Forum Topic

Reg Ghosh · 3/22/2016 7:56:00 AM

new.BrentfordTW8.com Communtity Forum Topic posting

'Disgusting and dangerous' behaviour at 'illegally-moored' houseboats in Brentford

Hounslow Council made the claim as it hit back over criticism of its plans for a new marina on the Thames beside Watermans Park."Illegally-moored" houseboats in Brentford are allegedly being rented out as "substandard accommodation".That was the claim made by Hounslow Council leader Cllr Steve Curran as he hit back over criticism of plans for a new £5.45million marina beside Watermans Park."Many of the illegally moored boats are rented out as substandard accommodation," he wrote in a letter to the Hounslow Chronicle."Most people living on the boats are being exploited and they are also being put at serious risk.""Power being delivered to the boats is through illegally installed cables running dangerously across public land and water, and there are no legal arrangements in place for the removal of raw sewage – which we suspect is being dumped straight into the river.Full story here - http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/west-london-news/disgusting-dangerous-behaviour-illegally-moored-11073948

Reg Ghosh ● 3426d48 Comments

This Council is driven by revenue streams that benefit corporate interests, not the needs of the Community.

Stephen Alexander ● 3381d

When did you arrive? I can assure you that there were no rotting hulks alongside the bank of Waterman's Park when I first arrived in Brentford or indeed any boats at all.The current boat owners may well have helped clear the river with Thames 21 over the past few years - others have too (including me - once). Some of the boats have indeed improved their image in recent years but please don't try to make out that (all of) the boaters have always been good neighbours or that they have always had the greater good of the wider community at the heart of their actions as there are those of us who pre-date you and know otherwise.No doubt there are considerate and responsible people who are part of your community and in some ways I rather like the bohemian look of the place but let's not make out it's something other than what it is - warts and all.

Anne England ● 3388d

In support of Damien’s post at 20:53, see the “Derelict Boats by the river” topic from last year, when I posted up photos from the clean-up operations.http://i1273.photobucket.com/albums/y406/nigelpmoore/Cleanup%20press%20art.s_zpso0x7ning.jpg http://i1273.photobucket.com/albums/y406/nigelpmoore/Cleanup%20press%20art.s%203_zps7sfw4us5.jpg I have just copied the 'image location' from that topic, so they won't come up 'live', but you should be able to see them either by copy and paste of the links, or search for the topic.

Nigel Moore ● 3388d

As one of the boat owners alan, I have to disagree with you, the wrecks and pieces of metal were there long before we arrived . Do you think we tie a rope to old bits of metal and drag them along and surround ourself like baracades ? Just about every resident here has helped clear the river with the Thames 21 , over the past few years by picking up rubish and putting it in the rubbish barges that were supplied by them. We even tried to cut up some of the steel wrecks . Please come and help next time they are down

Damien Thompson ● 3388d

Shopping really is scary Anna, I'm glad you stayed well away!!

Damien Thompson ● 3388d

you better use you real name or the editor will just delete your post

Bernard Allen ● 3388d

Council Steve Currans comments are inflammatory and unfounded. All the occupied boats in Watermans park are well maintained and welcoming homes. I have visited many. Hounslow borough council is only interested in money and has no interest in community.Submit

Paul Mendoza ● 3388d

This proposal from the Community represents a realistic design that will work for everyone in the Community.Why are the Council Planning Officers not looking at this proposal?Any rational answers??? Anyone?

Stephen Alexander ● 3388d

The Community DesignDoes not:1. Steal Park Land to give to Private boat Owners for their Carpark2. Stop Bikes and Wheelchairs cycling from one end of the park to the other3. Fill the riverbed with in excess of 17,000 Tons of Concrete4. Drive 938 pilings into a very toxic Riverbed threatening the local ecosystem ( The toxicity is from the former Gasworks which occupied this site for decades)5. Backfill in a significant part to the Park, almost to the road level, destroying one of the park’s best features of being much lower than one of the busiest roads in Brentfod.6. Evict a long standing community, many of which will need rehousing in a borough which has one of the worst homeless problems costing the Council yet more money7. Reduce the Children’s Play Area by 40%8. Make the Park a Building Site for Years 9. Remove Attractive mature trees in the Park10. Cost £5.4 million for the benefit of a few Private boat OwnersBut Rather:1. Extends the Boardwalk to provide a better viewing experience for the public.2. Provides a Public Pontoon where families can get down to the river and enjoy the proposed floating gardens3. Install a minimal number of Pilings (70 vs 938 ) so as to minimise ecological damage from the toxicity in the Riverbed4. Allow the existing boating community to remain as well as providing additional affordable commercial moorings to mitigate the development cost5. Carryout the entire development in 6 - 9 months during which time the public can continue to use the park with minimal disruption. This is a massive point - Before the first of the Court Cases the Council are wasting taxpayers money on even gets to Court, the Community Design would be finished !!!6. Deliver the Project for a massively lower cost saving the people of Brentford Millions whilst delivering a nicer Park7. Renovate an eclectic group of boats to make the Park attractive and interesting and above all a Community Space..

Nick Day ● 3389d

Hi Alex, As one of the boat owners, I do understand annoyance about the state of some of the boats. many, like the wrecks at the Watermans Centre end have been dumped and people don’t even know who the owners are, several of the untidy boats have been repossessed by the Council including the one that has now sunk, which shortly will be so damaged it will involve a costly salvage operation to get it out. However there are also some amazing boats, the Cob for example was in the Queens Diamond Jubilee Pageant, and saw service as HMS Mary during Scapa Flow, and many of the boats are attractive and with a lick of paint would make for a really attractive waterfront. Many of the boats have also decided to leave. Suffice it to say that there is now the possibility for fairer solution which delivers a nicer park for the public and allows a well-established boating community to stay, paying council tax, mooring fees etc.When I became a Watermans Park resident relatively recently it was very apparent that historically there had been much bad blood between the council and the boat owners, many owners felt that having been moored here for decades, the council were being unreasonable denying all requests to grant a mooring and improve the park, (in fact one of the boats has recently legally had its claim for adverse possession upheld with only limited rights of appeal) indicating the strength of some of the boat owners cases.This has not helped in trying to find a good solution for all. The narrative the Council want to portray, to avoid too much attention being paid to a terrible planning proposal for the people of Brentford, is “slum landlords, disgusting boats etc etc” WHILST THEY SELL OUR PARK OUT FROM UNDER US.( I have posted more about the councils plans in a separate post titled “Watermans Park Houseboats a boat owners point of view” along with links to find out more )Bottom line is the boat owners that will remain are not the scruffy and untidy boats, they want to pay mooring fees and will refurbish their vessels to make them interesting and attractive, our plan enhances the park for all, both the public and the remaining boat owners trying to save their homes,rather than destroying it for the benefit of a few rich boat owners. The Planning Meeting for the Councils development is 12th May 7.30pm, All we ask is to compare our design to the Councils proposal and judge each on its merits before it’s too late.

Nick Day ● 3389d

The present boat community do not deny that some of the vessels need a retrofit and upgrade and have programmed a complete refurb for all the vessels that would stay at Watermans park when the new project was implemented. They agree that it is long overdue for Watermans to have a facelift, much like most of the other low income housing in the borough.With regards to the time frame of their proposal, the initial project was put forward nearly 10 years ago, but has been hacked down every time it was discussed and was finally denied by the council as they did not want to 'legitamise' the moorings. The updated design was born from an in depth analysis of the councils planning application and supporting documents, that were only put online in October last year. The planning application is going to the committee in 2 weeks time. May 12th.And if you honestly think the council should pass a planning application that will remove all disabled access from the east end of the park, close the park for up to 4 years (as they relandscape EVERY SQAURE INCH of the place) and implement a massively over engineered, hugely costly and environmentally disastrous construction program for a design that is defective? then please do just sit by and only comment on the state of the boats. Or maybe you should actually read ALL the documents that the council has supplied with the planning application and learn what they are really going do… and then come back and have a chat. This argument is not about the state of the boats at Watermans Park, but the council want you to think it is. The council are sending out a message that there are slum landlords and squatters on the boats. This could not be farther from the truth. I know for a fact that there are deisgners, IT staff, A Bio Chemist, writers, film producers and engineers who are currently on boats in the Park. These guys all want the public to know what is going on here. That is why they are fighting the council on their plan, that is why they are taking the council to court. This isn't about a community project that is trying to 'freeload' or 'win' something for the themselves. This is a community of informed professionals, who are just trying to tell you, the public, that the council does not give a sh*t about your public open space and under the guise of removing the 'unclean' of Brentford, they are going to in fact remove your entire park and sell it to the highest bidder. And before you know it, you, the pubic, will have lost the last piece of open public river bank, in the area.

Martin Downes ● 3389d

The Boat Community, have for Years, been trying to find a resolution to the moorings with the Council to no avail. They have steadfastly refused to engage. The legacy of debris on the River bed goes back 60 years which the boat Community along with Thames 21 have regularly been involved with a clean-up operation of the River Bed at Watermans Park.I agree the boats definitely require a serious facelift and the moorings require formalizing in order to generate a financial return to the Council/Community.Please do howver examine closely what the Council are really proposing and I think you will be shocked.All but a few of the trees will be removed a car park at the Eastern end of the Park will mean a loss of the Park to private parking. The children's play area will loose 40% of its area and be moved to the Eastern end of the Park. Also the whole Park will become a construction site for YEARS. The Council plans to put 900, yes 900 piles into a toxic River bed. This is no exaggeration. Just take a look at the plans you will find them shocking

Stephen Alexander ● 3389d

Unfortunately it seems to me that the present boater community are the ones responsible for the mess and ugly look of the river around them. Old unused boats of various kind, old tyres, ropes, strange metal pieces...And for some reason its only now, almost facing the threat of being removed, the boaters suddenly came up with there own renovation plan which is allegedly better than the one proposed by the council.

Alex Shpinkov ● 3389d

Hi Sarah,It would be wonderful to go back to the beginning in so many cases in life generally, but time and circumstances move on and as I am sure you know well we cannot go back in time 'as yet'.Seriously though, the River Thames has had a community of people who for their own reasons, enjoy living on water. This has been so for many 100's of years.There has been a presence of boats in the area since time immemorial.The present Community at Watermans Park has grown to what it has become in a relatively short time frame at a position on the banks of Watermans Park that was for many years rather a neglected area. The pressure that is now being placed on the established Boat Community is due to the fixation on development of what is now considered prime real estate. Why should a long standing Community of boat owners who are committed to the area be dislodged now, after many years making this place their home, to make way for the private profit of some developer.The River is open to moving boaters whether or not the Community at Watermans Park stays or goes.Incidentally, I urge you to see the alternative proposals from the boat Community includes a Pubilc pontoon for all.see: www.watermansparkmoorings.co.uk

Stephen Alexander ● 3389d

Hi Anne, Our proposal has a public pontoon which would give access to the riverbed at low tide and the proposed floating gardens or Community Farm at high tide.

Nick Day ● 3390d

I wonder if somebody could take us back to the beginning before the present houseboats arrived ...well there are a couple of statements saying they weren't there a number of years ago. How does somebody 'win' a mooring on a permanent basis? Is it like land where it can be claimed after a number of years, 12, is it? Are the rules of the river such that you have to move on after a month or so? In which case should the arguement be that the land should be freed up for all moving boat owners? Can anyone explain? Cheers Sarah x

Sarah Felstead ● 3390d

Surely not? Steve Curren and co. as Councillors surely have the Public they represent at the heart of their work for the Council. After all they are Public Servants. They surely could not possibly have any commercial interests outside that basic duty? I have a great respect for those who are called to enter Public life. With it also comes a great responsibility.

Stephen Alexander ● 3390d

You are absolutely right, swinging an axe in public is not the thing to be doing even if you are chopping wood for a stove in order to keep warm in Winter.As for the view of the River I am sure that if the Councils plan goes through, you will not see the River any more from the Watermans Park. Also the beloved Watermans Park is to be reduced in size with the building of storage facilities and parking for the new marina at the Eastern end of the Park. Combined with the road widening scheme, you can say goodbye to Watermans Park as an amenity. It will become a River front for the New Marina. Probably largely PRIVATE. In contrast, The Plan being offered by the Community Project on the other hand will open up the Park and access to the River for the public. see www.watermansparkmoorings.co.uk

Stephen Alexander ● 3390d

It seems to me that the Waterman's boats are looking a darn sight tidier than they have at times in the past. I stopped going down the park at one particular time years ago when there was a wreck of a boat which had a generator sitting on top going thump, thump, thump all day long. There also was just about always one wreck or another left to rot away on the river bed. As I said in an earlier post, somebody from one of the boats was chopping (swinging axe et al) on the public footpath a couple of years ago and I've also seen the occasional car driven into the park and being unloaded. I have 'only' seen this behaviour a small number of times but this does not mean that it has only happened on those occasions.What I don't understand is why the Council didn't try harder to move the boats on when they first started appearing about 25 years ago. I understand that there were difficulties but surely something could have been done before now and if it had been the Council and the present boat dwellers wouldn't be in the position they are now in.I suppose my feelings about the houseboats are somewhat 'coloured' by the fact that when I first moved to Brentford there were definitely no boats there and I could actually see the river.

Anne England ● 3391d

My 'attack against the polluting house boats'? - it was hardly an attack.With regard to the disposal of 'black water' - that is good news. Can you please explain though how and where this is done?

Anne England ● 3391d

I have the same question........

Domenico Urzi ● 3391d

But that's not the agenda Messrs Curran, Walsh and associated cronies have set out in one of their "Done Deals".

Raymond Havelock ● 3391d

Hello Stephen. I fully understand that the alternative proposal is interesting and well thought through. What I do not understand is why the current boat owners don't tidy up their boats. I regularly walk past them and to be honest the site looks a total mess. Many of the boats look like a junk yard - it is such a shame as the boats in and around the Ferry Quays and Johnsons Island are really nice and a great addition to the community. But why not the boats in Watermans Park?

Matthew Taylor ● 3391d

I would urge you to have a close look at the Watermans Boat community proposals http://www.watermansparkmoorings.co.uk/?page_id=14.note: the public access pontoon they propose...

Stephen Alexander ● 3391d

I don’t know about the Park boats, but certainly since the new PLA byelaws came in recently, all the Hollows boats without mains sewer connections have installed composting loos – presumably the conscientious amongst the Park boats have followed suit? One wonders whether anyone has clocked how often the 3 dozen boats on the Council approved Canal and River Trust 'Island' moorings ever pump out at the towpath facility opposite? Some will be transporting cassettes over the bridge to empty there, but I doubt that accounts for many of them.

Nigel Moore ● 3392d

Anne your principal is exactly right when you say that just because someone else is polluting the River it does not give you the right to do the same. I would however, suggest that your attack against the 'polluting house boats' is way out of proportion when you consider the reality of 80 million tons of raw sewage disposed into the River, under license, by the Water Authority every Year. In addition all moving vessels are exempt from the legislation introduced last Year.HOWEVER the point is mute, as:ALL boats at Watermans Park now fully comply with current Environmental legislation re disposal of black water! This has been the case since the introduction of the legislation

Stephen Alexander ● 3392d

The river is far cleaner than it has been in 250 years. Enough to sustain life.But it is far from safe for humans. The urban area is alive with vermin and it's highly likely that Wiel's Disease and other infections would be contracted if one ingested the water or swam in the river and got so much as a small abrasion.Those who sail and row on the river take quite a risk should they fall in. The same with Canals.However boat dwellers offloading into the river is pretty much the same as the rest of us.Each time it rains, thousands of tonnes of effluent is ejected into the river.Sewage works like Mogden only reprocess to their capacity and to provide the demand for water.That is way below the amount of waste generated which has uncreased so much that seven Mogdens would be required to just cope with that increase. The "super Sewer' is just a big drain that will shift the **** into the river further up.The amount generated by boat dwellers is less than what can be found on the grass in the local park left by dogs and foxes.Don't see Mr Curran taking that one up as an initiative

Raymond Havelock ● 3392d

I get what you are saying but just 'cos some other b thinks it's okay to dump their rubbish willy nilly, it doesn't give me the 'okay' to drop a sweet wrapper.

Anne England ● 3392d

I wonder how the ratio of kilo's of poop excreted from the moored boats at Waterman's compares with acceptable(?) release from Mogden after a shower of rain?

Chris Greenwood ● 3393d

I know that the website is being worked on for the next week and is being given an official opening over the bank holiday weekend.

Martin Downes ● 3393d

"The Design & Access page of the the Boat community website explains this a lot better:http://www.watermansparkmoorings.co.uk/?page_id=313"Any idea who runs this website? pretty much all the content is appearing as: "This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:"

Bryan Betts ● 3395d

It also means that the hopelessly flawed proposal supported by the Council is for the exclusion of all but the well heeled as will the second Marina about to be announced.These are for exclusive use by the future occupants of new developments and those with deep pockets to keep their expensive vessels.It will lead to Watermans Park being reduced to a patch of Grass for the Public once the Watermans and Max Factor Building are redeveloped with a small concession of a riverside walkthrough.The alternative proposal is far more in keeping with the character and demographic of Brentford and not the fanciful whim of developers with an unhealthy grip over our Council

Raymond Havelock ● 3395d

It means that the design proposed by the boat community provides a better experience of the river and park for the user. Additionally, the community design has incorporated a public jetty and pontoon. This program of the design is currently at the initial stages, but ultimately it will provide a tidal access to the river for a multitude of river based activities.The Design & Access page of the the Boat community website explains this a lot better: http://www.watermansparkmoorings.co.uk/?page_id=313

Martin Downes ● 3395d

What do you mean by 'public access to the river'?

Anne England ● 3397d

Whether the boats are legally moored will ultimately be decided by a Judge.The Councils Plan for the Moorings is very flawed and doesn't stand up to even the most rudementary scrutiny. On the other hand the proposals coming from the boat Community is Stunning in concept.It not only proposes viable and aesthetic moorings but also opens up the Park with Public access to the River.You are absolutely right this should be a community project for the people of Brentford and beyond.

Stephen Alexander ● 3397d

Does anyone know why the residents aren't using the community right-to-build powers within the Localism Act 2012 to put forward a community-driven development plan?https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/2010-to-2015-government-policy-localism/2010-to-2015-government-policy-localism#appendix-1-community-right-to-buildhttp://mycommunity.org.uk/resources/understanding-the-community-right-to-build/

Bryan Betts ● 3423d

The Boat men's alternative design (uplifted from their website)

Jim Lawes ● 3426d

The Hounslow Council plan (from the Waterman's Park Boats website)

Jim Lawes ● 3426d

Yep, I have seen the gold braid - don't suppose there is much of that down Waterman's Park way.

Anne England ● 3426d

You have never seen a navy senior officer gold braid around the peak of their hat? there are plenty of them at penton hook marina,

Bernard Allen ● 3426d

What does the last bit of your sentence mean please? Don't get it.

Anne England ● 3426d

I think it's more like the Strain the tide will put on the structure of the original design. The alternative design is a much better design for a tidal river.What ever design get's built it wont be affordable for the average boat owner, only the Hooray Henry's with the scrambled egg on their peaked hats

Bernard Allen ● 3426d

So is the marina version proposed and supported by boaters less swanky?

Alex Shpinkov ● 3426d

"target boat dwellers because the real motive is to build a swanky marina which ain't for the likes of us."Exactly!

Mick Brent ● 3426d

Any idea why the boaters like their alternative marina design and wouldn't accept the currently proposed design? Looks like the proposed design can accommodate more boats.

Alex Shpinkov ● 3426d

A couple of winters ago? There is always chavvy behaviour here and there, whether by boat dwellers or land lubbers. Mattresses and old fridges in the front garden, all of that. The borough should police all anti-social and illegal behaviour, not just target boat dwellers because the real motive is to build a swanky marina which ain't for the likes of us.

Mike Paterson ● 3426d

Not to mention that a couple of winters ago one of the boat dwellers was wielding an axe and chopping up large tree parts on the public walkway. I saw this for myself. The aforementioned tree parts were also so large, numerous and heavy that they can only have been driven in. And yes, I have seen one or two cars parked down alongside the boats in the past with a person unloading what I think was shopping - didn't like to get too close.

Anne England ● 3426d