Forum Topic

West London orbital rail link (see front page)

Great news right?Alternatively, be very afraid…..This could mean twice as many trains using the Churchfield Rd level crossing.Already the barriers are down circa 50% of the time.So this could mean either CR being made a no through road (including for pedestrians)orA big bridge over the top.

Lewis Barnett ● 1281d26 Comments

Could the station tunnel be opened for all pedestrians? I think major works have already been discounted..

Sara Nathan ● 1280d

The station tunnel originally served both the station AND pedestrians crossing the line. On the west side a second flight of steps led down to the tunnel from the doorway that is now a small cafe (the entire cafe is suspended above them, and a board blocks the view of them from the tunnel). Within the tunnel a line of bars along the middle separated rail passengers and the public part. At the east end the exit was a doorway at the end of the tunnel which is still there, and a gentle slope out to the street (it came out where the street entrance to the new flats is). At some point the tunnel walls were reinforced and thickened, thus narrowing it - that may be why the bars were removed and the change made. Since both platforms now have access from the street (they didn't used to), it would seem possible with some fairly small modifications to make the tunnel entirely for public use, if that was desired.

Donald Power ● 1280d

The bigger problem would present itself on the Bollo Lane level crossing. This is across one of the few points of access to an area which has already seen significant building but is about to see a massive surge in the number of flats not just from the huge TfL project.Comfort should not be taken that these developments will be largely car free because they will still need deliveries, trades, taxis and get visitors. Therefore there is a big risk of significant queues along Bollo Lane each way.Not sure how you get round this. One suggestion would be to open access to the area through Chiswick Business Park but can't see the Chinese owners agreeing to this happening.

Mark Evans ● 1276d

One solution, for both crossings would be to reduce the period of time the barriers are down for each train passing through.Considering, at AC the trains are only doing around 15 mph, the barriers could come down to (say) 30 seconds before, not the current 2-3 mins. Then there is no real problem even if the number of trains is doubled.

Lewis Barnett ● 1275d

One definitely possibility is that Churchfield Road is closed to through traffic. I really don't like the idea.

Maire Lowe ● 1274d

Not only is the doorway at the east end of the tunnel still there, it still has the blue SUBWAY sign up - as you can see if you look down at it from the ramp up to the south platform entrance. It seems it wouldn't be difficult to recreate access to the  tunnel provided they haven't lost the right of way over the path in from the street.

Donald Power ● 1274d

The use of Chiswick Park estate to avoid delays at Bollo lane crossing seems a very good idea, unfortunately the new service would be on the Kew lines i.e.the second level crossing so the problem would persist. A couple of footbridges would be a minimal requirement.As a user of these crossings for at least 25 years the closed to road traffic time was a lot shorter with a signaller in the box there.

Paul Griffin ● 1261d

The scheme is back … new article on front pagehttps://www.actonw3.com/default.asp?section=community&link=https://neighbournet.com/server/common/conwestlondonorbital004.htmConsultation this summer - plan includes permanent closure of level crossings on Bollo Lane and a Churchfield Road

Paul Webster ● 225d

I'd expect with upgraded signaling for the new services, the time the level crossings need to be down could be reduced and, in the case of Bollo Lane, possibly synchronised. I've always though it was a missed opportunity not to open the Business Park to through traffic, which it still could be.  That would take huge pressure off the narrow bit of Bollo Lane, the mini-roundabout by Chiswick Park Station, and the traffic light junction with Chiswick High Road.  Meanwhile the Business Park has its own grand traffic light controlled entrance which must mainly be used by a few BMWs going to and from the gym!

Peter Evans ● 225d

and 6,000 workers who may prefer not to have the place they work choked with rat running traffic. The vast majority do not drive, having worked there the parking is extremely limited.

Tony Mansell ● 219d

I think your expectation about upgraded signalling will not be met.How do you think creation of a public highway through Chiswick Business Park would be achieved? Ask the owners nicely if they would allow it? Compulsory purchase of land?

Mike Robinson ● 218d

I don't understand how the pedestrian tunnel at Acton Central could be opened? On the park side, the exit would be in the private forecourt of The Sidings development.I do like the idea that the times the gates comes down are recalibrated - currently I'm often being caught there for 3+ minutes.

Carl Tamboli ● 214d

Adjustments to timing of level crossings is a fantasy given the additional trains. The proposals will be to close level crossings at Churchfield Rd and Bollo Lane with pedestrian/cycle bridges over the crossings.

Mike Robinson ● 213d

It'll be a problem if they close both the level crossings on Bollo Lane for there'll be no rear access to the Business Park for motor vehicles, including the 70 bus, or to the Pocket Homes building or to whatever they're going to build on the old Lamborghini garage.  And I can see the food delivery guys humping their cargo bikes over the footbridges to and from the industrial estate!If only they'd built a public road through the Business Park, this could have been avoided!

Peter Evans ● 212d

I don't think they will close both level crossings on Bollo Lane as that would isolate some buildings between the crossings and mean they could only be accessed via a private road through Chiswick Business Park.They may close the southern crossing for the track currently used by the Overground and retain the northern crossing for the track used by WLO.  The building between the crossings could still be accessed on public roads and a Bollo Lane bus route could continue to go through the Business Park (as long as the Business Park permit this... they stopped the buses using the Business Park during Covid).It is now moot about the road through the Business Park being a public highway.  Business Park owners won't permit this because it would devalue their asset.

Michael Robinson ● 211d

It wouldn't necessarily devalue the asset significantly - road access would be around the perimeter so the centrepiece garden areas would be unaffected. If it was an access only road i.e. for residents of Bollo Lane, day time levels of traffic wouldn't rise that much and it would provide a viable pedestrian route after dark (nobody walks through at the moment).However, I think you are right that the owners will probably say no. At one point it may have been that the money to be made from the Bollo Lane project would have prompted TfL to make it worth their while but that scheme looks very marginally profitable now so inadequate transport access would be just one of many reasons they aren't going to complete the whole development very soon.

Mark Evans ● 205d

Vehicles would still need to get to and from the perimeter road via the front entrance and mini-roundabout in front of the lake.  People's first view of the business park entrance as a traffic sewer would not be a good look.My prediction is the WLO project team long ago dismissed a route through Chiswick Business Park as not viable therefore have just been working on the details of closing the level crossings.I have no doubt the question will be asked by those whose journeys by car are inconvenienced, but WLO is a rail project, so inconvenience to drivers will be viewed as a benefit.  Carrot and stick.

Michael Robinson ● 205d

While I would agree with you conclusion about the WLO project team there are other interests at play here. The TfL property team and Places for London have a vested interest in road transport access to the site. It is questionable whether the 900 flats along Bollo Lane at the site are viable with out it.Nobody at TfL is thinking  'oh good cars are being inconvenienced'. They are probably considering the impact on local bus routes and the existing road infrastructure, particularly Bollo Bridge Road. If you close or further restrict the level crossings and increase the population along Bollo Lane by a further 2,000 or so on top of the massive increase that is already taking place, I really don't see how Bollo Bridge Road would cope (it is already struggling now). It'll be a nightmare for people who live there.At this point it looks likely that only 195 flats in the whole scheme would be built and economic conditions suggest that will probably be our lot for the next five years. However, should the whole project ever become viable again, TfL will be presented with a report from its own team pointing out these problems which possibly concludes that the housing can't be built. They may seek to revisit Chiswick Business Park access at that time. While I agree it will probably be a hard no from the owners, the pitch would be access only during the daytime along the route that buses take anyway.

Mark Evans ● 203d

The way you have described the situation is like the Bollo Lane development is inaccessible by road.  It isn't. There are many large housing developments in London that don't have through roads passing beside them.TfL know that a level crossing is targeted for closure because the planning documentation refers to providing funding for a foot/cycle bridge.Traffic required for access is invariably orders of magnitude smaller than through traffic  In most traffic surveys, 80% or more traffic is just driving through while the remainder is local access.Your proposed "pitch" to Chiswick Business Park has absolutely no benefit to Chiswick Business Park. Would you expect them to do it purely out of pity for those poor, desperate, disadvantaged drivers facing some inconvenience for their car journeys?  It would be kinda funny if CBP said yes, but only if drivers paid a toll.

Mike Robinson ● 203d

I fear it's too late now, despite how easy it would be, to allow through traffic to use the Business Park.  This would take pressure off the narrow residential bit of Bollo Lane, the busy junction in front of Chiswick Park station, and the right turn at the traffic lights with CHR, as well as avoiding the level crossings.  This should have been done at the original planning stage with local council intervention, but in those days useful through roads that went places were somewhat out of fashion!

Peter Evans ● 201d

I'm sure you are right about through traffic being the main issue. At the moment it clearly makes up the bulk of vehicles on Bollo Lane as more continue from the Gunnersbury Lane roundabout over the level crossings into Chiswick. This route seems to have got more popular with SatNavs directing people coming from the west aiming for the north of Chiswick to avoid Chiswick High Road when it is congested.If the level crossings were to close, the Bollo Bridge Road alternative is a bit longer and narrower but drivers will probably continue to be directed that way unless it is completely blocked, which, even with a much smaller proportion of through traffic it will be regularly rendering the new developments inaccesible by road for much of the day.Peter is right that an opportunity was missed at the time of the Chiswick Business Park development. However, I don't think the idea of a through road ever got much of a mention.  The pitch was that it would be served by a Piccadilly line station paid with a developers contribution of £14million. However, even if this sum wasn't woefully inadequate, they never actually asked TfL if they would have been willing to provide it which, categorically they weren't.So we ended up with a car-led development with relatively poor public transport links which got even worse when the 27 was axed. The site has a massive amount of car parking and Chiswick's most car intensive busines - Foxtons.It isn't the case that anyone driving there from the north would get much benefit coming in via Bollo Lane. If you are coming from the North Circular you can get there much more quickly by cutting through Power Road. That means that, although lots of people drive to work at the Business Park, there would be no real benefit to them by providing through access.TfL may have some leverage with the business park owners if they were to offer genuinely transformation public transport improvements such as major upgrade of Gunnersbury and better bus routes. However, there incentive to get access through the business park is much reduced if most of the flats on Bollo Lane are not going to be built - which seems to be the scenario at the moment.

Mark Evans ● 192d

As I recall, TfL contributed to the 'rusty bridge' from the Business Park towards Chiswick Park Station, intended to take the pressure off Gunnersbury Station and save TfL the cost of upgrading it.  As you say, the development was so 'car led' that it got its own grand traffic-light operated entrance onto Chiswick High Road, which mainly seemed to hold up the main road traffic so the occasional BMW could drive out quickly after playing squash!

Peter Evans ● 191d

From TFL:https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-releases/2026/september/have-your-say-on-proposals-for-a-new-london-overground-rail-routeLondoners are being invited to have their say on plans for a proposed new London Overground service linking Hendon and Hounslow.Transport for London (TfL) is running an eight-week consultation from Wednesday 23 September until Wednesday 18 November 2026, which invites feedback for the first time on proposals to create an 18.5km passenger route on rail lines currently only used for freight across west and northwest London.The consultation gives residents, businesses and stakeholders the opportunity to learn more about the proposals and help shape the development of the scheme.Feedback will help TfL and partners to gauge public and stakeholder response, understand how people may benefit from or be affected by the scheme, deal with any questions or concerns, and capture ideas to strengthen the scheme.David Rowe, TfL's Director of Investment Planning, said: 'This consultation is an important opportunity for people to shape the future of this new London Overground route. By making better use of existing rail infrastructure, we can improve connections between communities and support growth across west and northwest London.'We want to ensure that everyone understands the proposals and has the opportunity to share their views. All feedback will be carefully considered as we continue to develop the scheme with our partners.'Seb Dance, Deputy Mayor of London for Transport, said:'The Mayor and I are delighted that TfL is taking this important first step in proposals to add a brand-new line to the London Overground network, utilising a line currently only used for freight to transform travel in north and northwest London.'As well as connecting communities and improving access to vital places like schools, hospitals and transport hubs, this innovative rail project means we can drive regeneration and growth not only along the new route but across our great city - unlocking homes, jobs and opportunities.'The Mayor and I encourage Londoners to have their say in the consultation and help shape this exciting new transport connection as we continue building a better, greener, more prosperous London for everyone.'Erin Walsh, Director at West London Alliance, said:'This could unlock west London's economic potential, connecting people and places across the sub-region. As the partnership of the seven west London local authorities, we encourage everyone with an interest in west London to have their say and help shape this once-in-a-generation opportunity.'Matthew Carpen, Chief Executive of the Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation (OPDC), said:'This is an exciting step towards a new rail link that could transform journeys across west London. As we deliver a piece of city at Old Oak, including new homes, jobs, parks and community spaces all within a vibrant canal-side district, this new London Overground route would connect more people to these fantastic opportunities, boost local growth and make travel quicker, easier and more sustainable.'The new London Overground route would fill a key missing link in London's rail network, improving connections between communities and providing better access to jobs, homes and major transport hubs, including Old Oak Common. By bringing existing freight lines into passenger use and enhancing sections of the current rail network, the scheme would deliver new and improved connections while making efficient use of existing infrastructure.Plans include up to six trains per hour linking communities and key growth areas such as Brent Cross, Neasden, Harlesden, Old Oak Common, Acton, Brentford and Hounslow, while improving access to London Underground, London Overground, National Rail, the Elizabeth line and HS2.Subject to funding and approvals, the new route could support the delivery of around 25,000 homes, 11,500 jobs and up to £1.3bn in wider economic benefits, while encouraging more sustainable travel. The scheme could also remove around 650,000 car journeys a year, helping to reduce congestion and improve air quality.Earlier this year, TfL and its partners agreed a funding package of up to £6.65m to support the next phase of design, modelling and public consultation work. This funding will also support further design and assessment ahead of a decision in 2027 on whether to seek powers to build the scheme. TfL is working closely with the West London Alliance, the London boroughs of Hounslow, Ealing, Brent and Barnet, the Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation, and Network Rail to develop the proposals and make the case for future investment.Full details on how to take part, including consultation materials and how to respond, are available via the TfL consultation portal here: https://haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk/west-london-orbital

Patrick Green ● 23d

As predicted, proposal to close 3 level crossings.Churchfield Rd ActonMildmay line on Bollo lane (the WLO line crossing would be kept operational to permit bus services via Chiswick Business Park)Wood Lane IsleworthAccessible pedestrian/cycle crossings would be provided for each with reference to possibility to use underpass at Acton Central.

Michael Robinson ● 23d

As discussed before and elsewhere, these proposed closures would be highly challenging. I've posted about the Churchfield Road one on another thread but I haven't changed my view from years before that something needs to be done about access to the South Acton estate south of Bollo Bridge Road if you close a Bollo Lane level crossing.

Mark Evans ● 8d

Some access would be maintained by going through the Business Park.

Peter Evans ● 7d