Forum Topic

Residents concerned with this closure might be interested to know that the following missive was sent out last night by the London Cycling Campaign:Dear xxxxx,Please take one minute today to support the Church Street road closure in Hounslow.Click here to back the schemeYou need to fill in your details and answer yes to Q2. Answer the other questions however you want, and the whole thing should take less than one minute to fill out!Background information:Church Street forms part of the riverside cycle route in Isleworth, along the northwest side of the Thames and links to other major routes for cycling – helping connect the area to Quietways and potentially the route of CS9.That's why you're getting this email as an LCC supporter or member in Hounslow, Ealing or Richmond. Because this scheme will enable better cycling in and around your borough (and apologies to anyone from Ealing who might get a second message from the cycling campaign email list there also!).In the past Church Street was used as a through route for motorists hoping to dodge congestion on the nearby main road, so the council have put in a point closure for a trial period of 18 months (see local media reports here and here).This has greatly improved conditions on Church Street and only marginally affected traffic conditions elsewhere. But unless there is sufficient support for continuing the closure, the road is in danger of being re-opened so that the motor traffic will return."Modal filters" like this are a key element in creating quiet routes suitable for cycling. Inevitably any closure will shift some traffic onto other roads but if these are more suitable for motor traffic traffic the effect is usually marginal – as in this case. But these types of schemes can cause consternation amongst certain residents resistant to change. And so it is here – to such an extent that if we don’t send a strong message to Hounslow Council now, not only might we not keep this scheme, but the council could shy away from similar schemes in the future.Some residents have claimed huge delays for buses and motor vehicles on nearby main roads, whereas the traffic data available on the Hounslow site shows that a few roads have seen some increase in traffic and congestion – but at worst an extra minute on a five minute bus journey. And other residents are incandescent because they feel their residential streets have suffered increases in traffic – again, the few streets that have had increases haven’t had huge ones.The data shows clearly this scheme has been a success already – it hasn’t dramatically affected other streets in the area, traffic overall looks to be down about 10% (from Hounslow’s counts on all roads am and pm peak), and the street is far quieter to cycle and walk on now.That’s why it’s really important that you, your friends, family, anyone who cares about cycling and walking in the area and across west London fills out this consultation urgently – don’t delay.The consultation closes 1 March, but we’d rather you click the link right now  than risk forgetting about it.Thanks.Simon MunkInfrastructure CampaignerLondon Cycling CampaignObviously the LCC is has based its argument upon the (clearly flawed) data issued by the London Borough of Hounslow.

Phil Andrews ● 3092d

Here are some names from the Church Street Resident's Association, who are probably pivotal in these groups...along with some tall tales. 'Used by children' indeed...and traffic-logged Twickenham and Linkfield Road, overloaded with traffic whilst their street is free of it, aren't?? These people should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves for the chaos and the increased danger to health their actions have caused:Matt Koster and Ian Woods of the Church Street Residents’ Association urged members to listen to and follow the recommendations from the consultation exercise.  The current traffic issues impacted the whole Isleworth area, most acutely Church Street.  Two thirds of those responding to the consultation lived outside Church Street, indicating that this was a much wider issue.  They reminded members how narrow Church Street’s carriageway and footpaths were.  Vehicles were unable to pass each other without mounting the footpath, which was not wide enough to accommodate a wheelchair.  The kerbs offered pedestrians no protection, as they were as low as 20mm in places.  People were being hit by moving cars in the street and recently a dog on a lead had been killed by a passing car. The recommendation to close Church Street would provide an amenity for the local area, which was part of the Capital Ring, the Thames Trails and was used by school children as part of the Thames Discovery route.  Residents had sympathy for those living in Silverhall Street and North Street but it was suggested that all residents wanted the same thing, which was to keep through traffic out of this narrow street. There being no questions from members, the Chair invited Mrs Tamsin Turner to address the meeting.  Mrs Turner submitted a petition containing 147 signatures of residents living within the consultation area who did not support the proposal to close Church Street.  She indicated that there was no independent evidence to support the claims of accidents and near misses referred to by those supporting the closure.  Drawing attention to Appendix B of the submitted report she highlighted the officer’s comments on the lack of evidence of speeding along Church Street.  She noted residents’ concerns in relation to the anticipated impact to Twickenham Road, as the majority of local traffic would be forced to use Twickenham Road instead of Church Street.

Julie Evans ● 3092d

Here are a couple of names from the Church Street Residents' Association for you - along with some tall tales. 'Used by children' indeed... they clearly don't care about local children, unless they live on Church Street. They should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves:Matt Koster and Ian Woods of the Church Street Residents’ Association urged members to listen to and follow the recommendations from the consultation exercise.  The current traffic issues impacted the whole Isleworth area, most acutely Church Street.  Two thirds of those responding to the consultation lived outside Church Street, indicating that this was a much wider issue.  They reminded members how narrow Church Street’s carriageway and footpaths were.  Vehicles were unable to pass each other without mounting the footpath, which was not wide enough to accommodate a wheelchair.  The kerbs offered pedestrians no protection, as they were as low as 20mm in places.  People were being hit by moving cars in the street and recently a dog on a lead had been killed by a passing car. The recommendation to close Church Street would provide an amenity for the local area, which was part of the Capital Ring, the Thames Trails and was used by school children as part of the Thames Discovery route.  Residents had sympathy for those living in Silverhall Street and North Street but it was suggested that all residents wanted the same thing, which was to keep through traffic out of this narrow street. There being no questions from members, the Chair invited Mrs Tamsin Turner to address the meeting.  Mrs Turner submitted a petition containing 147 signatures of residents living within the consultation area who did not support the proposal to close Church Street.  She indicated that there was no independent evidence to support the claims of accidents and near misses referred to by those supporting the closure.  Drawing attention to Appendix B of the submitted report she highlighted the officer’s comments on the lack of evidence of speeding along Church Street.  She noted residents’ concerns in relation to the anticipated impact to Twickenham Road, as the majority of local traffic would be forced to use Twickenham Road instead of Church Street.

Julie Evans ● 3092d