| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Hammersmith Bridge | |
| Posted by: | Tom Pike | |
| Date/Time: | 25/09/24 08:28:00 |
| There is no basis given for the 22,000 figure. However, it does correspond to the DfT traffic counts over Hammersmith Bridge before the closure, but of course to claim that the closure meant all 22,000 vehicles then went through Putney would be rather silly. In fact DfT counts on Putney and Chiswick bridge are down, so there’s no evidence that traffic was simply displaced by the closure, but rather Hammersmith Bridge induced vehicle trips which in the absence of vehicle access across the bridge have been in part replaced by pedestrian and cycling trips, or became more local, not crossing the river. For example, after the closure, Barnes businesses actually saw an increase in turnover, as reported by the Barnes Community Association, an organisation funded by those businesses themselves. This would suggest people tended to use local shops rather than drive over the bridge to Hammersmith and indeed immediately north of the river, corresponding sales dropped. |