Forum Topic

Good Morning Jim,The way I understand it is John Dale is front man for Brentford TV and Jim Stirrar is the Frontman for Brentford Voice. Mind you, maybe ask Cllr Lambert he seems to be in bed with Brentford Voice perhaps he can enlighten us more. Either way LBH and Brentford TV/Voice have failed in their campaign against BDL.I don't really care where they both live although John Dale used to live on the Dock. Whoever is flying a drone in Brentford needs permission from the CAA to fly it in this area as its part of the London Control Zone which is a high risk area from the surface up to 2500 feet I very much doubt they would get official permission as we are under the flightpath to the Northern runway.The 2 public roads on the Dock are Augustus Close up to the BDL security office and Dock road. Good luck with walking along there the paths on Augustus Close as they are in a terrible state and its very easy to trip on the uneven surfaces, LBH probably are aware, but have done nothing about it.The other road is Dock Road which is jointly owned with Ballymore after LBH put a CPO on BDL some years ago. I am surprised you have not called out that sniper Anne England after she had a pop at you in her last post!Also the 2 of new Gates have already been vandalised,thanks to the unwanted publicity of Brentford voice/TV. Finally, I could say a lot more about all of this and the despicable behaviour of LBH and call out a lot more of the previous planning Committee.Im not gonna say much more because Storrar and Co use it against us. Genuine question?They say he is a planning expert, so what qualifications has he got to back this up?

David Cook ● 398d

Anyone can take photographs on private property that has general access or shared space. - Just like railway stations. Only H&S restrictions apply. It is only photographing people on private land that requires permission not the envisions.Permission is not required in any environ where people can access ie a footpath or open space used by anyone be it the Postman or a resident going to their particular home.  Taking photographs through someone's window or intruding into their own personal space is an intrusion.I do still live in the district as have my family for 3 generations. Just not in Romulus Court.The very reason that the Govt, LCC/ GLC and the Port of London Authority among others set out to open up the river was for the very reason to end the exclusivity enjoyed by the very few. Your Neighbour being one of those.The difference being is that your neighbour is landed gentry and is an estate owned for many centuries and Brentford Dock is a very recent development in an age of equality and democracy and inclusiveness to all not the very few. It was decided thereafter that that will not continue and that as riverside land became available, it would be wherever possible accessible in part to the public. Evident along the Mall in Hammersmith when the Beemax Factory closed and Watermans park to name but two. At the very least footways would link between.The changes for the better as you mention, started with the cleaning up and opening up of access to the river. The place stank from the rotting industrial neglect and 200 years of pollution almost constantly before that.Brentford Dock would not have been possible without the huge amount of taxpayer funded decontamination and stabilisation of the site and the riverbank which was written off to enable feasibility.I will agree it is rather strange that all these records seem to have vanished but then that's not the first time in recent times. The rationale for low height buildings from Morrisons to Heidelbergs back in the 1970s and 80s also seem to have been lost to public record.

Raymond Havelock ● 418d

RaymondI have to disagree with a lot of what you have said, there nothing sneaky or insidious about what I have said about Brentford voice and others. In fact they the insidious ones coming up onto private property taking Photographs on our private land without BDL Permission. Its their negative publicity and rantings on Facebook pages that have led to more people accessing our Private river frontage. The gates are in and wont be coming down anytime soon and that is what the majority here wanted.Your so called fact about a public access route is also wrong. This part of the Thames is not along with Syon House.In fact there are many places where the riverfront is not accessible to the public. All of this comes at a cost because of hearsay rumours and other rubbish being written about Brentford Dock. No we are not an elite group, its nothing at all do with that. In fact BDL treat everyone here the same, whether you are a Council tenant, lease holder or Private leaseholder. Unfortunately LBH do not and we have seen that when they only write to their tenants.The Syon Gate is open to all residents here, and the only stipulation is we pay BDL for the fobs who then pay Syon House for access on a yearly basis.You show me on any definitive map about what you are claiming about Public access route or Land registry document that says this.Brentford Dock is a very open Estate you can access my front door without going through any security and that is part of the problem. These New Estates being erected will not have that same sort of access. We wont be able to access the Church area or their private roof gardens when completed.You have not lived here for 30 years or more and a lot of things have changed here for the better.Im well aware that Trespassing is a Civil offence and you cannot be arrested for that. However if trespassers are causing a nuisance, damage or other anti social actvities then they can be ejected. That is the why we have security here to deal with that. If they cannot then the Police are called.

David Cook ● 418d

It's rather insidious that the blame is being foisted to Brentford Voice and some TV channel I've certainly not heard of.Reading all the Brentford Voice stuff they have (quite rightly in my own opinion) done something that should have been done by the council and certainly more openly and honestly.  That is highlight the issue of restricting the access to the Thames.  Nowhere do they mention access all areas.  Their wording is very fair minded.The Thames and its riverbanks are a national asset for the public.  Overseen and protected by a Public Owned body - for and on behalf of the Public of the UK.It has long been policy for near 60 years to clean up and  open up the riverside - Long before Brentford Dock was conceived.  Subsequently this was factored in to its construction.  Part of which was not completed.  At the time I thought it inadequate given all the fanfare at the time.However, the issue is only an issue because of a Council mess up in detail of a sale.  Fact is it was a public access route and has existed for many decades.Having once lived here, 3 decades back now, there was always an element who did not like it and desired exclusivity. The resentment towards the Council tenants was indicative of that.Trying to deny Council residents the key to Syon Gardens special gate " Only for Flat owners" I recall.  Not very inclusive.So hat's off to a local group who have highlighted the anomalies which is quite right and proper. That's what I call divisive.The real blame lays with the council - yet again.  Just like Parks contracts that left out cleaning the footways!I suspect the real anger is that Brentford Dock got caught out and thought they had got away with their intention.

Raymond Havelock ● 418d

Hi Jim,Well that new Canal bridge was installed in 2018, if im honest that got the alarm bells ringing here on the Dock.That meant there was a direct link from the Ballymore estate into the Dock. Thats one of the reasons the first gates were put in on the Brentford Dock site to prevent unwanted access and led to the first Article 4 Direction from LBH. The first Gate was actually vandalised at great cost to BDL thanks to Brentford TV/Voice negative publicity about the gates. They are still looking for the perpetrators.It turns out the Bridge was paid for by a PFI between Ballymore and LBH. I applied to LBH for a FOI on it. Guess what, they wont tell me how much has been spent on it. LBH tell me it has Statutory exemptions and its commercially sensitive information. There is absolutely no transparency on what LBH are spending of our Council taxes. However the Thames Path does come up Dock road and turns right after the lock down onto the canal path along to this bridge up the steps and across the bridge towards Ballymore estate its clearly signposted as well.Maybe thats the reason it was renewed but I don't know. I have my suspicions but cannot prove it. It was probably a deal done between LBH and Ballymore at some stage offering access to Brentford Dock! I remember all of Ballymore advertising back then offering riverfront access. Maybe they meant the Brent River/Canal and not the Thames.We get the same problems as the Island and I have been over there to deliver stuff to someone I know there and had to be let in because i did not know the entry codes. I think you find now all new developments have to allow access and thats a condition of planning nowadays. That was the case with the Island although it is gated for cars and Pedestrians. Its a bit rich and hypocritical when one of Brentford TV Directors apparently lives on the Island.If Im honest the argument was never about the odd pedestrian walking around Brentford Dock, but with the increased footfall with the lockdowns it soon became evident we were going to have much bigger problems. The pathway along the Syon wall which was grass was temporary fenced around that time to prevent people walking on the grass as it completely wore out to mud. Again another cost to BD residents. In fact all the pathways were renewed around the estate a few years ago because of the damage.What I am really fuming about though is the way LBH try to ride roughshod over us with another Article 4 which if enacted will cost BD more money as BDL will have to apply for planning permission to carry out any more works. Its the double standards and hyprocrisy of LBH. I seem to remember all the furore of the multistorey carpark being erected without planning permission and no stop order being put on it.Apologies for the long winded reply but there you have it.

David Cook ● 419d