Forum Topic

Restricting Public Access to the Brentford Dock Estate

You will have read the article on the front page.You may be aware also...via BRENTFORD VOICE... that Hounslow Council  might be engaging expensive lawyers to fight this prohibition.I sat next to a lady on a bus yesterday and we engaged in interesting conversation. She lived in Brentford Dock and was fully supportive of restricting public access to their river and canalside location.They pay their maintenance chargesto keep the place tidy..amongst other things. But it's OUR local scalleywags  who let Brentford down again. Some of their disgusting habits ruin things for the rest of us.Urinating and depositing poo on your homeland is no fun to tolerate. Litter is bad enough.I've come to the conclusion that Brentford Dock are right and Hounslow Council and Brentford Voice should tonedown their opposition.No wonder the Pump House Crescent estate of apartments (behind Holland Gardens) is fenced in too ..to keep out Green Dragon Lane swalleywags (if they exist).Summarising... these badly behaved locals spoil life for all of us and we should accept that  and not force the issue.I loved looking at the River Thames from outside Justin Court at the Dock... but no more. Thank you scalleywags.

Jim Lawes ● 470d37 Comments

Ha ha,Been there, done that, no intention of emigrating to SA! Im not aware of any plans to build on the riverfront. Its nowhere wide enough anyway and its a small area. That is actually the residents Private Garden which we residents can all enjoy.

David Cook ● 437d

It’s quite amusing to see this happening here. After Canary Wharf took off a lot of the banking types wanted to live more locally and developers leapt on the Isle of Dogs to give them what they wanted.Industrial units torn down, old housing demolished. Shiny new blocks of flats and luxurious townhouses sprang up. Traditional local pubs disappeared, while established residents sold up for a profit and the character of the island changed forever. Gated communities were a key element of that as the new arrivals wanted their investment kept safe from the less desirable local elements who remained.So don’t be surprised to see more gates go up eventually. Good luck to the residents of Brentford Dock. They voted for this and, as even Big Fat Liar would have to admit, it was a vote not a consultation!

Simon Hayes ● 437d

Often, it seems, people try and parcel off land to use it for another purpose, such as to build on it.  Can they fit another tower block or small town house on the blocked off area?

Sarah Felstead ● 437d

I can verify Jim and son’s find, and some pretty good pictures were taken by Jim.  I wonder if the critters carried on using their lair to dismantle the bikes they lifted from our streets?  They might still be at it today ….

Sarah Felstead ● 437d

Brentford Dock is no more targeted than anywhere else (go take a look around) and doubtlessly has its own share of miscreants.The answer is not to shut large swathes of Brentford off to its population. If people want to live in gated communities I suggest they move to Johannesburg.

Anne England ● 437d

Police don’t investigate crime? No surprise there!Supermarkets and other large shops generally accept the loss of items to theft. They can afford to. Staff are advised to be careful if trying to apprehend perpetrators in the grounds of personal safety. Security staff don’t get involved if they can help it for the same reason. Unless it’s a ‘soft’ target like a young woman they won’t step in. The police do very little in most cases.Perhaps those well remunerated councillors could form a vigilante group to keep the streets of Brentford safe?

Simon Hayes ● 437d

I forgot to mention Anne an expidition Sarah Felstead's son and I did many years ago. We clambered into Lot's Ait at low tide when the Island was derelict.We found a thie f's den of some 40 bicycles that had been stolen from the town, taken to Lot's Ait at low tide via stepping stones (now gone).The bike had been striped down etc. We recorded some 25 frame numbers which we took to the Police Station. The Police were not interested They were too busy.I do know what I'm talking about!

Jim Lawes ● 437d

Be assured Anne that I have witnessed and intervened in  many thefts in the area... and witnessed litterlouts. They get challended by me even at my 83 age.Whilst on Poppy Day selling duties at Morrisons a few years back  personally challenged,stopped shouted for security help after a chap was legging it without paying.Recently on the High Street I have witnessed two incidents.I've seen cases at M&S chiswick. Rymans Shops complain to me about people pinching pens and electrical things. Shops don't challenge these people for fear of a backlash.I don't blame Brentford Dock or The Island for their thoughts.Hopefully Balleymore will have security amongst their 870+ flats and the additional retail outlets

Jim Lawes ● 437d

I personally think that the river should be open and if that means thinking outside the box and building proper walkways on the riverside of the developments to get around all these blockages, then perhaps we can arrange that?The Government flood maps on their web site seem to show the whole area under water, not just holding back the existing river edges or allowing for some sluices to be closed.  Under their maps, the river edges simply are not there.

Sarah Felstead ● 437d

Brentford Dock unlike the newer developments have Permitted Development rights. So we do not legally need planning Permission for a few gates that have been installed and meet Permitted Development rights. They do not  interfere with the public walking the Thames Path.As I have pointed out before the then Labour LBH sold Brentford Dock with permitted Development rights! Btw the way Sarah,Brentford Dock has excellent flood defences and the risk of flooding is around 1%.

David Cook ● 437d

Undoubtedly some of which you write about happens but I can't say I've seen much of it, in fact I can't think of anything other than seeing somebody legging it out of Morrison's closely followed by a security guard.The things you write about will no doubt be happening everywhere, including Brentford, and every part of Brentford (including the Dock) will be harbouring its share of no goods.

Anne England ● 437d

A few years ago the Island wanted to install gates to the footpath along the canalside and, unlike the Dock, correctly applied for planning permission which was refused and so the path remains open.

Richard Williams ● 438d

THE ISLAND estate north of the High Street and to the east side of the Canal and Lock is  delightful. It affords views of the Canalboats and the Weir for startersIt is an island (Tallow Road) bordered on one side by the Grand Union Canal and on the other by the River Brent and Weir.At present public access is allowed...around the perimeter. But maybe not for long.Bike  theiving aplenty is being tolerated..but not by all.It's the theiving scalleywags spoiling Brentford life for all of us.I see them pitching fruit from the High Street stall ...and as for Greggs ...Kick the theives and litterlouts into touch.

Jim Lawes ● 438d

Shops pay business rates and council tax but still have to pay for refuse services on top.Never quite understood how that works but living in a leasehold block posh or not still entails service charges that often do not reflect value for money more often than not. But some are fantastic but very expensive.In this case it was a mixed development from the start and a careless overseer.The council with needs to act now to protect every inch of the riverside including putting it's own aspirations with developers to one side and being very clear what is not ever going to be on the table.

Raymond Havelock ● 438d

No!I've lived on FQ for more that 10 years and I remember in my early days somebody suggested this and was instantly sent back in to their box.Personally I love having a bit of activity through the FQ estate and I hope we will get a doubling if Ballymore get around to finishing the car park and the riverside walk through to Dock Road.Having the riverside banned to people around Brentford would be an appalling outcome, but if Brentford Dock are let to follow through, virtually every estate fronting on the river will have similar ambitions: after all, every has service costs, a certain amount of ASB and at least as much fear.

Guy Lambert ● 438d

Why not Anne? Riverside site, privately managed, resident service change.

Paul Scullion ● 438d

No!

Anne England ● 438d

Should we see the same restrictions at Ferry Quays?- considerable service charges- litter picking an maintenance delivered by estate management- small potential for anti-social behaviour

Paul Scullion ● 438d

The right of way was probably easily established over the first 20 years. You are right David about weighing up the use of fighting for this as according to the Gov web site most of that area will be under water in 20 years.

Sarah Felstead ● 439d

Guy you are incorrect. It was the GLC and the Port of London authority that were involved in opening up the riverside from Estuary to Source bolstered by the 1977 Queens Silver Jubilee riverside walk which sadly got curtailed back to the Central London area - probably because it was too difficult. Instead the Thames Walk exists from end to end.This was done in conjunction with the raising of the riverside wall flood defences from Teddington Lock to the then under construction Thames Barrier partly to placate the fact that the raised walls were quite high in places and blocked the natural view along several footpaths to those less tall.Only Strand on the Green remains unchanged in part.None of the western London Boroughs apart from Hammersmith and Richmond were particularly active or enthusiastic  with planning restrictions and seizing opportunities when redevelopments allowed possibilities.If they were this mess at Brentford Dock would never have come about.The fiasco that exists now is either incompetence or deliberate lack of stewardship by Hounslow council. Is that what 'working hard' means? Just like contracts for Parks Maintenance with no path sweeping.Or factoring in cleansing of cycleways, Not being able to enforce and oversee satisfactory pavement reinstatement  after utility works.In this case, it should have been plain upholding of what was put in place and was it the Tories who sold this off?  Not according to one of the contributors here in this thread.

Raymond Havelock ● 445d

No doubt they have wasted a lot of money on their vain ideals.Its a double whammy for us residents though, I know for a fact when BDL successfully defended the first Article 4 it cost upwards of £20K.LBH would be far better spending our Council tax money on much more pressing concerns within the Borough as pointed out by Cllr Louki at the January 2023 planning meeting.

David Cook ● 445d

No doubt the council has plenty of spare taxpayers cash to pursue a legal case.

Simon Hayes ● 445d

LBH in their wisdom have now issued another Article 4 Direction against BDL after the first one lapsed in July 2021 after a successful legal campaign by BDL against LBHs outrageous use of planning power. The reason this second one is being served by LBH is probably to placate a lot of the agitators on the Facebook pages of Brentford TV/Voice whatever they call themselves. But they are one of the main reasons the gates have been installed in the first place after all their negative publicity against BDL. The gating and fences will be shortly locked to protect our privacy and security along the riverfront in what is mine and all the residents private garden! Back in 2020 the residents of Brentford Dock voted overwhelmingly in favour of the gating being installed.Just to be clear to everyone reading this, Brentford Dock was sold in 1991 to Estmanco later BDL. There were no public rights of way or footpaths included in the sale by the then Labour Council. If Im honest its another astounding lack of foresight by LBH!I for one will now enjoy our splendid isolation!

David Cook ● 445d

One of the affronts to the residents of Brentford was allowing the Max Factor offices to be built at the bottom of Ealing Road.After the long trip gently downhill from Ealing Broadway...on arrival at the River Thames... one should immediately be able to view the River Thames...not some red bricked building acting as a screen ...hiding the view.Vigorous protection of Brentfords due rights is needed. Incomers may not realise what we're on about.

Jim Lawes ● 445d

Sorry Raymond, that is nor only nonsense but the opposite of the truth. The council for many years has been working hard to create and respect access to the river banks, such that you can follow the Thames (and the Brent) from Hammersmith to Richmond Borough with very little interruption: a few old riverside houses in Chiswick (but we won a hundred metres back when Redcliffe Gardens was developed); Victoria Steps Quay; Syon Park, and now it seems Brentford Dock.There may be legal ways to  restore access to the river at Brentford Dock, which are being pursued by the council's lawyers, and some residents looking at other methods.

Guy Lambert ● 445d

I grew up in Brentford and saw the Dock being built. Prior to that it was the remains of a Huge Railway goods yard and pretty much akin to the areas of bomb sites littered about West London. Small businesses,  outdoor storage  wasteland etc.There was no access ( at least officially but it was a good place to explore and play on.But one of the big deals about the new Dock development was the opening up of the stunning views of the river and how pedestrians would be able to benefit from this.  It was as I recall limited but definitely there for all to pass through. It did though bring you back to the High Street at the Syon End or vice versa.But lots used to be mentioned about the entire southside development over the last 40 years and more becoming fully accessible and over a period of time.Watermans Park was part of that and the Watermans itself was also part of that ( apart from the woeful architectural design)I suspect that the reason the council have not been actively seeking to retain the status quo is that it may conflict with the Marina and the hawking of the Watermans site to developers which will end up with a real loss of riverside access and just a token walk through- more or less what exists there now.Certainly there has been no real and 100% solid commitment over the last 25 years to protecting and enhancing Riverside Access for all.And an absolute aversion to the notion that it could end up as Brentford - Upon - Thames which could only be if it was almost 100% accessible.

Raymond Havelock ● 445d

This subject is pretty interesting in the future of Brentford and the development of the river frontage.I haven’t been along there in a long time but reading from what has been said - I think the comments are saying that the buildings were built up to and beside a public right of way.Maintenance of the public right of way must have been established/agreed a long time ago?  This may not be what people want to hear now, but it was up to their surveyors and solicitors to advise.  Puts me in mind of a couple who, having bought a house, didn’t think that the clause that they should maintain a part of the local church was serious, so were very upset when the £ were called in.Putting a gate across a public right of way, which in this case probably should be wide to give access to the river, is surely against a law as it blocks a part of the right of way?Some landowners maintain a right to a pathway by closing a gate (padlocking) for a period of time each year, is this what is going to happen with this gate?About time somebody had the gate completely removed to avoid any confusion?  with costs to the person who is trespassing on the footpath?

Sarah Felstead ● 446d

It's pretty much down to the council as usual not having their eye on the ball when it matters.Far more important are closing roads and meddling with things that are not necessary.Just like Firestone the warnings about issues arising over the public through routes of Brentford Dock - which did exist and much lauded when the development was first announced and changes of ownership. Whilst the political lot blame each other. It's actually the administration who sat on their hands because of political tactics. Not just once either. More than a few times.The last being a delay due to the election and council action might lose a heap of about votes. It's now a rearguard action just to save face and look as though they are doing something.But it should have been nipped in the bud and dealt with a good while back.This borough has such a history of things like this and it's incompetence or putting political games first.  It's got so embedded its seen as normal.But it's just the same old Hounslow Borough, parts of it are a toy for politicians and ambitious executives and it always falls short of how it could be.

Raymond Havelock ● 446d

I lived briefly in Brentford Dock in the 80's when all the footpaths were open to the general public. On whose authority are some of the footpaths now closed to residents who do not live on the estate?

Joan Adamson ● 446d

I think it's a disgrace that this part of Brentford be cordoned off to those that have enjoyed it as part of growing up (born in Brentford 1967).  Who says that that the river can be privatised??  There are untoward happenings in all parts of London/Brentford that cannot be avoided unless 24 hour patrol is put in place.  Shocking that this is even being considered!

Emma Rowlatt ● 446d

What makes you think it isn’t?

Bradley Taylor ● 447d

What makes you think the area we have closed is a public footpath?

Charlie Sturt ● 448d

Can I point out that this route is not “ locked off” and you just push the gate to open? I use it on my way to work.

Richard Hunt ● 462d

Good points Steve.Interestingly  there's a noisy helicopter hovering above Ealing Road South at the moment.Perhaps it's spotted a litterlouten route to Brentford Dock!

Jim Lawes ● 465d

Hi Jim, I agree with you in principle but it's a bit of a coincidence that the Brentford Project is now being occupied and suddenly the access to the river has been closed off. Also, plans for the Heidelberg site being developed has no doubt exacerbated the situation.This is a 'public footpath' with views of natural beauty (Kew Gardens and the Thames Path). The Dock have their own management office and security if they want to monitor anti-social behaviour. The river environment has the cleanest air in London and everyone should have access to it, in my opinion.

Steve Allum ● 466d

What’s interesting about this debate is the amazing double standards at play with Hounslow Council. The majority of Dock residents want the restrictions, and as residents that’s their right. Or it would be if the principle applied to the Swyncombe Avenue closure was applied, where the majority of residents wanted it and the council was only too keen to impose the restriction permanently.Either be consistent or admit the double standard.

Simon Hayes ● 470d

But we all pay for the streets to be well kept and it is supposed to be policed.But in 40+ years of popping over there in fact since it was built the only problem I've noticed is the gridlock of cars and drug dealing and intimidation by and from people who live there.Unfortunately there are people who do not respect and have no respect living in ALL our midsts and not really much that can be done about it.But the basic principle of public right of way was much lauded when the Dock was first built and part of it detailed accordingly. It never included the gardens or inner open areas.But some friends who remain there are not happy with both aspects. But equally feel there are double standards and a them and us still within the Dock.But surely this is a principle and somehow, somewhere the overseeing of it has failed.

Raymond Havelock ● 470d