Forum Topic

This South Fulham scheme?CAMERA HELL Our lives have been ruined by the council’s strict parking cameras – it feels like we’re living in North KoreaFUMING residents say they feel like they are living in "North Korea" after a camera system installed by a council to cut traffic has made their lives a misery.Locals in Fulham, south west London, are forced to log every single vehicle that enters an exclusion zone with ticketing company RingGo if a motor is not registered at an address in the borough.It means everyone from outside the borough, including tradesman and pals of residents have to ensure they are registered by a permit holder to even think about driving into the surveillance zone.The scheme - slammed as "abuse" by one resident - was brought in by Hammersmith & Fulham Council to cut traffic in the borough and stop "rat running" cars taking shortcuts down sleepy streets.The council also argue the scheme was intended to cut pollution, which they claim has fallen "12 per cent" since the cameras were installed in July 2020.But some residents insist the opposite has happened and vehicles are are forced on to a single lane road leading to "horrific" congestion with no other route options to ease pressure off a major choke point.Resident Caroline Shuffrey said the scheme has also seen women getting "kicked out" of Uber taxis late at night because drivers don't want to risk the hefty £60 fine for entering the zone.Speaking exclusively to The Sun, the 66-year-old said: "It's abuse. We have been abused."My daughter had to walk 15 minutes at 2am because her Uber kicked her out and did not want to go any further."etc ....https://www.thesun.co.uk/motors/18618595/traffic-cameras-north-korea-wandsworth-london-ltn/I'm sure that will be popular.

Paul Campbell ● 1579d

You're both inventing when the survey was done. Neither of you pauses to think that the high response rate might indicate you are not right about your assumption. I don't know when it was done either but I deduce it wasn't during the working day. And then you assume that people who are dependent on cars are more likely to be out than non-drivers during the working day. Eh? It's not difficult to construct an equally evidence-free basis of opining the exact opposite of that, especially on roads like this with very high house prices and a lot of retired people who had plenty of time to stand around for weeks trying to block Council employees from doing their jobs.And then you invent that drivers would be more inclined to be against the barrier. This is the biggest flaw of your criticism - the assumption that people are either one or the other and their response is predictable depending on which they are. I'd say it is a safe bet that a very significant proportion of the people on Staveley and Park who said they support the barrier are drivers who are enjoying the improved living conditions on their road and in their area when they are not in their car a great deal more than they are annoyed by having to drive a short detour. The survey only draws conclusions about what people on Park and Staveley think. That is its purpose and it is all that it claims and it has captured a far higher proportion of residents in its catchment than any other survey or poll in the area. This has been a long-standing misunderstanding for our local car lobby. They still haven't got their heads around the idea that a Council will prioritise the needs of residents on roads that are particularly badly affected by the negatives of high traffic flow. Exactly as they did for Stile Hall and Wellesley and Beverley Road (and all the other roads in Homefields Ward apart from the six that facilitate flow of through-traffic).The barrier isn't a zero sum game. It has encouraged some people in its immediate vicinity to walk or cycle instead of using their cars, reducing car load in the overall area; it has encouraged people not in its immediate vicinity to leave the car at home and use Staveley as a safe route this reducing car load in the overall area; it creates an ultra-low traffic street 24/7 for people to enjoy walking and cycling across Grove Park east to west (I know lots of people who live west of Sutton Court Road who love that) and to access Chiswick House and Dukes Meadows without the car. In short it provides very tangible positive benefits and improved life quality to many people who do not live on the two streets.Finally Sam Hearn got a no right turn sign put on Lawford Road to ensure that he and his neighbours didn't suffer from traffic displacement. It was his success. Apart from that everything you say is probably entirely correct.

Paul Campbell ● 1575d

Having been away, it is somewhat depressing to be back in the UK and in Chiswick.  There appears to be no change.Boris Johnson is still PM. When will the Tory party do the right thing and get rid of him.  Overseas our reputation is being tarnished and economic growth (GDP per capita) since 2015 lags all major European countries, even Italy by some way. We are returning to the 1970s and becoming the sick man of Europe.Sticking with the 1970s more locally, the new Council said they were up for change and then gave Cllr Dunne, member of the Hounslow Cycling Campaign, the role of lead on Transport. Who can forget her performance on 23 September at the Call In.  Very left wing, momentum orientated and the part of the party Sir Keir and team know have to be stopped if Labour are ever to get back into power.    So is Cllr Dunne a deliberately conflicted choice? Or can we expect change.From discussing with friends in Grove Park over the weekend, it became apparent that some on Staveley Road and Park Road had been recently door stepped by the increasingly less read Chiswick Calendar no less; asking the wrong questions as one said about the Staveley Road and Park Road Barrier.  As one said, the barrier has not stopped traffic entering Grove Park or reducing traffic on either Park Rd or Staveley Rd, but the person interviewing did not appear to understand that.  As they all know in Grove Park, and those of us that would like to visit it is the measures all around the area that restrict traffic and those in Chiswick even wanting to go.And right on cue, an article appears today in Chiswick Calendar and is being tweeted and posted..  What a surprise!  It looks like it was an organised activity and plan, following Hounslow Cycling Campaigns monthly meeting (last Thursday of the month) and often attended by Hounslow Councillors who are members of HCC.  The meetings are great fun to join.The evidence of Council surveys and in the case of Grove Park, the local Resident Groups at the Church meeting in March. All says that  Chiswick votes against the schemes by 80%.  It always does.  Every single one.  And that is a problem for Cllr Dunne and HCC as the overwhelming evidence is against these schemes.And the evidence in this thread clearly supports the plan, the same old people trying to push a flawed survey and its results, the same on twitter and even Ruth Cadbury being asked once again and tweeting again.  It regularly seems to be the same people who got the Chiswick Calendar to print a letter in November 2020 of 20 people who wrote into Government and supported Boris Johnson’s cycling plans. And now what we all know is that time and time again there are only 20 people in Chiswick who support these cycling plans, and sadly appear to be demonstrating the same failures as Boris Johnson.Labour should have won hands down in Chiswick wards given how poor Boris Johnson is, the fact is they did not and the reason for that is the local Hounslow streetspace schemes, which 80% of Chiswick do not agree with.  There needs to be change.Well the Council says it wants to change, it wants to listen, and that means that it needs to work with the majority of Chiswick, the elderly, the vulnerable, residents and businesses.

Jonathan Mabbutt ● 1574d