Forum Topic

Thames road what’s the time frame for passing through

Anyone no what the time frame is for passing through once restrictions kick in. If I drive from grove park pick up someone possibly two mins max just of Thames road and continue to Kew bridge. I take two elderly folk to Brentford  twice a week. If I have to make a long detour may not be able to continue depriving them of transport and help.

Sean Wales ● 2162d84 Comments

Sean, sign the petition that’s doing the rounds - it’ll be disastrous if it goes through !

Madeleine Hazard ● 2162d

Sent a letter to Tom Sharland yesterday for answer to your question.(Currently a posting on page2 of Forum under the tread starting with "Warning......)Let's see if it gets a reply!

Jeffrey Cope ● 2162d

Sean, I've been trying to find this out for ages.  The latest update states Vehicles will be timed and a pre-determined set limit will determine if vehicles are travelling through, with penalty charges issued accordingly.BUT IT STILL DOESNT TELL YOU THE TIMINGS.It recommends you go to  http://tinyurl.com/thamesroad.  But don't bother it doesn't tell you any more.

Micki Hawkes ● 2162d

I wonder why they don’t publish the timings ........

Paul Campbell ● 2162d

Forget the timings. They are merely a tactical attempt at enforcement. According to the link provided earlier in the thread, the signs will be "No Motor Vehicles Except buses, taxis and for access".If you are driving to a street off Thames Road to pick up someone, that is a legitimate access.  When your passenger is on board, you then start a different journey.  There are no restrictions on leaving the controlled area on a journey that starts there.You might well get a PCN if the timing is set too high, but you just explain that you entered the area in order to pick up someone who lives there. It's tedious, but this will be how the timing gets adjusted so that it doesn't catch legitimate users.If Hounslow start getting awkward about this, appeal to the adjudicator.  Feel free to involve me if you wish.  parking@rjen.uk

Richard Jennings ● 2162d

Oh Richard really.  Half my family live points west.  Sometimes they visit (when these things are allowed, of course) and stay for a good period of time, but on occasion, they arrive and say 'fancy going to Westfield - get your coat'.  Now, when we emerge from Hartington Road - are we done?  It's no good saying forget the timings.

Micki Hawkes ● 2162d

It's a nightmare. I am sure as intended by the pro-cycling, car, non-cycling and business hating weirdos who constructed these arrangments.

Claire Moran ● 2162d

"Now, when we emerge from Hartington Road - are we done?"Since I don't know where you live or where your visitors are arriving from, I've no idea what the answer is.  I was responding to a post about the Thames Road scheme.

Richard Jennings ● 2162d

Hope my cabs there and back to the dentist on Thames Road on Tuesday for my 2.5 hour root canal procedure won't be fined. Brilliant dentist, btw.

Claire Moran ● 2162d

As others have suggested, the infringement will be to drive through 'Except for Access', not to drive through 'in under five (?) minutes'. While driving in and going slowly, or stopping for a while and then driving on, might fool the cameras and be quicker than going a longer way round, without performing any 'Access' it could still be an infringement.  The only foolproof enforcement would be for the cameras to witness the whole journey in real time and for the authorities to react accordingly.

Peter Evans ● 2162d

Here's a real world scenario. I need to take something to the Post Office but there's no rush.  Rather  than make a special journey just for that I decide that I will wait as I'm due to visit a friend in Kew in a day or two so I might as well go via the Post Office at SOTG. On that day I drive to the Post Office, park and join the queue. It takes 10 minutes before I leave again. Clearly I have used Thames Road "for access" to the Post Office. I return to my car.  It has been well over 10 minutes now, so is it  OK for me to drive on to Kew Bridge? Suppose it had taken me 15 minutes to complete my business at the Post Office? Or 20 (it happens)? Or maybe it took me only 5 minutes? Which of these will get me a ticket if I drive on and who decides? Is it always the same allowable time or is that up to the person dishing out the tickets? Somebody must know, but I certainly don't.

Bruce Hammal ● 2162d

Sorry Richard, I wrongly assumed that, as I was posting under the Thames Road thread, and as I stated I'd been trying to find out the information, it would be understood.  Just to be clear, when I said points west, I meant they would be entering from Kew bridge via Thames Road.  I live in a turning off there.    When we only spend five or ten minutes picking me up, I am still at a loss to know what happens when we emerge from Hartington Road.  You imply that it might well generate a PCN which would necessitate an appeal by the car owner every time.What a ludicrous state of affairs when they could easily inform us of the minimum designated time. 

Micki Hawkes ● 2162d

I don't think they will be publicising the times.Some figures from the ANPR survey done last year from the cameras on SOTG and Thames Rd for vehicles that registered on both cameras.  These cameras were about 0.5 mile apart (can check exact distances) These may not be the same locations as the cameras being installed now.Fastest time eastbound: 0:57 seconds (57 seconds)Fastest time westbound: 1:04 (1 minute 4 seconds)These times are equivalent to an average speed of about 30mph25% of vehicles travelled between cameras under 01:36 50% of vehicles travelled between cameras under 01:50 75% of vehicles travelled between cameras under 02:20 So only 5% to 10% of vehicles took more than 5 minutes to travel between the two locations (again, can provide exact numbers)

Michael Robinson ● 2162d

It’s a bonkers plan. They could easily exempt all local vehicles. But they need to keep Hounslow Cycling happy and support their anti car campaign.

Russell Pearson ● 2161d

Presumably cars that are driving through will go past both cameras in the same order? There's not a great deal of scope for overtaking (unless you are Mr. 57 seconds)For the enforcement team to prove to the standard required by the adjudicator that you weren't 'accessing' premises, they could demonstrate this by proving that you passed through without having been overtaken by the next few cars that came in behind you. If the cars were more than a minute or two behind you, then at that point there would probably be a time threshold.Individuals Number plates could be translated to avoid Data Protection issues.

Andrew Jones ● 2161d

It was your mention of Hartington Road that confused me.  The SOTG/Thames Road "except for access" restriction ends at the junction of Grove Park Road and Grove Park Terrace.I would imagine that if it took them 5 minutes to leave Thames Road to reach your house, get you on board, and return to Thames Road (i.e. 5 minutes more than a direct through journey), they would not get a PCN.  If it was quicker than that, they might get a PCN, in which case they should submit an online challenge because an access was made, and hence there was no contravention.The signage concerns me.  How are you meant to know what area the single word "access" covers?  It's OK to enter from Kew Bridge and visit, say, 79 Grove Park Road, but not to go a few yards further and visit 71 Grove Park Road.

Richard Jennings ● 2161d

Exempting all local vehicles does nothing for visitors, deliveries, workmen, courtesy cars etc.  No-one has yet explained to me what happens if there is an accident blocking the A316 north of Chiswick Bridge (as there was the other day); where does the police divert the traffic to? I am having to explain to people how to get to our house from south of the river.  By the time I have introduced the concept of not entering through Hartington Road or Strand on the Green, added avoiding the Staveley Road school hours and the Park Road/Stavely Road shenanigans, they look at me like I am deranged... sums up the whole thing.  I have friends in Grove Park who live north of the railway line and who are going to have to go through the most convoluted journeys to get back to their front doors from quite legitimate journeys.  I understand that we can't formally complain or comment until these measures are implemented, but looking forward to when we are able to...

Cecile Parfitt ● 2161d

Each registration captured at each camera is timestamped then there will need to be matching of registrations and timestamps between cameras.This is all within the IT domain and some of our local councillors claim this is simple but I suspect is anything but.The first implementation for this type of system was in Green Dragon Lane Brentford a month or so ago.  Other councils are meant to be waiting with interest to see how things go as it isn't something that has been done elsewhere by a council.

Michael Robinson ● 2161d

I'm sure being diverted by the police is a valid reason for a ticket cancellation. 

Rob Reynolds ● 2161d

It’s a doddle Michael from a technology perspective - whether they have the skills is another, but even that shouldn’t matter as it’s SAAS.

Russell Pearson ● 2161d

As I understand Strand on the Green, the infringement is driving straight through without any 'Access'.  The time it takes is irrelevant, so using two timing cameras seems to be an unreliable way of providing evidence of 'Access'. Worse still, this arrangement seems to put the onus on drivers to prove they did 'Access' rather than on the authorities to prove they didn't.

Peter Evans ● 2161d

Thanks, as always, Richard for your contribution.But to quote from a letter from Tom Sharland at LBH dated 19 November on this subject ...Strand-on-the-Green / Thames Road - Trial Access Only Zone"Vehicle access to the zone will be unchanged for residential properties and businesses, but not passing through both points as part of a longer journey.  This will be monitored by ANPR cameras at both entry and exit points to the zone, to enforce against traffic trying to drive through.  Vehicles will be timed and A PRE-DETERMINED SET LIMIT will determine if vehicles are travelling through, with penalty charges issued accordingly."My capitals to emphasize PRE-DETERMINED SET LIMIT.It does suggest that there is one but what it is is anyone's guess.

Catherine Steele ● 2161d

Strand on the Green Association has asked on numerous occasions for SOTG/RV/CS/FR to be joined into one zonal group so that residents in these separate zones all have access.  This would not detract from the aim of preventing rat running.  If Lbh will not amend their plan now then it will be up to residents to lobby them during the review period.

Strand on the green association ● 2161d

How would SAAS affect their skills? Do you mean that it is just imputed into a cloud system?

Iris Hill ● 2161d

I don't know why you are wasting time here Russell - you could make some good money as an IT consultant to Hounslow telling them how to implement everything plus influence what gets influenced at the same time.  Win win for you.However in your pitch to them, I suggest you may want to clarify why commercial models for procuring software (a recurring SaaS model compared to up front license purchases) has anything to do with the functionality of the software itself.

Michael Robinson ● 2161d

They can’t afford me, so I’ve offered it for free.

Russell Pearson ● 2161d

"My capitals to emphasize PRE-DETERMINED SET LIMIT.It does suggest that there is one but what it is is anyone's guess."It will be pre-determined until they revise it in the light of experience to a new pre-determined level.  They won't publish it, otherwise people will dawdle through slowly trying to take long enough to avoid a PCN. The aim, after all, is to reduce traffic through the narrow and winding Thames Road.

Richard Jennings ● 2161d

Sean Wales asked" Anyone no what the time frame is for passing through once restrictions kick in"One reason they might be reluctant to publish figures is simply to prevent drivers from gaming the system. Basically once its realised that its possible to save ten minutes overall and avoid traffic by parking up somewhere around Thames Road for say five minutes then people are going to do so. michael adams...

Michael Adams ● 2161d

They'll get what they pay for then.

Michael Robinson ● 2161d

Isn't that a bit like saying there's a speed limit but not telling anybody what it is?

Bruce Hammal ● 2161d

"Isn't that a bit like saying there's a speed limit but not telling anybody what it is?"Not quite.  It's like telling people what the speed limit is but not telling them what the threshold for prosecution is. (It used to be 10% + 2mph.)

Richard Jennings ● 2161d

Bruce Hammall asked"Isn't that a bit like saying there's a speed limit but not telling anybody what it is?"No. Because the signs say "For Access Only" or something similar. Anyone entering Thames Road with any other intention is already breaking the law. The fact that that they may be able to disguise that intention by delaying their progress, is in itself sufficient reason not to publish specific figures.I'm not saying that I agree with any of this wantonstupdidity; only that its pretty obvious, to me at least why there should be this reluctance to publish specific figures.  michael adams

Michael Adams ● 2161d

Frankly a system this arbitrary really has no place in traffic control. It just invites workarounds and penalises many of the very people it's supposed to be protecting - residents. Another fail I'm afraid.

Bruce Hammal ● 2161d

It’s for access only, so long as you go back the way you came in, with no time restrictions, or access only and a fine if you leave at the other end, outside of an unknown time restriction. Bonkers.Heath Robinson traffic management.

Russell Pearson ● 2161d

It's just begging a legal challenge or at least a freedom of information request. Maybe transgressors could take a lie-detector test to determine their intentions!

Bruce Hammal ● 2161d

Perhaps those of us in Grove Park, historically hemmed in by the A4, the District Line and the main railway line, and now blocked at Harvard Hill, Staveley Road, Thames Road and Hartington Road, should acquire false number plates, eg GPK 1 and hope for the best.

Vivienne Cox ● 2161d

The machine-guns might come in handy too!

Bruce Hammal ● 2161d

I wouldn't mind betting MR actually designed the entire plan as he knows so much about the times - who else would bother doing such a job so exactly?

Jennifer Selig ● 2161d

Stated intention of the scheme - reduce through traffic.How do you tell that traffic hasn't visited the area for 'Access' - if it passes through in a time that suggests any meaningful access is implausible.Is any remote/automised enforcement of a regulation ever 100% effective? Probably in the majority of cases, no. But if you manage to get over 75% of transgressions, that seems likely to result in an (eventual) large decrease in through traffic.Will there be people who get PCNs incorrectly? Depends on the threshold, but it's plausible. At least they will have the opportunity to appeal.

Andrew Jones ● 2161d

Begs the question of what through traffic is. If simply trying to leave or go home from inside Grove Park, (and travelling past any of the various penalty cameras) is this through traffic?

Russell Pearson ● 2161d

In the case of Strand on the Green (which is what this thread is about), then it's through traffic if you enter SotG on Grove Park Road and leave at Kew Bridge without making access to SotG along the way.

Richard Jennings ● 2161d

Like buying a stamp from the Post Office.

Bruce Hammal ● 2161d

That would be sufficient to say you were accessing premises I'd have thought. What Richard mentioned earlier is food for thought ... how could/would the signage be adequate to convey the extent of the restriction to someone who has never been along that way before and who intended to access premises that turn out to be beyond the second camera?

Andrew Jones ● 2161d

"how could/would the signage be adequate to convey the extent of the restriction ..."Maybe you could create a zone, "Low Traffic Zone" perhaps, and put up a sign which says "No Motor Vehicles except for access to Low Traffic Zone".  It would need Department for Transport approval.  They might object on the grounds of having 2 or 3 zones with different boundaries, the LTZ and the SOTG CPZ, and the 20mph zone (if that still exists as a zone).

Richard Jennings ● 2161d

Hi Richard, thanks, this is me just thinking aloud ...Even with that, the issue is (as I'm sure you realise) that someone driving there (let's say for the purposes of this discussion they are visiting a relative and are being directed by Sat Nav) won't know whether the address they are going to is in the Low Traffic Zone. If it is, great, but if it isn't then they are commiting an offence. Even if they see the other camera and turn round, they will have still committed the offence, although they won't get a fine for it.If there was a way of issuing warnings on first offence (like Ealing with Fishers Lane restriction) that would allay my concerns, but Hounslow have never been that pro-active with warning people beforehand, apart from Stile Hall Gardens, where there were plenty of signs up beforehand. Still chaos the first couple of days, but they did at least try.

Andrew Jones ● 2161d

The fine would only apply when someone left the LTZ, on a journey through the LTZ to join the main LTN, or exit at Kew, either of which might not correlate with a CPZ. How on earth are they going to warn people that they’re about to leave the LTZ and get a fine, but if they do a U turn and go back the way they came, then there’s not a fine? But, if they started their journey inside the LTZ, then it’s ok to proceed. It’s all bonkers.

Russell Pearson ● 2161d

"How on earth are they going to warn people that they’re about to leave the LTZ and get a fine..."If you define it as a zone, you can put up an end-of-zone sign, as with CPZs.  You may think it's all bonkers, but how else would you prevent Thames Road being used as a through route?

Richard Jennings ● 2161d

By only targeting commuter traffic. They have the technology, already.

Russell Pearson ● 2161d

FYI just went past SOTG.... it is already 'Access Only' with signage for 'Goods vehicles exceeding a gross weight of 7.5T prohibited'.Presumable this would just need swapping for a 'Motor vehicles prohibited' sign?

Michael Robinson ● 2160d

But motor vehicles aren't prohibited per se, just those passing through as part of a longer journey. That's the problem - it's all a bit subjective which is not a recommended state where legislation is concerned.

Bruce Hammal ● 2160d

Anyone would think that 'No Motor Vehicles' and 'Except for Access' signs had just been invented specially for use on Strand on the Green. They're long established signs that are used all over the country and might even come up in a driving test.  I presume they must fulfil their purpose or they wouldn't be used. Unless, for all we know, they don't actually work anywhere and are impossible to enforce, and authorities have never noticed or don't care, and the 'Low flying motorbike' is an elaborate con trick.

Peter Evans ● 2160d

I don’t see how you can put a sign saying “no motor vehicles” on a road where motor vehicles are explicitly allowed. Am I missing something?

Bruce Hammal ● 2160d

Who knows, it’s like peering into a DOS PC running SimCity, on low memory.

Russell Pearson ● 2160d

Using the “Local Government”” Expansion pack.

Bruce Hammal ● 2160d

What signage would you use then to indicate that usage of the road is restricted for certain purposes (or to certain vehicles)?My issue isn’t with the signage per se, it’s that ‘Except for access’ requires an amount of prior knowledge (in some cases) to that it’s unreasonable to except a random motorist to have, in order to understand what they can or can’t do, and if this is the case it’s then unreasonable to penalise a motorist who is driving diligently.The signs have been around for years it’s true, but unattended enforcement hasn’t.

Andrew Jones ● 2160d

Sorry, should have written expect, not except!

Andrew Jones ● 2160d

I can't imagine how these 'Except for Access' restrictions were ever enforced, other than by people watching the whole length of the street to see what each driver actually did, or by following them in another vehicle to see if they drove straight through.

Peter Evans ● 2160d

"Access Only No Through Road" is surely more appropriate to this situation. It gives a clear warning to the uninitiated while those in the know might want to stop and pick up a beverage from the Coffee Traveller.

Bruce Hammal ● 2160d

That form of signage would be OK if there were a barrier actually blocking the road at say the Kew Bridge end. Now that's an idea! Much cheaper and less open to endless argument that the existing scheme.

Peter Evans ● 2160d

Ambulances and the SOTG people allowed that way?

Vivienne Cox ● 2160d

You'd have to ask the residents of SOTG what they thought of that idea!Oh no, silly me, of course you wouldn't, it's Hounslow we're talking about.

Bruce Hammal ● 2160d

I sense that the prevailing philosophy of 'South Chiswick/Grove Park' residents is to preserve all possible access for themselves and to remove it for everyone else. Maybe a series of automatic gates with residents' entry fobs and remote intercoms to let in approved visitors, and a few guard dogs to keep out the unwanted and unwashed, would provide the ideal solution!

Peter Evans ● 2160d

Can we take it that you're not a South Chiswick resident Peter? I think you would find that what you claim is close to the direct opposite of what most residents here want. Rather than wanting to keep people out  we are most concerned about being locked in.

Bruce Hammal ● 2160d

Yep, it’s a tired old straw man argument the cyclops trot out when they’ve been refuted on every other point.

Russell Pearson ● 2160d

Let's not forget that this started out as an enquiry as to whether or not the OP could carry on picking up two elderly neighbours and driving them on the most logical, simplest route to their destination. Quite how it has been turned into some sort of diatribe about privilege is frankly beyond me.

Bruce Hammal ● 2160d

I'd say the answer to the original question, based on a reading of the proposed signs, is that drivers can go along Stand on the Green if they're calling at somewhere therin. But then the conversation went off about cameras, time measurements, opt outs for local residents, and other fascinating digressions. On the other issue, if local residents want their road system changed to keep traffic out, they probably have to accept a certain amount of inconvenience.

Peter Evans ● 2160d

Do local residents want their road system changed to keep traffic out? As far as I know this South Chiswick business is all council-led and based on some dodgy survey which was pretty much ignored locally. All most people can remember about it was that we we supposed to be thrilled that there were plans to create a "Plaza" by the shops in Grove Park - naturally removing most of the parking in the process. However that seems have gone to the bottom of the pile while we have street closures and ANPR policing that were never explicitly on the agenda. If the council really wants to know what the people of "South Chiswick" want, now would be a good time to ask them. You still didn't mention whether or not you live in the area you seem to have such firm views on. I would just observe that while even if you don't live locally you still have every right to your opinion, it is the fact that so many people in Chiswick are sick of being told what's good for them that lies behind their discontent.

Bruce Hammal ● 2160d

Peter, wake up at the back“Anyone no what the time frame is for passing through once restrictions kick in. If I drive from grove park pick up someone possibly two mins max just of Thames road and continue to Kew bridge. I take two elderly folk to Brentford  twice a week. If I have to make a long detour may not be able to continue depriving them of transport and help.”

Russell Pearson ● 2160d

I used Thames Road to get to Chiswick Pool. Due to the cycle works on Kew Bridge last January I cancelled my membership as the journey was taking too long. I was hoping to return once Chiswick opens again. However with all this LTN nonsense I will not be returning , it is just too much hassle to get there. Own goal LBH. There must be others who will not return for the same reasons along with the delayed opening.

Elizabeth Price ● 2160d

Does this mean that people from S Chiswick can no longer come to parts of Chiswick north of the A4 without incurring fines???

Mandy Waters ● 2160d

Could I rightly assume that after entering this zone I could stop off at one of the pubs for some light refreshment and then egress the zone without penalty?

Jeffrey Cope ● 2160d

In theory, though we don’t know whether you need to spend 20 minutes there, or 20 hours.SCR to Burlington is still open, but it’s the single unrestricted route that’s left. All others have barriers or ANPR either coming in or out. Some are timed or at certain times of the day, others are for a handful of residents only, or as with Harvard, no exit at all.

Russell Pearson ● 2160d

"Could I rightly assume that after entering this zone I could stop off at one of the pubs for some light refreshment and then egress the zone without penalty?"As long as you purchase a Johnsonesque substantial meal at the same time and leave the minute you finish it, then yes!

Jim Brown ● 2159d

Sorry Jim, the edict yesterday was that up to two hours was acceptable.

Jeffrey Cope ● 2159d

But local residents weren't asking for anything. The only consultation was about amenity improvements near the shops and long standing requests for some streets near Fauconberg Road to be made into one ways.

Cecile Parfitt ● 2159d

Have the ANPR cameras been put in place for this yet?

Francis Rowe ● 2157d

I read elsewhere that as of this morning (Dec 1st) the signs were up but the cameras weren't. The restriction doesn't start until Dec 7th so I'm not sure why the signs have been put up - maybe they'll be covered to avoid confusion in the meanwhile. Or not.

Bruce Hammal ● 2157d

The reason I ask is that I was looking at the traffic orders for the two schemes and the maps gave no indication of camera placements. For other schemes e.g. school streets, the siting of the camera has been shown. Without cameras I suppose the Hartington Road restriction could be enforced by a Serco van turning up every now and again but I don't see how the Thames Road scheme could be practically implemented without ANPR at all the entry points.Perhaps they ran out of money for the cameras.

Francis Rowe ● 2157d

There are only two entry/exit points for those who don't live within the roads of SOTG so there will be one camera at the junction of Grove Park Terrace and Grove Park Road and one presumably very near to Kew Bridge. Exactly where they are mounting them should be evident in the next few days.

Bruce Hammal ● 2157d

"Does this mean that people from S Chiswick can no longer come to parts of Chiswick north of the A4 without incurring fines???"All residents of Chiswick who live south of the A4 will be able to travel north of the A4 by car on Sutton Court Road and via Burlington Lane and the A316 to the Hogarth Roundabout.

Thomas Samuel hearn ● 2157d

In the early 90s I lived in Singapore, where the entire CBD was monitored much like the Congestion Charge zone is here. You could never get a taxi into the CBD before 1800, as the taxi drivers refused to enter it.

Ian McNally ● 2157d

Sam Hearn, Can I continue to get food delivered at the drop of a hat from the Grove Park Deli in Fauconberg Rd to my home in Hartington Road?  This is the most wonderful service and often a lifeline for bods like me.

Jennifer Selig ● 2157d

Sign is up tonight at Hartington Road. Says Access Permits only 320 yards ahead. I could not work out quickly if that meant the restriction was beyond Cavendish Road or not. I think not, but maybe lots of U turns coming up?

Vivienne Cox ● 2157d

The restriction is at Chiswick Quay so you won't be able to drive up Cavendish Road unless you are a resident and the vehicle is registered. Visitors and deliveries to Cavendish Road will have to come via Spencer Road or Bolton Road which seems daft but there you go.The flying motorcyclist sign is being used which we know from Turnham Green Terrace is not universally known to indicate an access restriction. Force of habit and SatNavs will mean lots of people will still use the turning. If clear signage on Hartington Road is installed that may give them a chance to avoid a fine but, as you say, there will be a lot of vehicles u-Turning on Hartington Road.

Francis Rowe ● 2157d