Forum Topic

Cllr Matt Harmer and Parking again!!!!

This is my reply to Matt Harmers news letter, that after absence of nearly a year bring up the subject of Parking again in Brentford..I am sorry Matt but your bizarre biased stand on imposing unlawful CPZ's on a road by road basis is awful, people are upset because you are bullying people into them!! of course people want one in Lateward Road because of the ones you already have put into place. I thought councillors were supposed to protect and serve the public not the council's wishes. I cannot believe your one sided and almost blind loyalty on this. Up until the past few years I always thought of you as a man who was committed to the streets of Brentford, this obviously shows you are not. CPZ's planned and imposed on a street by Street basis in a small town like Brentford is unlawful and unfair to everyone, it only causes years of frustration and annoyance for the residents. And godforbid anyne opposes one of your CPZ's as you just do the bloody survey again to try and persude them... I shall definitely not be voting for you again and ask many others to do so, this is ridiculous!

Alan Branch ● 4530d106 Comments

Trouble is Alex I suspect that very very few will not qualify for permits as if there is a blanket CPZ ( and that's the only fair way if there has to be one,  Nearly all the vehicles in the existing area will indeed qualify for a permit.If it stood at 90+% last year then the yellow lines and additional ones proposed for the smaller streets will reduce capacity to less than 90% which means that permit holders will not necessarily find a space within the zone or indeed their street. Which effectively brings us back to square one. Empty streets during the day with many permit holders away at work or out in their vehicles anyway, but come home and it's much the same as now and outside of permit hours but still having to pay for one.If LBH come up with a better design with far less restrictions, shorter  corner restrictions and so on then it might help but given the wholly unnecessary restrictions proposed for Albany Road which may well destroy 3 local shops , a caring considerate Hounslow council is not in their mentality.

Michael Brandt ● 4505d

Michael, first of all thank for the info on the survey of vehicles parking by day and night in Grosvenor Brook and Lateward Roads. It is great to talk with some real numbers, and in fact the council should’ve done such a survey themselves and provided the results to residents. I intentionally wrote about parking in Lateward on Friday. Indeed, one side of the road faces St.Paul’s Grounds and therefore the number of available parking in that road is almost twice the number of households. And even accepting that neighbours (e.g. fro Brook Road South) park there, too (which is absolutely fine) there is no way in the world that both sides of Lateward Road are occupied with the residents of the area. I really appreciate Michael’s note about the survey in Grosvenor Brook and Lateward Roads. But for Grosvenor Brook Road it is quite obvious that majority of cars there indeed belong to the residents – it is a dead-end road and outsiders normally wouldn’t try their luck there. As for the Lateward Road you admit that it  is the overspill for the whole area and his survey was before introduction of CPZ in Hamilton Road.If the loss of 80 parking spaces in addition to what has already been lost is true – it is wrong and has to be corrected. It doesn’t have to be this way. Loss of parking due to CPZ is possible in theory, but in reality it is questionable. We have already lost most of potentially losable the parking spaces due to the double yellow lines on the corners.  Additional loss will not be significant compared to the non-CPZ parking. In fact there is no loss of parking spaces due to CPZ in Hamilton Road. The only “lost” space is on the Southern side in the very Western end of the road, and even that is due to the introduction of the parking restrictions on corners, if not earlier.  And again, real loss of parking spaces is because of the way some (in fact, unfortunately, a lot of) people park. At night I suggest late workers and anyone who has been out in the evening (including myself, as I often come home late and this is why I’m so frustrated about parking in recent years) will park in the places vacated by those who will not be eligible to parking permits.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4505d

Raymond,  I do understand that there may well be other residents parked in the vicinity of my house. However (a) they obviously could not park closer to their homes as spaces there were occupied by not necessarily residents, and (b) I know very well that drivers of some cars parked here in fact live in GWQ and the current CPZ areas.As for the logic - unfortunately the main logic I really see in the CPZ opposition is that people do not want to pay for what used to be free. But unfortunately the situation now is different – whatever used to be free simply doesn’t exist any more. The number of non-residents who park around Griffin Park is a lot more than it used to be – from the new developments, from those who just leave their cars here for a few days, from the CPZ streets where people don’t want to pay for parking.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4505d

Alex, Last year a few neighbours of mine carried out a full survey of vehicles parking by day and night in Grosvenor Brook and Lateward Roads. ( Only those three as that was where people offered to help.I was carried out not because of a CPZ but in reaction to an LBH survey that claimed there was no parking issue at night in this area. Part of a rather rigged proposal for two construction developments by LBH.The results showed that 97% of vehicles parked after 10 pm were residential from this area and that Lateward road indeed is the overspill for the whole area.By day it was another story with a lot of available space. This has though changed considerably since Hamilton Roads CPZ and the amount of displaced commuters by day but also the amount of non permit purchasing residents from Hamilton Road who now park eleswhere. The survey was taken over a week and involved asking late parkers where they lived.  Most vehicles were recognised by respective street residents.Simply counting cars won't tell you anything.I have to agree with Raymond. You cannot expect residents from adjoining streets not to park where they can at night. The streets are simply too small to accomodate all residents in their own streets.It happens to me a lot as I do work late regularly. Some nights I am lucky to park five or six streets away. So where do you suggest I park?We've already lost some 20 spaces locally from the corner yellow lines (although that do make for safety for all)A blanket CPZ will lose another 80 spaces.At night where do you suggest late workers and anyone who has been out in the evening park?This is why until Hounslow come up with a flexible a possible CPZ  ( and it is possible) and actually come clean with residents about their true intentions it should be not at all.

Michael Brandt ● 4506d

When I get home at night and I'm in the car, If I can't park in my street I have to look elsewhere.This is no uncommon.You cannot complain about other cars parking at night because they are not from the vicinity of your house.They are almost certainly residents of this district.In Lateward road we have extra space because of the park being on one side.We all know that residents from other streets particularly Brook Road Park here at night. Brook road's traffic calming means that many cannot ever park outside their homes. But they are local residents. Very different from your implication that people were parking from afar.If we have a proper zone CPZ I will still be able to park in your road and probable people will still have to park at night in our road.If it is street by street what happens when it gets to a tiny road like Grosvenor road? or Albany Road or Mafeking Avenue? Where there will never be space to accomodate a car per dwelling?Sorry Alex but your logic is rather flawed on this.

Raymond Havelock ● 4506d

"How do you know 40 out of 100 vehicles at night are not residents?"Sometimes I simply count cars in the vicinity of my house. And that's the usual numbers I get. To add to it, I drove along Lateward Road this Friday between 9 and 10 pm - there was hardly any space to park there, including the side facing St.Paul's Grounds. There is simply no way they are all residents of Lateward Road.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4506d

Think yourselves lucky, in a few months time I probably won't be able to park at all as Adelaide Terrace/York Parade will have the only permit free parking in the immediate area so the cab companies, local businesses and residents will all be competing to park there.The council's solution, sell us residents permits to park in the streets where there there won't be enough spaces anyway. Mark my words it's going to be a nightmare while the council or thier contractor makes money hand over fist from residents who end up parking "illegally" because they have no choice.I'm fed up with being a cash cow for the local and national government just because I own a car it's about time we called for a meeting with our rather shy local authority representatives so they can tell us how they propose to GUARANTEE parking within a certain distance of your front door. Maybe they could give a refund of parking charges when you can't.As far as I can tell, CPZ's serve two main purposes firstly they attempt to discourage car ownership by making it too much trouble/expense to own a car and therefore satisfies the "green" conscience that we're all meant to have and secondly parking provides a very nice income stream for the council. If they were genuine about the CPZ's being for the residents benefit they would ensure that sufficient parking spaces are provided for the number of permits issued.On a related point:It's intriguing that this debate is being had at the same time as around the country a number of towns have abolished parking restrictions in thier town centres and found an increase in trade as a result.If Hounslow are truly commited to the regeneration of Brentford maybe they should be looking at way of encouraging people to come into the area by making parking easier/cheaper/free not ways of discouraging or charging them for the privilege

Simon Foster ● 4508d

If a CPZ was in streets like Clifden Road, it would be fine.A large part of it has off street parking so two car households are in a win win situation. and as there are dropped kerbs there would be no need for passing point restrictions and all the other stuff that LBH planners have incorporated.So it would work just like in Northfields.But take a look at CPZs in districts that are mainly terraced houses with no off street parking and are narrower.They work OK by day, streets devoid of cars. But even the ones with late hours  change in the evening, it is often impossible to park. Just as it was before a CPZ.This is exactly what we used to live in in North London and it was  dreadful.Permits went from £65 to £95 and parking till 20.30. If you were not home by  the end of the school run at 4.30 you simply did not get a space.The zone lost a lot of spaces and it was difficult to park before but it was near impossible afterwards. There were regular punch ups in streets and cars were often vandalised by angry residents who saw others as hogging spaces.It's why we moved.If it happens here, it needs to be with absolute guarantees and as flexible as possible.

Raymond Havelock ● 4508d

Alex with all due respect who are these non-residents who are turining up and parking at night.Sure we now get quite a few commuters parking by day, largely they are gone by early evening. Then there are spaces for a while but by 8pm the street is full up.I do know that some of the vehicies come from other streets. Like the non permit vehicles from Hamilton.But they are residents.How do you know 40 out of 100 vehicles at night are not residents?I can tell you as wellI would be far from happy if I had yellow lines spanning a section of street and I happened to be outside our place, Where would we then park? And have to pay for that too?

Raymond Havelock ● 4508d

Hi Claire, your right but... It will help to park the car during the daytime, and if your lucky enough not to use it anymore that day, then happy days :-)

Saul Whitmore ● 4508d

The logic is simple. The original 100 cars includes both residents and non-residents. After CPZ is in place the number of cars will be not 100, but 60.The loss of parking spaces is really not that great as more spaces are lost due to the way people park - when I was driving around looking for parking there were a number of spaces not quite enough to park on both sides of a "well-parked" car.The fact that the parking was not such a problem next day at 6 proves that the problem was caused by non-residents.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4508d

Alex, sorry but I am totally confused by your posts. 6 o'clock last night was a problem because there were non residents but tonight was ok because they were residents, CPZs should not be implemented on a street by street basis but following Hamilton Rd's implementation you are all for it because if one street does, others should follow and £60 a year is ok because - despite the evidence to the contrary from every other borough that has introduced these schemes which have doubled in price in a short period - an increase in fees is pure speculation? Do you play Jenga and lose a lot because your logic is absolute nonsense. 100 cars in a street; 70 parking spaces = people struggling to park 100 cars in a street;  60 parking spaces under a CPZ (because every bay is equal size) = MORE people struggling to parkNow = FREE - struggling to parkCPZ = £60 struggling to parkWhere is the logic???????

Claire Peleschka ● 4508d

What you've just mentioned Raymond just proves that CPZ must not be implemented on a street by street basis. As to who parks at night who doesn't live there - residents of GWQ for example. White van people who live God knows where but not here. People who just need to leave their car somewhere for a few days...Oh, and by the way, no problem parking at around 6 pm today - so CPZ would've solved my yesterdays problem.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4508d

But we now have residents who live in Hamilton road parking in our road because they have several vehicles and or won't pay for a permit. One of them is my boss who parks three vans and two of his families cars all around here. Anywhere but his street. ( I hope he doesn't read this !!!)Who is parking at night who does not live here?

Raymond Havelock ● 4508d

Correct, if I'm a resident - I'll get a permit. Those who are not residents will not get permits. Therefore it will not be as difficult at night as it is now - as non-residents will not get permits. Hamilton road is a good example. And - yes, I lived in a CPZ area before.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4509d

If you are a resident you will get a permit.If you are a resident and have a van you will also be entitled to a permit.It will be just like all the other areas with small streets, no off street parking and permit zones.  At night it will remain as difficult as it is now. But worse as night workers will have to get up early and move their cars which will inevitably be parked on yellow lines.

Raymond Havelock ● 4509d

If you look at the last published plan for a full CPZ. ( A copy was still in the library last summer)  Yellow lines were specified in all the roads that have single carriageways at intervals to allow passing and turning pointsThis means that 4-6 houses have double yellow or single yellow lines right outside.  Thats 4-6 residences where you would never be able to park.The average street had two to three of these planned losing 12-15 car spaces.They could be positioned outside your home. Apart from that, total up the loss of those spaces and the extended corner restrictions and it's up to 20 spaces lost per street. Everyone is entitled to a permit and currently individuals living in a shared residence are legally entitled not to be discriminated against where permit restrictions apply.  Some boroughs it is one permit per household.It's the thin end of a wedge which will deter commuters but screw residents.

Anthony Waller ● 4509d

This has been discussed numerous times. A lot of spaces were (and are) occupied by non-residents - commuters, visitors, people from new developments, white vans. I eventually managed to park after one of the visitors left.CPZ helps as it reduces competition for parking. Both during the day and at night.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4509d

Alex, at 6 o'clock it would unlikely be because of these perceived mass commuters so would have mainly residents so how on earth would a CPZ that would reduce the amount of spaces help you?As for the price being ok and it only being speculation that it will increase...Oh Dear

Claire Peleschka ● 4509d

I cannot understand why the councillors are so shy of dealing with the real issues  that are affecting everyone locally. Be it unsuitable developments, decreasing water pressure, parking & transport problems, poor roads and parks maintenance. Poor standards in some departments. They have only been prominent in national and wider issues, which frankly whilst important are not in the scope of what they ought to be doing.It's why I think party politics is not a good thing anymore for local authorities.So many councillors start off really well and prove to be either useless or very good ward councillors, but whether its the taste of power or the manipulation of party machines, as they get established, they all turn away from their core duty.It's interesting that very few councillors of any party actually do proper jobs.Some don't work at all for different circumstances, but so many are in jobs that are affiliated with politics. or state run organisations.These must be the only occupations where it is easy to take plenty of time off work as very few others could meet the demands of holding lots of positions on a council.While most of these sorts of jobs may not have much bearing on their decisions as councillors, it does indicate a desire for a career in which holding a political  office might be of career benefit along the line.One wonders whether that is a good thing for the electorate? Maybe it should be a maximum two terms in office. Maybe new councillors should not hold portfolios or be in cabinet for at least 2 years.Maybe they should only be eligible for election in the ward in which they live.But above all, they really must put party politics aside and represent the people of their wards and address the issues that are concerning them widely.

Michael Brandt ● 4509d

To be honest Alex I don't think its currently as bad as it has been. I work very late quite often and have driven round for up to 40 mins looking for a space.Sometimes I've given up and driven to my parents in law and stayed over in Northfields.Several years ago this was 4 or 5 times a month. But  I've only had that problem once or twice now in a year.That said, I don't work as late as often and I don't use the car as much. But if I do leave my car unused, I don't want to leave it for any amount of time far from home and stuck outside someone elses front door for days on end.Quite a few residents leave their unused cars outside for weeks sometimes.Normally it's a minor niggle, but it's when it's a van or a giant steroid 4x4.They shut all the light out of the hall and front room and we have to have the lights on all day.Two seater sportscars and old minis are still most welcome!!

Michael Brandt ● 4509d

I received another unsympathetic reply from Matt Harmer, still without any reason why he thinks CPZ'S are a good idea on a street by street basis. We need to draft a petition not for more CPZ's in Latewatd road but for a review of all existing CPZ's , the council lit seems are completely oblivious to the problems of this poor planning and councilors like Matt are not prepared to help the community.

Alan Branch ● 4509d

Well, it is currently still £60 and there is no indication as to how long it has stayed this way, therefore discussions about future potential increases are just speculations although I'm not trying to say that this is not possible. Of course it would be nice to have a cheaper CPZ as it was in Northfields a few years ago. But even the current 60 sounds quite reasonable.P.S. Yesterday I had to make about five circles around Griffin Park before I found a space to park at around 6pm. And it wasn't even a match day. It doesn't get much worse.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4509d

Thats the starting price.That's 120% higher than the similar 2 hour zones in Northfields until the present administration hikes them up in the last 2 years after promising they would never rise above inflation.Your also not including visitors permits which you also have to pay for.Ealing have just increased those by over 300%.So wise up. It's a cash cow con.

Michael Brandt ● 4509d

In 2009 Ealing's permits cost £25 or £45. Now they cost £50 or £80. They have therefore either doubled or nearly doubled in less than 5 years so if you believe that because it is £60 at a time when the council are desperate to have everyone embrace this stealth tax, it will remain that way you are naive. Pretty much in the same way as anyone believing that having a CPZ will guarantee them a parking space.

Claire Peleschka ● 4509d

Parking fee is currently £60 per year. Anyone knows how long has it been like this? I don't think £60 per year is a killer.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4509d

With companies like Serco muscling in, You can forget ever having a low cost reasonable CPZ. After all it is supposed to be a respite for residents living in small densely packed streets, not another drain on hard pressed residents.I cannot understand two things. How is it that a local authority cannot afford to run it's own parking operations without as they claim making a loss or too little profit and yet companies like NCP, Serco and so on can not only make a substantial profit but also make enough to bid for a tender?As with most sub contracted operations with authorities, they come in with all sorts of claims of streamlined efficiencies, new technology as all the usual guff but seldom manage to make any sort of improvement. The Ealing deal with Enterprise for street cleaning is a very good example. The previous set up was good but Enterprise have been completely unable to live up to the previous standard.  But they are still making a lot of money out of it.CPZs and parking will become even more zealous and far more expensive than now.And just on a lighter note, Ealing and Hounslow are far from the worst operators of CPZ schemes.

Michael Brandt ● 4510d

Hi Eileen. When I bought my house parking was never an issue. It's only became a problem to park during the day, since Hamilton Road had a CPZ put in. I actually own one of only two houses down Latewatd Road that have off road parking. It's only after talking with several of my neighbours that, unfortunately, asking for a CPZ is the only way to free up all the day parkers. I have no problem buying a residents parking permit so long as its kept at a reasonable fee. Although I do think that if it could be incorporated in your annual council tax bill reminder, then it would make more sense.

Saul Whitmore ● 4510d

In addition to that there are more and more new developments whose residents park in adjacent streets hence making parking for the residents of those streets much worse than it used to be.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4510d

But provision was put in place by building rentable garages in several locations to alleviate the pressure as long ago as 1965.Many of these spaces doubles up as utility access for the same reason - houses built intensively before electricity and gas and without full water and sewerage facilities.Now most of those garages have being taken away and cars are much larger than they were.I don't think it is possible for anyone to choose where they work nowadays.You go where you are told or sink.

Michael Brandt ● 4510d

Actually Saul, I'm not missing your point.  I empathise with the predicament but you chose your house where it is with its surrounding problems - no off street parking availability, near a train station and a football ground (although when BFC move to the new stadium in the future your problem will not be so great on match days) and that these houses were built when cars were a thing of the future!.  Don't get me wrong I love that road and had I had the wherewithall to buy a house there I would have done with all its resulting parking problems.  However when I chose and bought my little house parking was a big factor in my deliberations.I also choose not to work in central London which would mean commuting and that would be far more stressful than having to find a parking place at the end of the day!

Eileen Henderson ● 4510d

To be honest, the painted lines have already happened around Griffin Park. So it is very unlikely that the number of parking places will reduce much more.Of course it is nice to have free parking with no CPZ, but... the number of vehicles competing for parking have increased in the last few years, and not form the resident's vehicle. Of course, if one doesn't use his/her vehicle much - the would prefer not to have CPZ. But for those who drive every day it would be nice to be able ton park not too far from home and not to have to drive around trying to find a place to park.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4511d

The yellow lines on the corners would have gone in irrespective of a CPZ. This is to allow longer recycling vehicles to use these streets. But many of the double yellows are much longer than need be.In Hammersmith and Fulham for example. Corner yellows are kept to just 1 car length on all narrow roads and side streets that do not have junctions with large roads.Hounslow's CPZ designs are an over the top interpretation of what they claim are the rules but are actually only guidelines and very flexible.It's been mentioned time after time. A full CPZ in this block will lose nearly 100 spaces according to the Boroughs design. From turning restrictions, corner restrictions and passing points. It's also a very expensive load of add ons pushing the implementation cost up.

Michael Brandt ● 4511d

I know people living in the cul de sac Westbury Place - since the CPZ in their short road, they have fewer places to park because of the painted lines AND it now costs them - so for them it's a big no,no.

Jennifer Selig ● 4511d

I think you are missing the point Vanessa.  What he is doing here is trying to taunt us by hinting that his party intends to fight another spoiling campaign in Isleworth.  Naturally he won't make threats like this on the Chiswick forum in the light of the name that Ed seems to have made for himself there over the Grove Park CPZ, and being a typical arrogant politician David assumes W4 people won't have the intelligence to read this forum and see for themselves what he is up to (he also assumes the ICG is incapable of dropping a few leaflets over in Grove Park to let them know!).Unfortunately for David the Tories have become so unpopular and locally irrelevant that if the ICG did decide to contest Isleworth it is unlikely that a Tory spoling campaign would have any significant effect on the outcome one way or the other.But I do wonder what those entrusted with the task of holding out in Osterley and Hounslow South, just to cite two examples, will make of the fact that their party seems to be prioritising playing silly buggers in Isleworth over defending their threatened seats?

Phil Andrews ● 4511d

Unfortunately making sure developers provide 1 parking place per per unit will not exactly do the trick. Some residents from new developments will still look to park in adjacent streets – some as they wouldn’t want to pay for parking, some as they have more than one car.Unfortunately the demand for parking around Griffin Park has greatly increased in the last few years and it will not get any better. Now there is no other way than CPZ. But it must not be on a street by street basis and it must be reasonably timed (Hamilton Road timing is fine I believe). And as someone mentioned earlier charges for the second car should be more reasonable.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4512d

Sorry but your missing my point. The problem in Lateward road is during the day, not in the evening.  We have only one car by the way.

Saul Whitmore ● 4512d

A triumph of hopeless optimism over experience if ever there was one.

Vanessa Smith ● 4512d

Have just read the whole thread!  Yeow!!  Don't believe that a CPZ should be instigated in Lateward Road.  They have additional parking available on the 'park' side.The families that have two or more cars are the problem for night parking.  Also as most writers have stated the 'width' of their houses can only 'just' accommodate a car so if you have a 4x4 or estate (as I have seen) then they are parking over the boundaries of next doors frontage.  Bad parking is prevalent with small cars parking so badly that where only this one car is parked three could have been accommodated.  It could have resulted from one car parking badly in the first place and the consequent knock on effect cascading.  The street by street CPZ implementation will have catastrophic effects on the parking in Brentford.  This will have a detrimental effect on business in the area.  If staff can't park then businesses can't expand.Living near a train station or a football ground will ALWAYS bring problems with parking as is the case here.  If you are a family then I rightly suppose that you will be a 2 car family and when the kids grow up....I noticed a CPZ implemented on Southdown Avenue near Boston Manor Station.  Once where cars abounded on both sides during the day it is now a 'ghost' area with barely a car in sight.  The same can be said for an area on Greenford Road in Ealing where parking bays have been marked on the road - barely a car parks there now - all were spaces, which accommodated the workers for nearby businesses.  Workers will now, no doubt, have been shoved onto nearby residential streets.  Planners obviously saw big dollar signs and put these in place, and as some writers have already said, residents are now sorely repenting their CPZs.What has to be addressed is that the Council NEEDS to make sure that new developments have a minimum of 1 car parking space per unit in any development.  NO development should be approved unless this basic standard is adhered to.  The cost of this space should be included in the price of the unit NOT as an additional cost (ranging from £12,000 per space as I heard on one development - consequently leaving empty'ish allocated car parks and the developments' car owners then parking on local surrounding streets).AND for goodness sake people, HAVE A BIT OF COMMUNITY SPIRIT.

Eileen Henderson ● 4512d

Phil Andrews ● 4516d

Ed Mayne is an Isleworth councillor because the people of Isleworth elected him. It is a pity that the Conservatives did not win the Isleworth ward last time but there is another opportunity next year.

David Giles ● 4516d

Touche I believe!

Vanessa Smith ● 4518d

Ed Mayne is an Isleworth councillor by grace of the local Conservatives, who are based in Chiswick.  David Giles is a leading member of and regular forum spokesperson for the Conservative Party in Chiswick.

Phil Andrews ● 4519d

But a 4x4 poses other problems. They are much higher, block the view for other cars manouvering particularly in tight spaces and make it very dangerous for children both on bikes and as pedestrians as they just cannot be seen.4x4s are also wider even than some vans and make it very hard and dangerous for anyone in standard sized car. Trying to park or pull out.It's not about choice it is about common sense and practicality and these sorts of vehicles are for families with driveways in Ruislip not tiny terraced streets in this sort of area. It's the fact that so many have been taken in by the marketing of these as a status symbol and a must have that is the problem.

Anthony Waller ● 4519d

Don't blame 4 x 4 's for parking problems a Range Rover (ultimate Chelsea Tractor) is only 8 inches longer than a Ford Mondeo Hatchback that means you'd need over 20 of them parked before they took up one extra space between them. Please don't use parking issues as a reason to have a pop at people who have excercised freedom of choice, they already get penalised by HMRC enough. By the way, I've got a Mondeo.

Simon Foster ● 4519d

Spare a thought for these of us who live on Adelaide Terrace, and York Parade.The parking bays outside our houses is controlled by TFL when the CPZ comes into force in the roads behind and around the A4 we will be lucky to ever park outside our houses again.The councils solution? Petition TFL to allow our parking bays to be included in the CPZ? No, don't be silly, that would be fair and sensible, they have generously offered to sell permits to us so we can park in the CPZ where there won't be enough parking anyway. In streets such as Challis Road, Enfield Road etc. there isn't enough space now for the residents to park, just go down any of them at night and you'll see issuing permits and marking out a CPZ will only compound the problem. Cllr Harmer may pontificate about surveys and the like but in all honesty can anyone believe that 3 months after setting up a CPZ the council is going to take it down again. In your dreams! And anyway they'll have had our money for the first year by then and of course closing the scheme would be unfair on those that want it etc etc..... If you'd like to prove me wrong I'd love to know where this has been done.It would be nice if Cllr Harmer were so passionate about the semi derelict buildings being used as advertising sites and the the epidemic of utility roadworks we've had to endure over the last couple of years.

Simon Foster ● 4519d

According to LBH, the introduction of a CPZ in Park Road, Grove Park, Chiswick will lead to a reduction in the number of parking spaces from 305 to 178  - a loss of 127 space.There are 91 houses in Park Road who together have 150 off the street parking spaces. That's a total of 455 parking spaces in this street of 91 houses !Over 90 per cent of Grove Park residents voted against a CPZ in 2011.All 9 Chiswick councillors voted against a CPZ. Residents remain opposed to a CPZ.But this Park Road CPZ is being imposed on Grove Park by Isleworth Councillor Ed Mayne who once stood for election in Grove Park and lost. Councillor Ed Mayne's parents live in Park Road.

David Giles ● 4520d

A big difference between Grove Park Area and Griffin Park Area is that a lot of Grove Park residents have off-street parking.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4523d

Thanks for letting us know, be great find out how they are fighting it as I can't see we have any choice , coucillors like Matt Harmer can't see anything wrong with it. That's the most frustrating thing!

Alan Branch ● 4523d

I feel for you all that are against the introduction of CPZ on a street by street basis - there's a huge fight going on in Chiswick over just this imposition in the Grove Park area.

Jennifer Selig ● 4524d

Yes. So would I as I already know two who don't and are parking in Lateward and Brook road.Really though, with housing costs impossible for many to leave home and consequently  so many having to lead independent lives in the same household, two or three permits per household/individual at the same price should be the norm.

Michael Brandt ● 4526d

The last few times I've seen the Hounslow CPZ plans they have been over elaborate, full of yellow lines for passing & turning points over the top signage and made a real meal of it.It resulted in a lost of over 80 spaces in the dlstrict and was quite ridiculous.CPZs can be very flexible and need not be like the LBH interpretation.The Ealing 1 and 2 hour schemes are not too bad, it's what has happened since that is scandalous.And I quite agree. a permit with you council tax renewal and free for pensioners but not transferable to avoid abuse .

Michael Brandt ● 4526d

I would be interested to know how many Hamilton Road residents are paying permits for their 2nd and 3rd cars, or whether they are "dumping" these in surrounding streets?

Reg Ghosh ● 4526d

Yep I agree with you. Permits should be free or just hidden in the council tax,  and given out when you pay your council tax bill.

Saul Whitmore ● 4526d

I do agree with most of what's been mentioned.But with reservations.Even a 1 hour blanket CPZ ( which would be better than the current Nimby fiasco) would have a detrimental effect on the elderly in the area. And there are quite a few.Permits should be free for the over 70's and visitor permits free for the over 70's as well.  It costs nothing really - only lost perceived revenue by the contractors.The permits should be low cost after all, the parking problem will remain the same at night as it will be residents in the main and all will be entitled to permits.A long and large vehicle ban as in Ealing in residential streets. Based on wheelbase and axle tonneage ( I believe this already exists from GLC days but is not enforced)A written in stone undertaking that this will not and cannot be used as a cash cow, and once instigated, lead to the huge and unreasonable hikes in permits and visitor permits which has caused great anxiety amongst the less affluent and elderly in Ealing to name just on e authority in which this has happened.This is after all a problem with commuters not with residents.At night it is a different issue and not so easy to solve.

Michael Brandt ● 4526d

Ray I must admit I do agree, if a low cost blanket is applied, and only enforced for an hour a day.

Saul Whitmore ● 4526d

"The only solution is a low cost Blanket CPZ with the hours you suggest. But protecting that low cost is paramount as recent huge hikes in Ealing have shown what a trap that can drop us all into."Fully agree, Ray.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4526d

You're not wrong Saul but this is not the way to do it.Residents will all end up paying for a solution to a problem that a few months ago did not exist. Not only that but the many who do drive to work and are gone all day will still have to have a permit and it will be just as difficult to park at night as it is now.Hamilton road is near the railway and a station. It's higher house prices reflect that. But it is elitist to give that street a CPZ without concern for the fallout.Why should we in a street not affected previously pay the price?The only solution is a low cost Blanket CPZ with the hours you suggest. But protecting that low cost is paramount as recent huge hikes in Ealing have shown what a trap that can drop us all into.

Raymond Havelock ● 4526d

HI Saul, thanks for the reply, I think no-one is dismissing the need for a CPZ given the right circumstances, it's the way it's being done, as you say it's purely because of parking displacement. But the way to solve the issue is not to be just another resident laying down our rights for a CPZ because we want our own personal street to be fine, as the problem just moves on to the next street. This is exactly what the council want!This is unfair! the CPZ consultation as put in the guidelines of the Road Traffic act should be well planned with consideration for a problem parking area and it's surrounding area's..They are simply moving the problem around and making it worse, the long term plan must be to gain an extra parking tax..one they can increase yearly..That aside I think it's wholly unjust and downright dangerous to affect traffic flow like this down Lateward Road , given the car mayhem at school times and people like Matt Harmer and the council are responsible!We need to make a noise so the whole of Brentford is given a proper review.

Alan Branch ● 4526d

I would just like to point out, that I have lived on Lateward Road for the past 12 years. Parking during the week days has became a problem particularly from 9-6. Now I understand that some residents are not around during these hours and therefore don't see the problem. However for the rest of us it is real and it is there. I knocked on 20 + or so doors on Lateward Road asking their veiws to a CPZ, as Hamilton Road had just put one in and the knock on affect was obvious. Controlled during only an hour a day say 1-2 would prevent most of the non residents (i.e day/tube/work parkers) from filling up the road. Only 3 residents were against the idea of a consultation. I am afraid that once a CPZ creeps near to a non CPZ  area, it is only to obvious that parking in these areas increases to a point when Residents get pissed off, and the only way to solve the issue is to become a CPZ as well.

Saul Whitmore ● 4526d

Well I hope the survey includes all the streets now affected and not just Hamilton Road.There may well be some legal issues with single streets dictating terms for a CPZ. Without adequate surveys or consultations to surrounding streets.I will ask my legal dept to take a closer look.

Raymond Havelock ● 4526d

I cycle in the daytime and you are right it has filled up with commuter cars.This is simply commuters displaced from parking near the station. Hamilton Road should not have been allowed a CPZ without consulting the streets that get affected and this is one of them.

Raymond Havelock ● 4526d

No. I am aware that the street has filled up with cars in recent weeks.It's all the displaced vehicles from Hamilton Road. Clifden road has lots of driveways so it's effectively one street.This is why a street by street CPZ is so stupid it foist a problem onto others  (who do not live so close to a station) and should not have been permitted without consultation to the streets that may get affected.If we have a CPZ here then Grosvenor road ( a small cull de sac will be completely chaotic and then Albany road and so on.It is a wholly wrong approach and to not consult the surrounding streets thus affect is the biggest and most unfair gaffe.

Anthony Waller ● 4526d

Sorry Ray, but maybe you are at work during the week. The problem as I see it is parking in the day time. It is becoming harder and harder to park in Lateward Rd.

Saul Whitmore ● 4526d

Just to keep this discussion on track I'd like to post a reply I finally got from Matt Harmer."Thanks Alan. I suppose all I can say is that I have only ever supported CPZs when a majority of residents have said they wanted them and have always insisted that any CPZ that goes in is followed by a survey a few months on to see if residents still want it (so far, they always have).Not sure about unlawful, but anyway.BestMattCouncillor Matt HarmerBrentford WardLondon Borough of Hounslow"

Alan Branch ● 4526d

And yet our driving standards are still better than in many developed countries.Does not mean we should be complacent.The trouble is that standards have declined sharply cars are safer but accidents more common.The root is that the focus has been shifted to fines by stealth on soft easy targets, speed cameras, parking offences and yellow box infringements.All of these can catch out a driver of any standard and do not reflect circumstances and do not identify consistent poor driving ability.This is something that traffic police could do effectively and with evaluative diligenceOnly traffic light cameras have made a significant change in safety.It's become like so many things here , all emphasis is on money and does nothing to enhance the general standard of driving.

Raymond Havelock ● 4526d

I agree with most of your point Raymond. Driving of many drivers is really appalling. Lack of signalling (this one really kills me!), sudden stops, slow starts, speeding, using mobile phones, jumping the red lights... But unfortunately I'm not sure if anything can be done about it(.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4526d

As for the space required for a 4x4 vs a usual family car, 4x4 don't take much more space. Here are some overall lengths of some 4x4s and family cars:4x4 Range Rover Evoque 4365 Vauxhall Astra   4466 Toyota Prius   44804x4 Freelander 2   4500 Volvo S60   46284x4 BMW X3           4648 Ford Mondeo   4784 BMW 520           48994x4 Range Rover   4999

Alex Shpinkov ● 4526d

Raymond I might once have agreed with you about creating ‘stop off and pick up points’ for schools but the way forward is to simply make it wrong to do this, and if you have to take a car, you have to park away from the hectic ‘danger zone’ near to the school.The best example I have seen is St Mary’s by the clock tower in Isleworth.  A car park was dedicated to allow parking for the area outside the school and shops - the Council took the existing car park, knocked down the garages built for the flats at Wisdom court and made it pay and display.This has seemingly allowed more traffic to use the area, not to allow reasonable use with the over flow going elsewhere.  I went past on the road the other day, at a time I would normally avoid because of the pickup drivers, and the car park was stuffed right out into the main road.  Giving some room for parking seems to have given permission for everyone to park and jam themselves in regardless of other pavement and road users.
View Larger Map

Sarah Felstead ● 4526d

I cycle locally all the time and the school run for me is far more dangerous than any other time on the road.I do drive a fair bit bit long distance stuff. and passed the Advanced driving test when I was 22.But without wanting to be sexist, Some mothers do drive 'em...badly.I'm sure it would not be much better if it were loads of dads doing the school run either.The blatant lack of care and attention on the roads, lack of signalling, sudden stops total lack of attention to road markings and signs is really awful.Doors opening with no-one looking and a complete lack of spacial awareness prevail. It's a miracle every day that so few potential accidents happen.If proper pick up and drop off points were built into into school, hospital , venue and transport interchanges, which is done in other countries, that would be better.It's always going to be tight for space here so it's not always possible. But fines for stopping simply panics the driver and that's where the concentration gets warped.It would be better to create kiss and drop zones.But coming down hard and issuing a few warnings and advisories on such bad driving practices would be very welcome.

Raymond Havelock ● 4527d

By the way, I enjoy reading Matts newsletter as I do Mary Macleod’s MP's newsletter.  I receive some Conservative propaganda newsletters one of which said ‘we want your comments’ so I wrote back saying that the difficulty was that I didn’t believe that they genuinely wanted my comments, and they didn't reply....

Sarah Felstead ● 4527d

"I do agree about the rate of roll and control... but again, in reality it applies to aggressive and risky driving which is not the case when a vehicle is driven by a mum with kids."... you obviously have not witnessed the school run where the mentality seems to be 'my children are safe inside' often accompanied by a 'distant glazed' expression from the driver.Parking across the pavements/blocking driveways/roads/zig zag lines and driving across pavements amongst other parents and children, is incredible!  There is a serious case for sending parking attendants/community police to the schools at these times of the day.

Sarah Felstead ● 4527d

You are writing about theoretical "generally accepted" tests. It is like fuel consumption figures that are never achievable in real life. In real accidents chances to get less hurt in a Range Rover or MB4x4 are a lot less than in Vauxhall Astra. I do agree about the rate of roll and control... but again, in reality it applies to aggressive and risky driving which is not the case when a vehicle is driven by a mum with kids.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4527d

Modern cars have to meet all the same safety standard parameters regardless of size.Most cars are in the same safety category score the same as most (not all) 4X4s. A Vauxhall Astra is as safe as a Mercedes 4x4. Ironically, the least safe vehicles are most people movers which have poorer side and crush values. 4X4 also have a higher rate of roll and are easier to lose control of unless the driver is used to handling such effects. One or two models score very poorly and  meet US standards but only just scrape into EU certification.Alll are still within industry tolerances but only justBut a 4x4 can inflict far more damage at low speed than a car or light van and this is highlighted in crowded urban areas with smaller highways.These are not ideal vehicles for occasional and short distance drivers from a perspective of common sense.Envirionmentally there are a whole load of reasons.But the marketing and aura created has been brilliant and despite working in the industry, there are times when I would like a 4X4. But not living around here for sure.

Anthony Waller ● 4527d

It is not necessarily a snob factor, Raymond. Large 4x4s are safer in case of an accident.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4527d

That's true, some people park and take 3 spaces, but others amaze me at how well they can park in a really tight space without touching the other vehicles.But it's those extra long vans and huge Lego Duplo 4x4s that do make parking difficult.I cannot fathom why so many mums use them for tiny children. It has to be snob factor and a selfish belief that their bundle of joy is more important than anyone else's offspring .Should be banned outright from all small streets.

Raymond Havelock ● 4527d

"FAR worse parking at night. "Check out Hamilton Road or Layton Road at night, Guy. I'm really jealous - there is always place there to park despite 4x4s.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4527d

In all fairness, it is not huge 4x4s or people movers that create a problem, but the way some people park. It is so often that one can see a small car parked in a space that would be good for two vehicles... or allowing a couple meters between their small car and a disabled bay.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4527d

That's a unique problem to those handful of streets ( like New Road that is narrow for both road and pedestrian users.But in a perfect world, anyone living here with an inch of common sense would not buy a huge car unless it's a work/domestic utility.Trouble is cars (even small cars are over a third bigger than they used to be.The new mini which barely has any more space than the old one is massive by comparison, but it's all about world homogenisation of vehicles and safety standards. Not much can be done about that but large long wheelbase and oversized 4x4 should pay triple for permits to represent the space they use up.But how ironic is it that the well known champagne socialists whose huge 4x4s adorn Hamilton Road, get a CPZ to suit them. they just don't care. Which is indicative of most driving around in huge all terrain vehicles.Probably the only thing I would agree with Ken Livingstone on, unless it's for rugged work, wholly unsuitable for London.

Anthony Waller ● 4528d

A number of CPZs have been created as a result of requests from residents.Avenue Road residents together with those of Enfield Rd rejected schemes twice before finally agreeing to one by a small majority last year.Why? The new university building opposite GSK, has attracted students and tutors wishing to park in these streets.Like in other roads there will be less parking bays, but there is a gain for pedestrians who will actually be able to walk on sections of pavement in Enfield Rd where cars may currently park legally.I have been pressing officers to tell me whether there will be a line parallel to garden walls on the section of this street where pavement parking will continue to be permitted ,defining the bay, to allow pushchairs and mobility scooters to actually use the pavement.This street is currently a no go area for the visually impaired and a great opportunity to provide access may be missed.As a driver and pedestrian,I think any additional cost is worth it. When planning to buy a new vehicle residents might ask themselves the question ,"Will this vehicle be longer than my property is wide?"If the answer is "Yes", don't purchase it.

David R Rowlands ● 4528d

Very well put and more or less my experience.None of these people who are wanting this seem to be prepared to come forward and be identified.In Lateward road, no-one seems to know anything about this. But residents in the next streets surely have to be consulted about their desire if it is true.

Michael Brandt ● 4528d

I'm generally not in favour of CPZs except where absolutely necessary however the 'one hour a day' ones ought to mitigate the effect on local pubs/businesses/visitors etc.I used to live in the Stile Hall Gardens CPZ area in Chiswick and voted against it despite being harangued by CPZ supporters and called various names unrepeatable on a family forum.It came anyway and the result was - easier parking outside your house during the day (though in truth I had never had to walk more than 100 yards) - a deterioration in the feel of the area. It's not so much the presence of yellow lines, machines, etc: it's more just a feeling that you're living in a tenser, more urban environment - FAR worse parking at night. The loss of spaces to yellow lines etc meant I frequently had to park in a different street entirely. This never happened before the CPZ. - Fines. The worst was on a Sunday morning at about 8-9 am where I had parked overhanging a double yellow marking the junction of a small cul-de-sac. Fortunately my neighbour discouraged the tow truck from taking my car away whilst I got dressed and organised.Some CPZs are inevitable but as somebody said they should not be street by street - Stile Hall only happened because Wellesley ROad happened because others nearer the centre of Chiswick happened. And people who campaign for them should do so with their eyes open: there's a good chance they will make things worse.

Guy Lambert ● 4528d

Unfortunately now it is not the issue of old salami technique or divide and rule. It is much more simple - parking has got very tight and non-residents (Barrats, other new developments, white vans, etc) make a large contribution to parking problem.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4529d

This of course is the old salami technique of slicing one street off at a time to get what you want. It's divide and rule. It's another example in broader terms of removing notions of community. If you can pay fair enough, if not tough, eat less, do without, get rid of your car - you're on your own. I'm sure Matt Harmer is aware of just how bad the politics of all this is. It stinks.

Pete Branston ● 4529d

The main cause of parking problems in the whole area were triggered by developments with inadequate parking ( GSK for starters, TVU next and then residential developments with huge parking fees and inadequate parking, followed by the CPZ in the Butts.Apart from commuters and the increased use of Brentford station, all these issues could have been solved at the planning stage were it not for idiot politicians and idealists wading in and creating foolish policies for which we are now paying the price. And of course we are now fodder for the likes of Capita, Apcoa and Enterprise et all who are waiting in the wings to get hold of lucrative parking contracts as it turns into a cash cow for the council and these leach like contactors.

Michael Brandt ● 4529d

A lot really depends upon the hours of the CPZ. I personally cannot see how a 1 hour a day Mon-Sat ban would damage the pub business (add to it the drink-and-drive issue). It would be a shame to see the pubs go with the move of the football grounds - Brentford pubs are among the best pubs in London area.As for the residents from the new Barrats development - I do think this is part of the parking problem around Griffin Park - no wonder they don't want to pay for parking and instead just flood the adjacent streets. This is probably the reason Layton street residents supported CPZ - they are the closest to Barrats.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4529d

I think the football ground going will be the end for most of the pubs and probably a few of the food businesses as well. The matchday influx is vital to the businesses and just about keeps them going.If a CPZ is draconian or the wardens over zealous then passing trade will be wiped out as well.As some locally know, last autumn, wardens hid in a car in Brook road on a sunday morning at 8am and jumped out and ticketed a car that parked on the yellow corner lines to pick up 3 boys for football practice. If that is the shape of things to come then it won't just be businesses that will be damaged.

Anthony Waller ● 4529d

A few weeks ago a resident from the new Barratt development was on here talking about the parking charges on the site, and issues arising from visitor permits etc which lead them to park on the surrounding streets. I do wonder if the council's apparent support for CPZ's is partly to do with their discussions with Barratt, and reaching some agreement there.In addition, I do wonder what effect these CPZ's will have on the pubs surrounding Griffin Park.  They are already facing a major fall off in trade once the football ground moves.  Introducing CPZ's thereby preventing customers parking nearby will surely have an impact (particularly if they have sports screens etc).  Have any of you noticed how many vehicles pitch up for events at the New Inn?  Before any of you say about drinking and driving etc - I not saying all of those who attend these pubs for events drink alcohol (different subject altogether..)

Andrea Hall ● 4529d

I don't think Mike means you will get charged for deliveries but I do know that courier delivery companies do include a blanket charge into their prices to cover for parking fines.It's small local trades and so on that have to pass on the cost. Originally they would say so or not come at all, but now it just quietly goes into the bill.Many do charge quite a bit more than if you have off street parking or do not live in a CPZ.I think it's unlikely that Hamilton Road will experience this yet but with large service organisations who do calculate premiums and annual charges who will use a database, a surcharge will be slipped in and unless you have a direct comparison you will be hard pressed to prove it. But in all honesty, our firm has been doing this since the start of the recession as CPZ permits and ticket fines became to high to write off. And we do not tell anyone how a costing is made. The same with our rivals and any service business.  Actually, we did it because the others do it but only after a lot of wrangling. IN the end it was out of proportion local authority rises that forced us on the issue.But the cost of having visitors who come by car, is one to bear in mind.  £6 a week for say 8 weeks a year? That's £48 straight away. And that applies to any resident in a CPZ, the elderly, and those who have not got a car.It is far worse for those in an all day CPZ and if we do have to have a CPZ then the 1 hour ban is all that is needed.But Matt is suggesting a night ban. I suspect that once all the streets are in a single zone ( separate streets is unlawful) it will be a huge hike in permits charges and longer hours.

Anthony Waller ● 4529d

Michael, you have raised some interesting points although I did not get extra charges for deliveries when I lived in a CPZ area. Also when I buy stuff online and get it delivered I’ve never seen any indication for additional CPZ charges. However it doesn’t mean that such charges never exist. As for the particular case of Griffin Park area we also need to remember that the CPZ in Hamilton Road, for example, is just Mon – Sat 2-3pm.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4529d

Bumper edition it might be, but it's what does not get mentioned that is equally concerning.Not a dickie bird about the plethora of developments going on. The Leering tower that casts a spectre over most of South Ealing, Gunnersbury and Brentford. The onslaught of giant advertising hoardings.The silence over the flood risk if the developments go ahead. The overcrowding in the local schools, the lack of health facilities for the 8000 increase in local populus,and a load of other local issues.At least he does bother, one never hears a word from the rest Labour, Conservative, Libdem or whatever.

Anthony Waller ● 4529d

I had not thought how the hidden costs all add up.Alex, you have either not noticed or you lived in complete isolation.  But it is quite true. Like most I had not really thought about it or sat down and totalled up the costs.I don't suppose anyone in Hamilton road has either yet as it's early days. Much of the costs are by stealth and well hidden and one does not easily notice -  a bit like using an Oyster card when It's not always easy to notice you have been overcharged.I have to admit it must be true because my company does make additional charges to addresses inside a CPZ and we have done for some years now.Regular parking fines were wiping out whole weeks profits and compromising the time and service to clients.Thinking about it more, my office is in a CPZ and I used to live in one as well. It was true that a lot of tradesmen would not come to do estimates during CPZ hours and some deliveries and collections would stipulate collection from depot only.Then with so many CPZs and loss of customers, businesses wised up.British Gas service add on a CPZ charge to their premium calculations so do many other businesses, the same way we do.. It's hidden but it goes on if their database shows the street in a CPZ. My own business factors in the charge that covers a permit cost which admittedly we do not mention. We do though, mention that we will  pass on a ticket fine to the client if they do not provide a parking permit or parking facility.You have to add on how much you spend on visitor permits for family and friends who are your guests, baby sitters, child minders, carers and so on. After all do you charge your guests for tea and buns?If you look at the hike Ealing have done, having visitors even for coffee is now a very expensive event. And way beyond the means for some. Remember, a non car owning resident also has to pay for visitors permits.

Michael Brandt ● 4529d

When I lived in a CPZ area there were no additional costs on top of the actual cost of permit. I wonder if the residents of Brentford CPZs (Hamilton road, Layton road) have to pay anything extra? In fact I've heard residents of Hamilton Road are quite happy with the CPZ. And the price is currently 60 per year.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4529d

I always find it an interesting read, but I was amused by the reference on the news page to it being a "bumper issue".  Like some Labour version of Whizzer and Chips.Do you think Matt is a Whizz Kid or a Chip-ite?

Phil Andrews ● 4529d

Cllr Harmers newsletter returns.  There must be a election coming up

Gill Hutchison ● 4529d

Apart from the cost of a permit. The true cost to any resident, car owning or not is much higher.If you live in a CPZ, Delivery and service costs often get imposed.If you have tradesmen they have to pass on the cost of a works permit. They also factor in the time lost in the process of getting one.You have to factor in every time you have visitors you will have to pay for them in the form of visitor permits.When we lived in Barnet this worked out at over £120 per annum in additional costs on top of the permit for our small car.  Our neighbour an elderly lady incurred the same sort of costs minus the permit but eventually noticed that she got less and less visits as her friends and relatives all tried to avoid the cost or the threat of a ticket.Residents should think long and hard at what we are being manipulated into here.

Raymond Havelock ● 4529d

Has Matt let the cat out of the bag in a cryptic way?Is he warning us or stitching us all up?Whole thing is weird.

Anthony Waller ● 4529d

That is scary stuff , thanks for the info, but what can be done, as my wife said the reason its so frustrating is we have can't do anything about it, we live in a democracy but in this case we obviously don't. The council have found a way of enforcing these CPZ's slowly and painfully taking over the whole area.

Alan Branch ● 4529d

Thanks for posting the Ealing rip off. I remember reading in the Gazette years ago a pledge by a Cllr Cudmore that the permit fee would never rise above inflation and was a service not a money making scheme.  Funny how it's the same labour party that suffers amnesia from it's own doctrine.There is a wholly wrong assumption among councillors that non council tenant residents are highly affluent and have bottomless pockets.That's a complete myth. A tube worker earns 35% more than I do but gets a council house priority based on a low income. It might have been true 40 years ago but is certainly not now.Mike is right. Councils simply cannot be trusted and I think Gerrymandering is probably the case.But Alex, apart from vans and some are working residents, who other than residents is parking at night?  I think it is only residents and it is packed out when it's very late.

Anthony Waller ● 4530d

"But If it is not residents parked here at night - I come home form work after 9pm quite a lot, who is it? Most commuters have gone by then but by 11pm is is impossible to park nearby."I'm not exactly sure who they are. Sometimes some vans appear and remain parked for a few nights and are never seen since. Same with cars. I've been living next to Griffin Park for a while now and I know a lot of vehicles belonging to residents and it is usually easy to spot newcomers. And I regularly see people who park their vehicles in the evening and walk away towards Ealing Road and further.The events at BFC are a special disaster - and seems like now they are having more evening events than ever before.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4530d

I agree, it is a lot of large vans - bigger than a standard transit vans and it is not helped by large 4x4s. Not working ones but shiny status symbol ones.We have a huge Audi regularly outside that is the length of 1 and half houses and the owners have another 4x4 as well!But If it is not residents parked here at night - I come home form work after 9pm quite a lot, who is it? Most commuters have gone by then but by 11pm is is impossible to park nearby.If it does have to be a CPZ then yes it should be a whole area. But having just read Mr Brandt's paste from the Ealing site it seems more like gerrymandering to force money out of residents when simpler bans could ease the problem.

Raymond Havelock ● 4530d

«Has it not occurred to anyone around here that it's at night when there is a real problem and the roads are full ...of residents cars? And residents will have permits.»Streets at night around Griffin Park a full not just of residents cars. And parking in the evening when residents return from work is another big problem as there are a lot of commuters and white vans. The number of cars has increased and now there is no alternative for the Griffin Park area other than CPZ. An of course not on a street by street basis.

Alex Shpinkov ● 4530d

Heres a taste of things to come.I'll only add that when the first CPZs started to be consulted properly, Ealing Council assured residents that it would always be a "service for residents" and it would never be expensive or a cash cow.A golden example of how a council can never ever be trusted.* from the Ealing W5 site:It's going to cost even more to park in some parts of Ealing this year as the council increases (pdf pg 174-5) charges for a third year running.All day zones residents’ passes have now increased from £45 (2010) to £80 (2013) – up 78%. Two hour zones residents’ passes have gone from £25 (2010) to £50 (2013) – up 100%. The latest rises were £77.50 (2012) to £80 (2013) and £45 (2012) to £50 (2013) respectively. Some visitor’s vouchers have gone from 40p for 3 hours to 60p an hour.  A rise of 350%. The all day voucher is going up a £1 to £4.50 Originally this cost £1 - a rise of 350% in 3 years. Parking in West Ealing in Arden Road, Dean Gardens, Singapore Road, Witham Road goes up from £1 - £1.50 for the first hour's parking (then £1 per hour afterwards)The Council is making one concession in an attempt to encourage weekend shoppers to Ealing Broadway. From April 1 visitors will now be able to park all day on Sunday at Springbridge Road car park for £1. On Saturday, they will be able to park for £1 an hour or £3 for the whole day. The weekday charge will remain at £1 an hour

Michael Brandt ● 4530d

We live in Lateward too and it's the first we've heard.You cannot have this street by street CPZ. It was wrong to do Hamilton road.Why can they not impose a ban on vehicles of 8CWT and long wheelbases as they did in Ealing 30 years ago? Cost to residents? Nothing.Have you seen what's left in Hamilton road during the witching hour? Huge 4x4s and people movers. Presumably It's the Yummy Mummies who never walk anywhere and demand a space outside their home.Are they the ones instigating all this or are we being manipulated by the council?

Anthony Waller ● 4530d

This is utterly stupid. We live in Lateward Road and this is the first I've heard of a CPZ. Who exactly is the pushing this?Street by street is really divide and rule. And what about the streets affected next?Has it not occurred to anyone around here that it's at night when there is a real problem and the roads are full ...of residents cars? And residents will have permits. So will end up paying into LBHs coffers for something we will still have..no spaceStupid and inept.

Raymond Havelock ● 4530d

Here here!!

Reg Ghosh ● 4530d