Forum Topic

You could not make it up part 71

TMO/PO45/13 Traffic Order Church StreetThe latest daft idea dreamed up by officers at Hounslows Traffic Dept is the proposed lifting of the weight restriction on the bridge at the Mill Basin on Church St Isleworth from 18 tonnes and allowing up to 40 tonnes instead !I wonder how they imagine even if this proposal was successful how a vehicle weighing 40 tonnes would ever get to the bridge in the first place let alone get through the width barrier right next to it designed to stop these size of vehicles from using this stretch of road What a complete waste of our money yet again and who actually gets paid to dream these schemes up?

Paul Fisher ● 4215d19 Comments

"But were I in his position I would have considered an embarrassed silence to have been a more appropriate response than a victorious declaration of the fact that he has managed to persuade his own officers to reverse a decision for which he himself had ultimate responsibility."Well apart from the fact that Ed was updating me and us on the situation, this is a local politician we're dealing with. And I don't agree that he was 'triumphalist', and I am highly critical of the farce that has been caused with local traffic as you will know. My beef is that having been notified that there is a problem as with that bloody roundabout and my bugbear, that median strip, there doesn't seem to be any dialogue, rather a sort of messenger situation rather than a questioning of officers about why they're doing what they're doing and what steps they have taken to listen to local concerns. It's the incredibly arrogant 'we know best 'attitude of these traffic engineers, and then when you are critical they cry like babies and get all hurt and precious and moan to councillors who then get sniffy with their constituents, which I found very hard to stomach and just makes you even more furious. Like you - been there - got the T-shirt, but I would not back off, I'd be demanding answers. These people work off maps - they don't seem to deal with the day to day driving and road conditions which are a whole different ball-game, they could try listening to local people first - hey! Who knows they might even save some time and money! Why not use this Forum to communicate? Anything rather than the farcical shambles we are still going through.

Vanessa Smith ● 4211d

My point precisely. I suspect that it's possibly an 'advisory' notice of some sort, from their action in backing off I would seriously doubt that it's a mandatory requirement or they wouldn't have done it. But then that begs another questions why be in such a hurry to waste so much money? Traffic Orders are very expensive to do.

Vanessa Smith ● 4211d

VanessaIt surely can't be churlish to point out the absurdity of Ed's triumphalism in this instance. As well as being the ward councillor Ed is the local authority's Lead Member for Traffic.  The decision to raise the weight restriction was taken on his watch, by officers who answer directly to him.What Ed is telling us, in effect, is that he has no control over his own department and that his officers make politically contentious decisions without even bothering to run them past him first.  I actually have some sympathy for him here because I know, as you do, that that is precisely what they sometimes do.  But were I in his position I would have considered an embarrassed silence to have been a more appropriate response than a victorious declaration of the fact that he has managed to persuade his own officers to reverse a decision for which he himself had ultimate responsibility.  One is reminded of the words of Ledru-Rollin, the French revolutionary, when he declared: "There go my people, I must find out where they are going so I can lead them".

Phil Andrews ● 4211d

So what happened to the 'legal obligations' ?? Was that just an excuse for a major blunder?"Council is under a legal obligation to remove it and revoke the traffic management order."

Steve Taylor ● 4211d

Is this the bridge that used to a part of the walk I used to take to the Town Wharf for a pint or 3 of excellent Sam Smith's Extra Stout(knocks Guinness into a cocked hat imo)? It has been labelled as unusable a couple of years now. I wonder if and when it will be repaired. It thought if formed part of a public right of way.

Keith Iddon ● 4213d

The thing is we shouldn't be too churlish on this occasion as people have been listened to. But, the question for me is, if this pressure has made Planet Traffic back off how necessary was this in the first place, and what was all the cobblers about the legalities? It's sometimes about the questions that you ask. Now if only we could do the same re that damned roundabout.........................

Vanessa Smith ● 4213d

Jim, it's not delicate.Hounslow Highways have done a routine re-assessment of its structural integrity and say its fit for 40 tons !(Would they get the job of replacing it when the stones fall into the river ?)

Tim Henderson ● 4213d

Here is a picture of the delicate Bridge plucked from cyberspace.Perhaps read the article by Mike Paterson.http://londonhistorians.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/dsc03802b.jpg?w=500&h=375

Jim Lawes ● 4213d

I remember dear Joan Catterall (RIP) reporting at a Brentford and Isleworth Area Committee Meeting several years ago that she had phoned the Civic Centre and asked the operator whether she could speak to somebody about Isleworth matters.The Council Operator replied "Where's Isleworth...somewhere near Kingston?" !!!!!As you say Paul..you couldn't make it up.

Jim Lawes ● 4213d

Wow, Labour Council defeats Labour Council's plan to increase weight restriction.  He should put that on a leaflet.

Phil Andrews ● 4213d

VanessaI have been advised that following objections from local residents and Councillors, myself included, the 18 tonne weight restrictions on Church Street and Talbot Road will now remain in place for environmental reasons.Thank you for contacting me about this and for bringing it to the attention of the Council.Please circulate this information to people you know who have expressed concerns about this.Best wishesCllr Ed MayneLabour, Isleworth WardLondon Borough of Hounslow

Vanessa Smith ● 4214d

This is just another silly decision by Hounslow Council. Time to vote Councillor Mayne and the other Labour nannies out, out, out.

David Giles ● 4214d

The other points are - is this really something that has to be done, who would/could take action if the weight restrictions just stayed the same? And how long would it be before some lorry driver unfamiliar with the area saw the new signs and chanced a short cut? How long would it take to get a huge artic. out of Church St? After all neither of these roads can take big vehicles, they barely cope with local traffic.

Vanessa Smith ● 4215d

Why would the weight restrictions which once applied no longer apply?  Has the bridge got stronger, and if so how?Fair point about the size of the road being prohibitive in its own right to drivers of larger vehicles, but why do traffic officers seem so frequently to feel the need to wind local people up in this kind of way?

Phil Andrews ● 4215d

Just received from Cllr. Mayne.I support your point of view but unfortunately I do not think it will be possible to change these because the restrictions relate to structural issues rather than traffic flow.Regarding Church Street specifically, the weight restriction was placed on the bridge following concerns about its structural integrity. Hounslow Highways, who manage the public highway in the borough on behalf of Hounslow Council (with the exception of the handful of roads that are managed by Transport for London (TfL), have recently done a routine re-assessment of the bridge's structural integrity and have concluded that the weight restriction is no longer required. As the original reason for the introduction of the weight restriction is no longer valid the Council is under a legal obligation to remove it and revoke the traffic management order. The published public notice states "The general effect of the Order would be to revoke the 18 tonne weight restriction from the bridges in Church Street and Talbot Road, Isleworth. Recent structural assessments confirm that the weight restrictions are not required".The revocation of the weight restriction should not increase the number of goods vehicles using Church Street as the width restriction remains in place, and being a physical barrier is far more effective than any weight restriction that relies solely on driver compliance. There are already advance warning signs for the width restriction so the removal of the weight restriction should not create any additional issues for drivers of heavy vehicles having to turn around prior to the width restriction. Furthermore the Council has been in negotiations with residents of Church Street regarding the trial of a priority give way system which should further reduce traffic flow if residents there choose to accept it.As I understand it the legal precedent is that the Council must remove a weight restriction if it is no longer required as public highway is for all vehicles if there are no structural issues to prevent certain types of vehicle using it.I will however try to find another reason to keep the weight restrictions in place.Hope this is helpful.

Vanessa Smith ● 4215d

I note this will also apply to the bridge in Talbot Rd. and that the police have been consulted - well ain't that great. When did the police become experts? When were they thinking of consulting local residents?

Vanessa Smith ● 4215d

I have to say that councillors should be all over these incompetent officers and in their departments demanding answers and explanations. Even better get them to a local area committee and do it publicly, what a gutless lot they are.

Vanessa Smith ● 4215d

Like voting councillors and recommending officers who did not know Carville hall Park is in two parts and is not Gunnersbury Park or Lionel road. Or the planning officer on a site visit  who thought Gunnersbury school was Reynard Mills! One wonders sometimes just how we ever managed to win two world wars.

Anthony Waller ● 4215d

You do have to ask whether or not any of these dozy objects ever leave their desks to come and see the area of their proposed plans. Talk about make yourselves look like complete plonkers. Someone seems to have it in for Isleworth.

Vanessa Smith ● 4215d