Forum Topics

The Full Horror of A4 Restrictions and Closure for Chiswick and all West London

Over the last week articles and comments are appearing as to the works required to repair on the A4.  The full impact is only now dawning on Chiswick and west London residents.  Yet some details are unclear and raise many more questions that need answers.  Works start in just over a week.   We all know the impact will be huge across Chiswick, Kew and surrounds. Expectations are of back-ups all the way into central London along the A4 corridor, with only a single lane due to be operational westbound at the Cromwell Road Railway Bridge, and only two lanes eastbound also reducing flow into London.  It will not be until at least October Half Term that some daily closures may ease.  TfL are telling people in central London to use the A40 and M40 to go west.Many operational questions will need answers but TfL and LBH have now clearly worked out the full horror about what these closures will mean.  That has become clear with a decision by TfL and LBH to announce the suspension of restrictions in Grove Park and potentially turn it into a car park. This is suspicious and gives the game away but also looks poorly thought through.  It also raises more important questions as to the competence and motives of both organisations.At one level it looks like TfL realising that the impending gridlock for all A roads from Mortlake, Sheen, Richmond, Kew in the south through to Hammersmith, Fulham, Barons Court, Earls Court, Kensington, and Shepherds Bush in the west can be a little alleviated at the expense of residents in Grove Park.  In addition, they probably also worked out that they and LBH could not be seen to profit from the further misery of accumulating fines on Hartington and Staveley Roads.Then there are the questions of timing, motives, and consequential effects, such as: when was it determined that there was a structural issue with the Bridge?  Has the issue been known for some time?  Are the works exploratory, or like Hammersmith Bridge and the Hammersmith flyover is this a situation where in September, London will be informed that on further inspection, we are going to have to close this section of road, and the Overground and Tube below?  Trust in TfL will continue to hit new lows for residents across west London.  For LBH this is a disaster.   They look completely caught out.  Just when they were hoping to repair the relationship with Chiswick, they are going to subject them to gridlock. The only good that may come out is that LBH may finally realise that they need to work with the majority of Chiswick residents through the Residents groups and Councillors, rather than the small niche campaign groups going forward.  Those that are going to suffer the most are those that have so far been negatively impacted by the current Streetspace schemes.  Carers will take even longer to reach their patients, and bus users will be stuck on Chiswick High Road going nowhere.  Residents of Burlington Lane will suffer again, as the inequity of the Staveley Rd barrier diverts all traffic down their road.  If LBH can suspend and abandon a scheme at the drop of TfLs hat, they can clearly start to work with residents.  With the impending gridlock to come, LBH will owe Chiswick much and LBH positively could use the time with a new approach, by abandoning the current Streetspace schemes and plans for future phases and instead work with the majority of residents to put in schemes that the majority want. 

Jonathan Mabbutt ● 1549d43 Comments ● 1542d

Uber - Snatched Phone

Here's a story.  I would be interested to know whether this rings true with anyone else’s experiences.At 1 am this morning I was trying to order a Uber from the City (Barbican) to get home in the country.  It's a £155 trip (but I had no other way home). It's difficult to get Uber drivers to accept for such long journeys, so often you get told that a driver is on his way, then cancels.As I was standing on the corner, looking at my mobile phone, it just vanished from my hand (literally, just like that) and as I looked up someone was cycling away with my phone in my hand, with the Uber app still open.  After faffing around with calling the police (fortunately I also had my work phone with me), I eventually gone home after my wife organised a minicab to pick me up.  In the meantime I was able to call EE to block my phone's SIM.So I got home about 4am absolutely knackered as I have had just 3 or 4 hours sleep each night this week, working on a deal which had to be completed by midnight. And no doubt the fact that I was absolutely exhausted meant I was less alert.This morning I checked my credit cards linked to my phone.  A charge for £155 had gone through for Uber (my Uber account is liked to the credit card). I called the card company, who told me that Uber had already cancelled the charge.And my thought is this.  I was in a very quiet area (the new Crossrail  entrance to Barbican, on the corner of Smithfield market).  Not an obvious place to look for victims for an opportunistic phone snatcher - and the bloke was obviously a professional - he shot past at full speed, and grabbed the phone from my hand so swiftly I did not even feel it go - it was there, then it wasn't there.The Uber app was open, because I was looking at it to see if a car was on its way.Then an Uber charge appears on my cardfor a ride that was never accepted or took place.Am I being completely paranoid here or was I set up?  I.e. was the snatcher working in cahoots with an Uber driver knowing that at 1am on a Friday night it was possible that people ordering rides might be a bit worse for wear (in my defence - I had had two small glasses of celebratory champagne – but I was certainly not sizzled – just absolutely knackered after an intensive week).The snatcher would have had very precise details of my location, and know that I would have phone in hand on the roadside.Has anyone else’s heard stories that suggest that people ordering Ubers at night might be being targeted by phone snatchers, woking in cahoots with Uber drivers?

T P Howell ● 1547d6 Comments ● 1546d

Dumb DOTT (cycles)

I regularly send these sort of images to John Todd and Katherine Dunne. No answers. But I think I've solved a riddle as to why these vehicles continue to litter streets in W4. This morning I forgot my keys. Mind you I walked to Hammersmith to find this out. Not really in the mood to walk back and then back again, I thought I'd avail myself of the e-bikes cluttering the pavement on King Street. Easy enough, I thought. It was. Fun fact: you DO NOT have to prove your of age (16) unless you count ticking a box as evidence. You also DO NOT have to submit your drivers license there and then. This is why we see kids clearly not of age using these vehicles. As I "pedaled" along CS9, I learned just how clunky and heavy these things are due to the uneven pavement on a brand new cycleway. The area around manholes is particularly thrilling to one's ass. Once I crossed Goldhawk headed west, the bike died. So it was all down to me with no assist. Fine. A heavy bike for that, but fine. Once I got home and dismounted, I learned I incurred a penalty for having gone out of bounds. At least now I know why the bike died. (sidenote — the technology exists to kill the battery when crossing a line, and it also exists to identify contravention...and we can't do this for regular cyclists???). Mind you there is nothing on the app that tells you what and where those bounds are, just that I was out of them and I must pay for my ignorance. There was no available information to educate the user. A bit like giving a ticket to a driver for failing to stop absent a stop sign. Sorry, but reading the forum doesn't count. Would a tourist know? Your uncle? Folks from W6? Nah. In and out of the house now with keys, I tried to hop back on the bike. No can do. Once its out of bounds, its off limits. Now we know why there is no uptake on bikes left in W4. So I dragged it to the corner to get it out of the way. No small feat. But it begs the question who pays for the LBH admin costs in correcting the situation? Picking up the litter as it were. DOTT has its ill-gotten gains. LBH gets the litter. I also wonder about liabilities for such a loose system. Under-age kid uses loop hole to hop on and gets injured in W4. Who pays? 

David Lesniak ● 1554d22 Comments ● 1546d