| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Footbridge at Chiswick Station | |
| Posted by: | Francis Rowe | |
| Date/Time: | 13/08/25 08:49:00 |
| Simplistically relying on overall station usage to determine which stations get step free access is going to lead to some very flawed outcomes. While it is true that the more people using a station, the more disabled people are likely to be among them, and they would be keen to have their local station upgraded, you have conflated demand with need. Raw station numbers tell you the former but not the latter. You seem determined to make this about Kew Bridge vs Chiswick but the smoking gun on politics driving decisions on this matter is Isleworth and Syon Lane being given priority over both. According the data supplied earlier they have similar usage numbers to Chiswick. Research by Steer Davies Gleave and others suggests that accessibility improvements can lead to 15–25% increases in usage, and this has happened at Isleworth and Syon Lane. In 2021-22, Chiswick was a busier station than Syon Lane and within 150,000 annual visits of Isleworth but they have both since surged ahead. The two stations are within a mile of each other and Syon Lane is within a mile of fully accessible Brentford and both sit on bus routes which will bring people relatively quickly to a step free train or tube station. The need for full accessibility was clearly much less here than at these two stations. What other reason could there be for them being given priority than the effective lobbying by their local political representatives. Ruth Cadbury would have been aware of potential boundary changes and the local ward councillors had more pull being part of the ruling administration. Chiswick (the town not just the station) remains at least five years from getting an accessible station. While there may be fewer disabled people demanding this basic facility than elsewhere, their need is far greater because at the moment they have nothing. |