Forum Topic

Mobile CCTV Serco van - Fishers Lane (Hounslow side)

This afternoon there was a mobile CCTV Serco van parked on Fishers Lane, just south of the junction with Chiswick Back Common Road/Belmont Terrace.  This is about third or fourth time I've seen it there and, as the camera is pointing north towards the bridge, I'm assuming it's enforcing the No Entry on the Hounslow side?

Mary Oppe ● 2161d54 Comments

According to the article published recently on this site warning notices will be issued for two weeks once the camera on South Parade is activated. It would therefore seem a bit odd that vans are visiting the site to issue fines. Nevertheless, they are a welcome sight. I don't think the closure is a good idea but an unenforced closure is the worst option of all.

Mark Evans ● 2161d

They also had one on Devonshire Road for a while this morning.

Michael David Rowe ● 2161d

Devonshire Road seems to offer very slim pickings for Serco so far as the number of fines hasn't risen above double digits. The problem for them is that most people know if they spot the van they can avoid the fine by pulling up and going into a shop. It does make you wonder who are these people getting fined - nearly everyone driving down the road will be local and aware of the restriction. If they are minded to ignore it they will know the method to avoid a fine. It's possible that the people who have got caught have been misdirected by Google Maps.

Paul Corcoran ● 2161d

Don't know if it's still the case, but my iPhone used to keep trying to persuade me to drive along Fishers Lane under the bridge, a long time after the restrictions came in.

Andrew Jones ● 2160d

Google maps has shown Fishers Lane closed for a long time now, so excuses are running out, and the permanent camera is in place now. This route is now heavily used by families and individuals who have switched to bikes and a hardcore minority of selfish motorists.

John Hall ● 2160d

The Serco van is there for one reason only - to make money, irrespective of how it's done.

Brian Coyle ● 2160d

Really? It wouldn't make any money if people didn't ignore the signs. More to the point the last several weeks had shown that there is clearly insufficient social responsibility there without the threat of fines. And the same applies to cyclists who run red lights too. 

John Hall ● 2160d

There’s clearly very little social responsibility from our leaders based in Brentford

Russell Pearson ● 2160d

Hi John,I think if there weren’t fines then more vehicles would be passing along Fishers Lane so the Serco Van is a necessary evil - I say evil because there is no way of distinguishing between the unwitting transgressors and the deliberate transgressors.I prefer Ealing’s approach - warnings then enforcement. Will still catch out the unwary, but at least it’s not just about revenue raising.I remain very cynical about Hounslow and it’s enforcement of traffic and parking restrictions - I remember how multiple CEOs would appear about 11.00 on a Bank Holiday to ticket all the cars parked illegally on CHR whereas if there had been just one CEO issuing PCNs from the start of the restrictions the rest of the cars wouldn’t have parked there because they would have seen cars with tickets when they were thinking about parking.

Andrew Jones ● 2160d

"Will still catch out the unwary, but at least it’s not just about revenue raising". Unlike the Serco van.

Brian Coyle ● 2160d

I'd think the problem is also the signage."Except for access"Could it not be argued anyone driving on Devonshire is accessing something? Shouldn't the sign read "except for access to_____" in order to be actionable?

David Lesniak ● 2160d

If people want to find a loophole they will, because that's the go-to these days, right? But I'd argue anyone with a modicum of common sense knows what the signs mean. Unfortunately, the idiot hurtling along Devonshire Rd in his white Mini Countryman yesterday (giving us the finger because we dared crossed the road) seemingly couldn't read the signs (or stick to the speed limit).

Gordon McDonald ● 2160d

Yep, if Serco are there then that’s is a commercial operation meaning revenue to be made ££££££££££

c james ● 2159d

Simple answer open up Devonshire road it was never a problem, the spirit of the street has been lost completely and for residents of glebe estate. Plus fishers lane needs to open up and Turnham Green terrace remain open. This is Hounslow council meddling where there was nothing to fix.

Jayne Thorburn ● 2159d

Why should Fishers Lane reopen? Where is the safe North to South cycling route instead?

John Hall ● 2159d

Nothing is "safe". Maybe Fishers Lane is safer for the few 100yds or so one is cycling along it.Anyway, I very much doubt most, if any, cyclists will go out of their to use Fishers Lane if Acton Lane or Turnham Green Terrace is a quicker option neither of which I would regard as particularly unsafe.

Adrian Irving ● 2159d

For children cycling between Acton Green and Chiswick Common Fishers Lane is the safest (and quickest) option if there is no traffic apart from buses. The footpath is very narrow, which makes social distancing difficult.Whether you think Children should be cycling in parks is a seperate issue of course.

Andrew Jones ● 2159d

No, it's much safer with the reduced traffic for reaching the centre of town from the North. Where else can kids go? On the pavement under the railway at Turnham Green Station. That's the only alternative.

John Hall ● 2159d

I would argue that if children are not capable of cycling along TGT or AL in relative safety then it begs the question should they on the road at all?After all, journeys don't start and finish in Fishers Lane so at some point they will be mixing with traffic.Before someone jumps out of the woodwork and says I am campaigning against safer cycling, don't. That is a ridiculous thing to say.

Adrian Irving ● 2159d

"on the pavement at Turnham Green" - that will get even busier as people return to using the tube and to the shops - why when Fisher's Lane is obviously such a good option for cycling from north to south?It's obvious that some people just should not be on the road if they can't stick to the rules. 

Philippa Bond ● 2159d

If all roads were open the traffic on each would be less and therefore I assume safer for cyclists.  One cycle friendly road is almost pointless. As someone said once they come out either end presumably there will be other roads to deal with. The inconvenience to drivers and the greater traffic concentration in the other roads ought to be a consideration. Those drivers are quite often working.

Maggie Dodge ● 2159d

Kids cycling, not on their own.....we didn’t even do that years ago in the suburbs. To think that everyone has to be inconvenienced for a handful of cyclist I think not. Fishers lane was used by a lot of local residents as a way to avoid the Chiswick high road. Utter madness to close short sections of roads and argue it’s about cyclists it’s not just Ealing council response to closing Turnham Green Terrace  both need reinstating.

Jayne Thorburn ● 2159d

It really angers me to read people suggesting that motorists using, or wanting to use, Fishers Lane are selfish or inconsiderate. For families like us who live just the other side of Fishers Lane and have had (until recently) both this and TGT closed closed to us, it has meant a huge amount of disruption and extra time spent travelling to get anywhere. It has also meant we have had to stop doing a lot of our shopping locally, as it meant having to go up to Acton Lane or down to the Goldhawk Road to return home, along a high street now reduced to stop start traffic due the ridiculous cycle lane that hardly anyone will use.It isn't as though these roads (Fishers Lane, TGT, Devonshire Road, etc) used to be closed to bicycles, so why should they now be closed to cars? If people are concerned about cycling under the bridge at Fishers Lane because of the narrow road, why not get off and push your bike for 20 yards?! Rather than demanding sole use of the road for yourselves, and in the process inconvenience thousands of people (at least, according to the petitions) and damage local businesses? I am still hopeful that Fishers Lane will one day be reopened to all traffic, rather than remain as it is to please a few selfish cyclists.

Mark Edwards ● 2159d

Whilst there are restrictions on Fisher's Lane you and everyone else should be fined.  There will be increasing restrictions on cars.  They have not been around that long.  There was a big increase after WW1. There will be more truths to come out about marketing. Dieselgate is not the last and although we remember that for VW it was not only VW who were cheating.https://www.standard.co.uk/futurelondon/theairwebreathe/ulez-extension-london-air-pollution-a4572093.html

Philippa Bond ● 2159d

Mark my understanding is that Ealing council closed fishers lane because of the closure of Turnham Green Terrace could be wrong. Totally agree we are in a similar situation along with thousands of others. Fishers lane should reopen I have even emailing everyone I can to present the case please do the same if enough of us protest just maybe our voice will matter,

Jayne Thorburn ● 2159d

https://www.sustrans.org.uk/our-blog/get-active/2019/everyday-walking-and-cycling/cycling-safety-for-childrenI think it is very unfair that you want to monopolise the roads and bully other road users off them.

Philippa Bond ● 2159d

I hope it's never reopened to vehicle traffic. Living with my family just the other side too, where can't we walk to on CHR or Turngam Green Terrace? The idea that it's acceptable to jump in the car and polluting where we all live for such short journeys is on the way out for good I'm afraid, going the way of habits like smoking and drink driving. 

John Hall ● 2159d

Yeah, you've not thought that through Adrian. How then should children be able to get to School or parks without the car, or are we writing that off as an ambition? With the closure of Fishers Lane and the restricted entry to Duke Road there's now a safe N-S route that links all the way through to Chiswick House, Grove Park and the River mixing minimally with traffic, the majority of which exceeds the speed limit. Made a massive difference to getting about safely, by the more vulnerable cyclists which is what will help enable a healthy shift in transport mode.

John Hall ● 2159d

The.modern car was a revolution and a massive enabler for millions of people and is here to stay in some shape or form. Interestingly people north of Chiswick need a car for all sorts of reasons so yes open up the roads. We pay for them cyclist do what they have always done cycle to the side of the road. Where it is appropriate then by all means spend taxpayers money designing a cycle lane and make it law that cyclists can not use the road on these stretches. Chiswick high Road is totally unacceptable to reduce traffic to small single lane in either direction. It worked well before for everyone.

Jayne Thorburn ● 2159d

John, of course we want everyone to get about their business as safely as possible and if you are right about Fishers Lane etc making a "massive" difference for children getting to school and so on, then great. Bearing in mind the closure has been largely ignored by many motorist who are passing through in numbers I can't see how your claim can be reconciled as things stand.If anything I would think things are more dangerous. They certainly are at the moment in CHR with a half open half closed cycle way and traffic constricted to a narrow lane.I am an experienced confident cyclist but my recent after dark side ride to pick up a parcel was something else.

Adrian Irving ● 2159d

"restricted entry to Duke Road there's now a safe N-S route"Well this is patently untrue.With access to the Glebe estate restricted via Devonshire Road all residents must return home via Duke Road. So if safe N-S cycling was the goal, it's a bit idiotic to send all cars on the route you want, is it not? Otherwise to follow your logic you'd want to have an alternate vehicle access. Oh wait, that already exists.To Gordon's comment, unfortunately the sign says what the sign says. So anyone with a modicum of intelligence would think access means access. The sign doesn't say "Access to Prince of Wales Terrace only" now does it? So why would anyone think access to one street is allowed and  access to another intersection is not? It's a bit like saying you can't make a left turn when only the no-right-turn sign is posted.

David Lesniak ● 2159d

"I think it is very unfair that you want to monopolise the roads and bully other road users off them"Interesting point, Philippa. It's precisely the question we've posed to the cycle lobby who are, you must admit, pretty good at bullying.

David Lesniak ● 2159d

The only time I used to drive down Fisher's Lane was to do a larger shop. It enabled me to get to the Sainsbury's car park quicker. For most shopping trips I walk.I have to make this journey at least once a week. I don't want to use online deliveries because I believe that is worse for the environment and hurts local independent businesses. The journey takes about 5 minutes longer now each way that the persistent congestion on Acton Lane seems to have dissapted. As far as I can see the detour means I drive past more people's homes and contribute to more congestion. It isn't a huge inconvenience but it is annoying that nobody seems to be able to explain what benefit closing Fisher's Lane provides and instead just reply with platitudes and narcissitic comments about how they care for the planet more than the rest of us.

Anita Blake ● 2158d

To clarify a couple of points: originally the line was that the restrictions were to aid cyclists and pedestrians then it was due to concerns over traffic displacement from the TGT closure. Now it would seem that the proposed Acton Chiswick safe cycle route is the significant factor.The Hounslow Scrutiny Panel includes papers outlining:Route 14: Chiswick - Acton Fisher’s Lane: Traffic volumes will be significantly reduced following LB Ealing’s closure of the rail tunnel to vehicular traffic, complementary Quietway treatment and wayfinding – Quick win (£10k).On that basis it would seem that any ‘review’ has already been decided. To add insult to injury it seems we learn this from Hounslow Borough committee papers.

Andrew Steed ● 2158d

Hopefully CS9 will go, we can reverse this decision and find a compromise so cars can share the road too. Makes no sense to close a road that isn’t used say 10/12 hrs a day, councils have zero imagination.

Jayne Thorburn ● 2158d

Judging my the general sway of opinion, and what is happening in Euston and now Kensington, I am becoming increasingly confident that the cycle land on Chiswick High Road will be removed in the very near future, and that in itself will be cause for celebration.It sounds as if there will also need to be a formal consultation process for Ealing Council to make the changes to Fishers Lane permanent, which will also hopefully be reversed in the early part of next year. Then the whole of 2020 can be written off as some sort of weird nightmare, and we can all get back to living some kind of normal life...

Mark Edwards ● 2158d

Suggesting that using one's car to go to the shops or take your children to school is going out of fashion is another ridiculous comment. And who says these are all short and unnecessary journey's?Cities and towns have developed over many years to accommodate the increase in car users, hence large supermarkets and retail parks on the edge of urban areas that require the use of one's car.Also many of us don't or can't use local schools in the way many families did in days gone by. We have to travel across London to take our children to school, and taking public transport, cycling or walking is just not an option.To suggest we should be going back to a time where we all pop down to our local corner shop to pick up a few items that we can then walk or cycle home with is just never going to happen. And with consultation due to happen in January about the unlawful way Ealing closed Fishers Lane in the first place, I am very hopeful it will soon be reopened to all traffic in the near future. As it should be.

Mark Edwards ● 2158d

Hopefully not.

Carl Wynne ● 2158d

Mark, Whatever your views on FL, all consultatins are advisory, so I would not make any assumptions about how Ealing reacts to any consultation. The fact that both Ealing and Hounslow are signalling-if not confirming now-that the safe cycle route/quiet route, call it what you will, will become permanent indicates just that.

Andrew Steed ● 2158d

Can a local authority levy a fine for an offence which has effectively taken place in another borough?

Jeremy Parkinson ● 2156d

I wondered that as well. Maybe Ealing can only fine those going South along Fishers Lane under the bridge.Any ideas Richard (J)?

Andrew Jones ● 2156d

The Serco van has been back again so it would be interesting to know, also whether the Ealing side camera is active yet.After Andrew Steed’s posts, I had a look at Ealing Council website and now see why he’s concerned that a review of the Fishers Lane closure has already been decided.  Ealing Council has funding for the Acton-Chiswick cycle route (apparently to be delivered by the end of 2020??).  The proposed route is detailed here https://www.ealing.gov.uk/downloads/download/5914/acton_to_chiswick_proposed_cycle_route_drawings.  A Public Notice was issued October 28th to alter the Zebra Pedestrian crossing on South Parade (west of Rusthall Avenue) to allow for a parallel crossing for cyclists as the route continues from Rusthall Avenue, over the new parallel crossing, across Acton Green (shared path with pedestrians) to join Fishers Lane before the rail tunnel.  The intention seems to be that this route will be a link to Cycleway 9 on Chiswick High Road.

Mary Oppe ● 2156d

Excellent. One of the Chiswick Councillors' main objections to Cycleway 9 was that it was too "linear" and that there are no north/south routes. So I am sure they must be as pleased as me to see that Cycleway 9 is inspiring connections to be built around the area before it is even open.

Paul Campbell ● 2155d

Not really sure what this crossing adds. If you wanted to get to Fisher's Lane from Rusthall Avenue why not just turn left? There is only a short stretch of road until you get to the roundabout. This is directing cyclists across the park where we still don't know if there is an issue with the use of common land. It might be marginally helpful to cyclists with children but nobody objects to them currently using the pedestrian crossing. Also I tend to avoid cycling along Rusthall because it is something of a wind tunnel. St Alban's Avenue doesn't seem to be as badly affected probably because it has more bends.

Andrew OSullivan ● 2155d

Looks good, nice Christmas present. And appreciate the effort to remove hazards with the crossing adjustment — what puts off more nervous users is often abrupt ends to safe infrastructure that suddenly put you out into the traffic.

John Hall ● 2155d

Light the blue touch-paper....

Bruce Hammal ● 2155d

I’m very pleased to hear that Ealing are providing a safe cycle route linking Acton with Chiswick. This one comes right past my house on Rusthall Avenue, which I guess makes me an IMFY rather than a NIBMY. I find Rusthall a pleasant place to ride a bike unless an oncoming driver approaches too fast. It feels slightly safer than St Albans which is narrower and I think probably has more traffic cutting through between South Parade and Southfield Road which it links. The Toucan crossing on South Parade is also very welcome. Many local children and adults use the zebra on the way to school which takes in about 5 metres of pavement and the zebra. Is would be good to have this natural wayline made official.This then links to a car-free Fisher’s Lane and a pretty safe route to Chiswick Common, Rocks Lane, the playgrounds, and the High Road/ C9. A controlled means of accessing the bidirectional lane would be really helpful too. North it gives access to Southfields playing fields, The Vale (with a protected bike lane although currently only short and eastbound) and Acton Park. From Acton Park you can cycle a short distance north to meet C34 which runs along the A40. The traffic signals at Savoy circus have been changed to give 4 simultaneous greens for cycles so you can move all the way to White City very easily. This is beginning to look joined up!

Edward Seaton ● 2155d

So is it the case that cyclists will be directed across the road onto a section of shared pavement on South Parade at the end of Rusthall Avenue.If this is what is intended it does seem inherently dangerous because it is a blind corner and cyclists coming south will meet head on people walking on the narrow pavement next to a road which has become much busier since the closure of Fisher's Lane.

Anita Blake ● 2154d

A shared narrow pavement?  Bonkers if this is what is intended.  Who is sticking up for pedestrians in all this planning?  Seems as if pedestrians are the bottom of the pecking order every time.

Marie Power ● 2154d

Fisher lane is not busy and connect north side residents to be able to do their big shop avoiding the Chiswick high road it is a vital route for local cars. Why don’t they allow local residents that includes Hounslow council Chiswick residents to use it thus avoiding commuter traffic that is a fair compromise. The councils seem to lack any imagination to create smart use of roads for the local community. We live here and should be given top priority when any scheme is being consulted and considered.

Jayne Thorburn ● 2154d

"over the new parallel crossing, across Acton Green (shared path with pedestrians)"Question: What happens when a cyclist is forced to stop when a child runs across the shared pavement launching him/her over the handlebars? Who is at fault? The cyclist? Or the untethered child?

David Lesniak ● 2153d

..or dog clashing with a cyclist, bearing in mind the recent court case surrounding such an incident in this very place.

Peter Evans ● 2153d

It would be easy to do that Jayne, very easy.

Russell Pearson ● 2153d

The big issue here is that Ealing and Hounslow do not talk to each other. So we have a quiet way though Ealing that stops when it hits Hounslow. Its not joined up at all.The irony is that when these closures were announced, I noted that there was no rationale at all for TGT closure, but that Fishers Lane could be part of a quietway linking north and south Chiswick. The money wasted on TGT could have delivered this.This was attacked by the usual lobbying suspects who told me there was no funding for non segregated cycle routes that do not meet the latest safety spcecs. But it seems that was either a lie or not true. Not least because the stretch of CS9 along Heathfield/ Wellesley is just bike signs painted on the road.So we need Hounslow and Ealing to talk to each other and put residents first ahead of grand standing with cycling lobby groups. In the process acknowledge that Acton Lane cannot cope as the sole north south vehicular route.

Paul Green ● 2153d