Forum Topic

Church St Isleworth

I see that councillors have voted to close Church St in Isleworth for an 18 months trial period This was a real pain for me when I was a councillor as the residents were split about 50/50 on this issue and I predict massive traffic problems in the area for the next few months but something has to be tried and I think the councillors have got it right on this occasion by giving the closure a trial

Paul Fisher ● 3791d13 Comments

Isn't this road a beside the river, track road with a historic right of way?

Sarah Felstead ● 3788d

"Whilst there's no question that there will be a serious impact on traffic on Twickenham Road in the short term, there's quite a lot of evidence that closing roads actually leads to a diminution of traffic, just as opening them leads to an increase (M25, anyone?)"Cole Park anyone? One tiny road being shut off has caused so much traffic to pile up around here it is unbelievable, and it has - without doubt - caused a lot of people to try and turn off down Worple Avenue and Road. How long will it be do you think until they discover they can turn off down some of the small residential roads off Worple Rd. find their way out into St. Margarets Rd. and thus either up to the A316 or into South St. and add a bit more pressure there? Short term? You are having a laugh.

Vanessa Smith ● 3788d

Neil - I believe so, probably have to dismount bike and wheel round barrier.

Ian Speed ● 3789d

Does a right of way mean cars though? You can still walk and bike through it.

Neil Chippendale ● 3789d

Isn't this road a historic right of way?  How do you close such a road?

Sarah Felstead ● 3789d

So when the Duke of Northumberland wants to nip down to Josephs for a baguette... or to the Town Wharf for a pint...he'll have a bit of a detour to deal with.Unless,of course, he walks or goes on his bicycle!

Jim Lawes ● 3789d

The closure will be at the current narrow point.As people say, this is very difficult and I personally had a massive postbag against the closure and a somewhat more massive postbag in favour of it.Whilst there's no question that there will be a serious impact on traffic on Twickenham Road in the short term, there's quite a lot of evidence that closing roads actually leads to a diminution of traffic, just as opening them leads to an increase (M25, anyone?)

Guy Lambert ● 3789d

One day - the powers that be may well understand that traffic is a lot like toothpaste - pinching it in one place makes it pop out at another, it doesn't actually go away. I am generally against closing roads, after all they are for traffic, that's why they are called highways. I fear this latest attempt at trying to stem the flow for one lot of residents will only lead to more misery for the rest of the people who live in South Isleworth and who have to pass through.

Vanessa Smith ● 3789d

Frankly I think this an excessive response to the narrowness of Church St and it would have been better to make it one way going southbound from Syon Park to the Swan. That would have addressed the issue of cars passing both ways and going up on the pavement. As it is, the Twickenham Road will gradually become more and more of a car park, or else there will be a knock-on effect on roads elsewhere in the wider area.

Ian Speed ● 3790d

Absolutely agree with everything that's been said - the junction at South St. /Twickenham Rd. was just a waste of money and hasn't helped one bit, rather it's exacerbated a bloody awful junction. As for Church St.it is a nightmare down there and always has been the bane of councillor's lives since the year dot. Do you know where the closure actually is? Knowing the colossal difference that Richmond council caused to Twickenham Rd. traffic by just closing off Cole Park, this is going to make this area of Isleworth more of a nightmare than it already is. The increase caused to traffic in Worple Avenue/Worple Rd. by the Cole Park changes is amazing. Frankly if the brains can't get enough information in a far shorter time than 18 months to make a decision then God help us!

Vanessa Smith ● 3790d

Agreed, although problem with closure is that it does nothing to tackle the behaviour of such drivers, they'll just do the same elsewhere.

Adam Beamish ● 3791d

I agree that 18 months is too long and I suspect designed to make this permanant in the future but I have witnessed many times first hand vehicles speeding madly along the narrowest part and its been a miracle that nobody has been killed yetWhat does concern me though is that this already exclusive area of houses will now in theory be a private estate for those luckily enough to live there

Paul Fisher ● 3791d

Well I still don't think the 'improvements' to the South Street junction with Twickenham Road or achieved anything of any significance.Church Road is a problem but speaking as a regular commuter (and hence acknowledging my experiences may be very different to the residents of Church Street)  I didn't think the amount of traffic using the rat-run was horrendous.I think 18 months is too long, and whilst having not yet the relevant report it smacks to me of closing the road for the longest possible time so that people will forget it was ever open and hence temporary closure = permanent closure.At the same time, and again I haven't read the report, it would be good if, in the longer term and assuming the closure becomes permanent, the carriageway is changed to provide better facilities for cyclists and pedestrians.As for the impact upon Twickenham Road, thank god I recently moved jobs and am now based in central London so don't have any reason now to go near there during the rush hour.

Adam Beamish ● 3791d