Forum Topic

How can Grove Park residents make themselves heard re traffic restrictions

Is there any pressure groups in Grove Park that are able/willing to lobby the council to remove the traffic restrictions.I have spoken to many residents, i have not found a single person in our area who is happy with the restrictions imposed on us. Further more, none  of the people i have spoken to believe the consultations that were done by the council were done fairly.If anyone knows of a petition that is in place it would be great to know about it.

Adam Robertson ● 1683d31 Comments

Ask you neighbor, Paul Campbell. He lobbies vociferously for the LTN measures. I'd suggest to be heard, pull up outside his and lay on the horn. Maybe then he can call LBH on your behalf. It is legal to use your horn to let others know your presence. Seems a good use of it to me.

David Lesniak ● 1683d

Whatever we do Adam  - they do not listen to us- property prices around here are going down here -none of the present council give a damn.  It would be great if there was something we could do but I don't give much hope - There was not much traffic before but now we are completely cut off from the rest of Chiswick- even more pollution on other roads- what rubbish

Helen Bamberger ● 1683d

LBH have a consultation open -https://haveyoursay.hounslow.gov.uk/traffic-and-transport/staveley-road-and-burlington-lane-trial-access-r/consultation/intro/

Mark Perry ● 1683d

Thats great, thanks. Not much faith in being listened to but will pass it around.

Adam Robertson ● 1683d

Signed and forwarded

Loraine Pemberton ● 1683d

Grove Park residents HAVE been heard, but their voices ignored. Because apparently Paul Campbell is happy with the situation as is. Fair enough

Maggie Dodge ● 1683d

'I have spoken to many residents, i have not found a single person in our area who is happy with the restrictions imposed on us.'How strange,  I was at dinner last night with fellow locals in Grove Park and everyone agreed the changes have been for the better and that was before I showed them photographs I took of a car which smashed through a centre bollard in a 20mph LTN by STOG this week.

Matthew Swain ● 1683d

What are the benefits Matthew?

Maggie Dodge ● 1683d

> I was at dinner last night with fellow locals in Grove Park and everyone agreed the changes have been for the betterWas there much mess to clear up afterwards, and did they have a clown to keep them entertained?

Russell Pearson ● 1683d

Don't quite see how a picture of a car crashed into a bollard signifies anything in this matter however I would agree there are a significant number of people in Grove Park who think these changes are brilliant.If you live on a road from which traffic is being directed away and if you have the necessary exemptions your life has just got a lot more pleasant. I suspect these people are confining their delight to dinner parties because they are aware that the traffic that used to go down their road is now going down somebody else's. This is the core problem with many of these schemes. The theory is sound - it is obviously a good idea to divert traffic away from residential roads. However, the concept does fall down in densely populated areas like Chiswick where even a main artery like the A316 is a residential road and certainly Sutton Court Road is. You could I suppose argue that the people living there knowingly bought property on a busy road and therefore haven't really been significantly impacted by it becoming busier. However, it remains the case that the quality of life of people has been degraded for the benefit of a group of people who are exceptionally well off even by the standards of west London.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1682d

Well after 3 letters from our council in the past week- I am told that the barrier on staveley road is going to be made permanent- absolutely no answer to our views- the monies this is going to cost us is beyond reality when this money could be so better spent. Are we still a democracy? Do any of us have a say anymore?

Helen Bamberger ● 1682d

Please do not make this thread about Paul Campbell.  I may not agree with some of his views but this thread should be about whether the changes are for the better or not, not about being personally offensive to anyone.I do not live in GP but just north of it and the SCR was my main route home if I had been down to Richmond.  The changes are inconvenient but for me effectively a form of one way system - I can go south to the A316 via SCR and the railway bridge but I cannot go north.  The reality for me is that the Hogarth Roundabout seems a bit more congested than usual, almost irrespective of when I am travelling and it adds a few minutes extra journey time but if the residents of GP are happy with the changes then we should all just grin and bear it.Personally I would have preferred a system where all residents of Chiswick, say west of Chiswick Lane were allowed to go north through GP

Justin Stephenson ● 1682d

Justin, why not just have a system where all residents and businesses of Chiswick have access to Chiswick? Why seek to divide it at all as you suggest?

David Lesniak ● 1682d

That’s my view David, chiswick residents should be given an exemption not just the people living in GP. The council clearly lack any imagination and don’t consider the local community which isn’t made up of a few roads. It really isn’t that hard to think a little more about the impact on the local community and create a money revenue scheme at the same time charge local residents a small admin cost for the exemption permit. This is a Labour council all over no imagination!

Jayne Thorburn ● 1682d

The small admin charge for a permit will of course increase annually, I’d opt out, rather than give them my money. . I object to paying to drive locally !

Maggie Dodge ● 1682d

You have to copy and paste the petition into your browser but it's easily done. www.change.org/p/stop-hounslow-council-destroying-chiswick-stop-streetspace?recruited_by_id=3496ccb1-30bf-4861-9e64-e6f833e3ce9d

Mandy Waters ● 1682d

Matthew - the devil is in the detail. For example can you explain why there is a need for a permanent barrier to be erected at the Staveley Road / Park Road junction? The trial closure of Burlington Lane and the new restrictions on Staveley Road (east) make the barrier redundant.Officers can provide no explanation for why the permanent barrier is needed other than to say that after 7pm without a barrier "chaos" will ensue - what twaddle. This did not happen before the temporary barrier was installed so why should it happen now?By the way there are currently 2.259 signatures on the petition. : https://www.change.org/search?q=chiswick-stop-streetspace

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 1682d

Justin I don’t think it’s for you to defend Paul Campbell. He’s is more than capable of standing his ground.

Maggie Dodge ● 1682d

It is rather disingenuous of you, Sam, to exult in a local petition when you and your party chose to ignore over 6 million signatures in the stop Brexit petition. It’s almost as if you’re picking and choosing the bits of democracy that suit your arguments when you need them. But I’m sure politicians would never behave so mendaciously, would they?

Stewart Jones ● 1682d

Sam and his party had every right to ignore a petition on Brexit as they won a clear mandate to 'Get Brexit Done' at the last election. To imply a decent man is behaving mendaciously in the way you have is repulsive.The cycleway schemes are still being implemented under Experimental Traffic Orders and are currently not fully operational so any petitions submitted now or any comments will simply be ignored because how can you have reached a balanced position on a scheme that is not complete? Petitions are for the lazy. If you really are opposed to a scheme you have to follow a process and submit convincing evidence to the council why it is a bad idea and not working. This might entail keeping records on a daily basis of journeys or providing a detailed account of how a scheme is impacting you negatively.The petitions are actually more about raising the anti-Streetspace/Cycleway credentials of local Conservative politicians. The Hounslow one makes no mention of how the council are adhering to a template outlined by central government and being financially rewarded for doing so. The King Street one, as I understand it, was started by a candidate for the local ward for Hammersmith & Fulham Council. When a Tory candidate in the local election asks you to sign a petition against Streetspace, ask him or her what they have done to lobby their own government to change its policy.

Francis Rowe ● 1682d

I have first-hand experience of Sam misreporting on interactions with Officers in the Council. It is his MO to state that they don't have reasons for their decisions when that is not true. I don't know if his constant state of befuddlement is an artifice or not but I can understand why he is so motivated to prevent this barrier being installed. It will stand as a permanent physical reminder of his failure to prevent the implementation of the safer streets programme in Grove Park. And he will see it every time he steps outside of his front door. I think we can all sympathise with how galling that must feel. And no petition can stop it.

Paul Campbell ● 1682d

As a long-term GP resident, I'm strongly supportive of the objectives LTN - the cut-through traffic blighting the area has been greatly reduced resulting in a much more pleasant place to live.However, the *way* in which it has been imposed upon us by Hounslow Council has been extremely unwelcome and unpleasant.  In the main, GP residents have attempted to engage in civic dialogue, but seem to have received little regard for their efforts.  Instead the traffic officers seem hell bent on imposing their plans on us without articulating why our objections can't be accommodated.I think therefore that it's worth separating these two points in any responses:1. Are you supportive, in principle, to a scheme to remove rat-running, cut-through traffic?2. Do you take issue with the *way* it has been implemented?

EH McNeill ● 1681d

The Officers have articulated why objections cannot be accommodated as I have heard them do so directly to local Conservative Councillors in meetings. However it turned out that they articulated the reasons to unreliable intermediaries who have failed to pass them on and have instead left residents in the dark for a variety of reasons but mainly because it suits their political agenda to constantly stir-up ill-feeling for the Council.

Paul Campbell ● 1681d

As a chiswick resident not GP we were given no information or consultation on the LTN scheme. It’s goes back to community spirit totally understand the rat run issue but local residents are part of the community and allowing local residents access surely should not be grouped into the rat run group. We avoid the whole area to avoid getting fined due to confusion. Local residents should be allowed to apply for exemption.

Jayne Thorburn ● 1681d

Are you suggesting that locals don't rat run and don't drive faster than the Maximum Speed Limit?

Philippa Bond ● 1681d

There is no such thing as rat running. Nobody owns the right to the road they  live on. The shortest route, free of hindrance, keeps things moving and reduces pollution. If you want pollution for your own ends, then close roads, take away lanes here and there and generally mess up an area. You can refer toall sorts of data showing problems . Clever or evil?

Maggie Dodge ● 1681d

You ignore six million signatures at your peril especially if you’re putting up the Get Brexit Done ‘mandate’ as at sort of argument. Six million people including many Tories knew the agreement would be rubbish and worse than the deal negotiated by May, They were right then and are right now.

Stewart Jones ● 1681d

The council is elected, Why consult?

Stewart Jones ● 1681d

A decent man would argue for himself.

Stewart Jones ● 1681d

"The council is elected, Why consult?"Surprised this needs explaining but it is a requirement of law. The schemes are implemented by experimental orders which means that they are operated on a trial basis during which feedback can be given on how they are going. It perhaps isn't strictly speaking a consultation but there is a chance to highlight any problems which the scheme is throwing up. Presumably the extra traffic on Burlington Lane was consistently raised by people for the first iteration of the scheme which is why we now have this amended version.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1680d

Rat running has been heavily exacerbated by satnavs and online mapping suggesting and sending all traffic down roads it would never all have travelled down at the same time before its invention and so often at speed. It is noticeably rat running.  Satnavs often aren't kept up to date by the manufacturers or the owners/users so unless you read the road signs can take down roads that have restrictions.

Philippa Bond ● 1680d