended to carry large volumes of traffic on to residential streets.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 3d

Never realised it was an accident but traffic was reduced to single lane.

Janice Evans ● 3d

What us it called when people go straight to the exceptional cases on a discussion?

Paul James ● 3d

There was a fatal collision on this stretch of road recently but the fact that the driver was charged with dangerous driving suggests ignoring the speed limit was a factor. This wouldn't have been averted if the speed limit was lower.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 3d

>Why?Is it because the silly number of car crashes?

Paul James ● 3d

It was chaos on Gunnersbury Lane a couple of weeks back.

Janice Evans ● 3d

To keep Paul James happy ?

Richard Greenhough ● 3d