Forum Topic

Parking restrictions to be imposed.

Some local residents have brought to my attention that signs have been placed on lamp posts informing of proposals to introduce yellow lines and turning circles etc in several streets around St Pauls Rec and Griffin Park. This would be a 24/7 restriction.The problem appears that the markings are rather long and will result in the loss of dozens of parking spaces.The turning circles seem utterly pointless and will also reduce available spaces significantly.With CPZs and a river encompassing the district, there will be no alternative parking for the many displaced residents who come home late at night from work or play.It appears this is all to allow refuse services to use longer vehicles. The old excuse of fire appliance access is also mooted although this does not hold water for several reasons.The suggestion by the residents I spoke to is to object wholly to the turning circles but approve the corner restrictions only if the length of them is reduced to a single car lengthper corner.There is just a short time to object and the details are in small print on the notices

Anthony Waller ● 5371d29 Comments

Tried to get a picture today. 36 ft dustcart and 30 ft recycling truck totally blocked Brook road south.Grosvenor residents are a calm lot. They all have to reverse out of the street and become deft at dealing with obstacles.Bad parkers are a nuisance but it is not the residents who are demanding change. It is to suit large vehicles not designed for these streets.

Michael Brandt ● 5342d

The resident's of Grovenor Road must be a placid lot if they have allowed obtructions like those described to have persisted for so many years.If they indeed had made complaints to the Council, or other Community Services about the inconsiderate parking on those street corners...surely some action would have been taken.I admit to not having studied the Highway Code for some years.. but surely it mentions "no parking within xx metres of road junctions".Pictures someone!

Jim Lawes ● 5343d

The problem as you can see in Grosvenor Road is not weekly, or even daily.However there is a woman resident of Brook Road who regularly parked her tiny car way past the kerb apex, causing all sorts of problems for every one in Grosvenor.A van often blocks the road, which also overhangs the apex.Even without yellow lines these can be construed as traffic offences but that has not happened.The lady and her small car, - Locals will know her ability for parking - or lack of it seems to have gone. But there are one or two who park an Audi and a 4WD on the corners with no care for pedestrians or residents.Local residents did not oppose some sort of restriction on the corners, in particular to keep the dropped crossing kerb free for pedestrians, trolley and wheelchair users as well as a clear view. This would also be ample for most standard length Fire appliances and refuse vehicles.The real desire for the extended length is to allow longer than standard vehicles access.This is at the inconvenience of residents and for the gain of private contractors.  - Not acceptable. Small streets are not uncommon and that is why specific dimensions for service vehicles were devised many, many decades ago, in an era where common sense and practicality and service was put above profit .Also the refuse services do not help matters themselves by turning up between 7 and 8 in small streets when most have not left for work.This means that if anyone has had to park on a corner, they have still no alternative to move their vehicle.As it is, I timed how long the cycling trucks take pre-09.00.As the cars are bumper to bumper, this involves operatives moving up and down to find a space to access the truck and residences.Post 09.00 this is not an issue.The timings for Grosvenor are 18 mins pre 09.00 and 7 mins post 09.00.Post 9am, their is far more space

Michael Brandt ● 5343d

Hounslow Council response to an FOI asking for details of when emergency and refuse vehicles have had problems accessing the streets around the proposed restricted parking zone:We do not currently hold information by individual road on whether emergency services vehicles have problems with access. However, we do receive this information from our waste and recycling contractor where roads do not receive a collection due to lack of access. We have had particular problems with collections from Grosvenor Road. Details of dates for this disruption are below. Unfortunately we do not record the time of visit, although on most occasions they would visit two or three times during the day to try to gain access and will have failed on all occasions. 21/08/07, 24/10/07, 27/03/09, 08/04/09, 01/07/09, 5/10/09, 21/10/09, 18/11/09, 09/12/09, 10/12/09- repeat, 11/01/09, 27/01/09, 03/03/10, 08/04/10, 19/05/10, 20/05/10- still no access, 21/05/10- still no access, 25/05/10- still no access (cleared 26/05/10), 09/06/10,  10/06/10- still no access, 22/9/10As you can see there have been very regular problems over a period of time with accessing this road. The other roads in the proposed CPZ have not had any occasions recorded where we have been completely unable to get in to collect the waste and recycling. So some justification maybe for restrictions at the Grosvenor Road/Brook Road South junction but the Council should not be using this same arguement for other streets in the area.

Jennifer Long ● 5343d

I've had a response from Andrew Nye, Engineer - Developments and Parking to my objections to the proposed parking restrictions:  With regard to the restrictions at the Grosvenor Road/Brook Road South junction, the proposal is for the lines to come into Grosvenor Road a distance of 7 metres from the junction on both sides. This is the minimum we consider necessary taking into account the width of the road and is equivalent of possibly two average car lengths on either side. The extent proposed for Brook Road South is six metres which was considered the minimum clearance required to enable drivers to pull out safely from Grosvenor Road into Brook Road South. In response to the overwhelming number of objections received to the proposed waiting restrictions in Grosvenor Road's 'turning head' it has been agreed that these restrictions will no longer be considered as part of any future proposal. In view of the objections and comments received to the restrictions proposed for Clifden Road, we have withdrawn the proposal and will consult again with the waste management team and with the emergency services.  I will write to you again with the outcome early in the New Year.

Jennifer Long ● 5344d

Ah!  Thanks

Michael Brandt ● 5362d

Sorry-it's the Area Committee -meets 2 Thursdays a month-ish at Brentford Free Church near Inverness Club. Check out when the parking thing is going to it.

Ian Speed ● 5362d

Er...What's IBAC ?

Michael Brandt ● 5363d

I can only suggest a petition to be presented to IBAC via Matt Harmer. It would be a good idea if IBAC councillors also voted for greater written consultation in future on this kind of scheme,if they agree that is!

Ian Speed ● 5363d

The shorter pdfs just pertaining to Brentford are now available on the front page.

Kath Richardson ● 5365d

Except that Grosvenor road was not fully consulted. The street said no  but was concerned about being on the periphery of a zone. It was left out of other consultation.residents have not been kept in the loop about any other developments in other nearby streets.We were most certainly NOT consulted about any other street markings.

Michael Brandt ● 5366d

Except that Grosvenor road was not fully consulted. The street said no  but was concerned about being on the periphery of a zone. It was left out of other consultation.residents have not been kept in the loop about any other developments in other nearby streets.We were most certainly NOT consulted about any other street markings.

Michael Brandt ● 5366d

The double yellow lines will squeeze residents (and non-residents) into less spaces with the possible result that the next time a CPZ is proposed we'll all vote "Yes" because parking has become a worse problem than it is now.

Jennifer Long ● 5366d

Not quite sure what the surprise is here. When the Griffin Park Area CPZ was decided against (in June/July - and without specific reasons why being provided), what was agreed was that the council would proceed with the yellow-linery. Which they are now doing.Interestingly, and ironically, enough - the council's own report into the effects of a CPZ showed that there wouldn't be any displacement of traffic into surrounding roads. The imposition of sizeable yellow lines will, however, have a displacement effect because - without a CPZ - the streets around Griffin park will still be full of day trippers, commuters, Heathrow-airport-users and overnighting white van men, which will drive residents into other roads.It does make one wonder whether this is the council's revenge for some residents having had the audacity to ask for a CPZ, and then having the nerve to complain when it was rejected under slightly dubious circumstances. But that cannot be right, can it, because the council would at least generate some revenue from a CPZ?

Jeremy Probert ● 5366d

I note that of the 3 councillors, it is as usual, Matt Harmer who has at least put in a response.But surely these officers/planners put a notice to councillors first?I've just read Cllr. Harmers newsletter and no mention of this in that so maybe not.It really does start to look like a back door attempt at forcing a CPZ into the area.What is really annoying is that if they came up with a "CPZ Lite" plan instead of the heavy handed rather inflexible models around to date, rsidents would probable accept it.But be warned, over in Ealing, the Labour administration have just hiked up CPZ permits and removed carer permits as well as a 300% visitor permit rise.flying in the face of all their own previous administrations promises for it to never be a cash cow but a service at the behest of it's own residents.The Tories honoured this but no mention of it in the Labour manifesto.Residents groups are now seeking advice for a juducial review.

Anthony Waller ● 5367d

How can the Council get away without a proper consultation?  They may have met their Statutory obligations but it is morally wrong.And why didn't our local Councillors at least post something on this site so more people are away of this?It just seems like the Council are determined to get back at residents for rejecting 3 CPZ proposals in the last 10 years.

Jennifer Long ● 5368d

Objections must be filed this week.There is a degree of common sense for some of the restrictions but they are way beyond what is necessary.Best thing is to tell as many people in your street asap as so few have read or understand the notices.

Michael Brandt ● 5368d

Given the massive impact and loss of places these proposed yellow lines will cause and the history concerning CPZ's, I really do believe residents need to be properly consulted.In one sense this will be worse then a CPZ as people will still park for days on end while they use Heathrow etc & as well as taking away valuable parking places.Please can we have a proper consultation & leaflets through every door illustrating the parking places that would be lost.

Phil Whitehead ● 5368d

It would seem that some of these specifications are a straight lift from the blueprint which was publicly exhibited around 2001/2 when the last CPZ plans were proposed.I recall a public meeting in a packed hall where the late Cllr. Val Lamey made a quick exit when the whole plan was dissected by a few well informed residents.The net loss of parking in the zone was 108 cars spaces due to the amount and length of yellow lines and turning areas.Residents realised there and then that the CPZ did not mean a parking space for you outside your house but more permits than spaces and a bunfight for less spaces than before.Until a better method is found, this makes the CPZ nothing more than a drain on ones income.These proposals are simply out of some guidebook.Keeping the corners clear is fine but a minimum length is all that is required and turning circles?  No benefit to anything - except those who can't reverse properly.

Anthony Waller ● 5369d

It would seem that some of these specifications are a straight lift from the blueprint which was publicly exhibited around 2001/2 when the last CPZ plans were proposed.I recall a public meeting in a packed hall where the late Cllr. Val Lamey made a quick exit when the whole plan was dissected by a few well informed residents.The net loss of parking in the zone was 108 cars spaces due to the amount and length of yellow lines and turning areas.Residents realised there and then that the CPZ did not mean a parking space for you outside your house but more permits than spaces and a bunfight for less spaces than before.Until a better method is found, this makes the CPZ nothing more than a drain on ones income.These proposals are simply out of some guidebook.Keeping the corners clear is fine but a minimum length is all that is required and turning circles?  No benefit to anything - except those who can't reverse properly.

Anthony Waller ● 5369d

LBH daubed double yellow lines all over Augustus Close. Brentford Dock resulting in the loss of at least 12 parking spaces.This has caused chaos when trying to park at night. There is no where else to go and it is distressing to come back late at night unable to park. Who thinks up these crazy schemes? There is never consultation and no thought given to problems it causes.Usual excuses given re emergency vehicles, dustcarts etc. A little imagination using single yellows with overnight parking between 6.30 and 8.30 am would ease the situation. Brentford Dock existed without problems for 25 years but someone on a computer at the civic centre changed all that!

Elizabeth Price ● 5369d

Matt - I did email you complaining about this.  It is totally unacceptable for the Council to try and introduce this on the quiet.  I'm sure very few people have seen the signs attached to only lampposts at the end of the streets.  How can they get away with this?The proposed yellow lines are unnecessarily long - I agree people should not be parking on the corners but surely one car length of yellow lines is enough?  The turning bays - if we've survived decades without them why do we need them now?Double yellow lines by fire hydrants - how come in the CPZ proposals earlier this year there were parking bays by fire-hydrants but suddenly now they need double yellow lines?  Ridiculous - fire engines park wherever the fire is and run hoses down the street - they do not next to fire hydrants!

Jennifer Long ● 5369d

Thanks to all for this. I have two pdfs showing the proposals, if that helps - the document Michael helpfully links to is rather large, covering as it does potential changes accross the borough. Please do get any comments or objections in (to me if you like). These will be discussed at a forthcoming Area Ctte meeting, open to all residents.matt.harmer@hounslow.gov.ukMatt HarmerBrentford ward councillor

Matt Harmer ● 5369d

Just seen the notices too. This will cause huge problems for residents, just so oversized vehicles can access these small streets. Quite why we should be penalised for no-one regulating the size specifications of service vehicles just beggars belief. As usual in this country, we end up paying the price for wholesale incompetance.One space each side of the corner would be more than sufficient.This notice should be a letter drop to all resident in all roads affected, not something cooked up  from obscuriity.There's not long to object.020 8 583 3322  Reference TMO/P028B/10  Michael Jordanhttp://www.hounslow.gov.uk/traffic_waiting_restrictions_151110.pdf

Michael Brandt ● 5369d

Just noticed notices on Grosvenor Road. I estimate just this road alone will lose at least 6 places, possably 8. Where are these cars going to go? We've survived without a turning place at the bottom of the road why now. Could support a 1 car gap at the top but this seems like an over kill.Strange if this can be done with a notice on a lamp post, surely considering the impact this should a letter through the door? Sure most neighbours have little idea about this.

Phil Whitehead ● 5369d

Now a turntable at the end of each road would be good!!Actually it's to allow a three point turn as only a Triumph Herald or a SmartCar could U- turn kerb to kerb

Anthony Waller ● 5369d

What is a turning circle? Is it mechanical? Do you just sit on it like the trains did in the Thomas the Tank Engine stories? What fun avoiding the dreaded three point turn. Is there a reverse park version?

Lisa Mercer ● 5370d

Absolutely! I guess people from the affected streets will park in adjacent streets,residents there will say "Oi what's going on here,we need a CPZ". And so it goes, another tax... Kerching!

Tony Wood ● 5371d

And these suggested restrictions will assist who exactly?  The imposition of the yellow lines, if they are anything like the ones that appeared around Northfields Avenue, will result in the loss of at least 4 parking spaces from either end of the road and serve no purpose other than to create even more of a scramble for the already limited parking spaces which presumably will result in everyone begging for a CPZ which in turn will be a nice little earner for the council without any benefit for the residents!  To those in favour of CPZs all I have to say is "be careful what you wish for".I can't imagine what "turning circles" actually are or where you would put them?

Bernadette Paul ● 5371d