Forum Topic

"New" parking charges on Dan Mason drive - Saturday and Sunday !!

I went to watch Chiswick rugby on Saturday and to my amazement and disgust I discovered that Hounslow Council have introduced parking charges on several small areas of Dan Mason Drive in effect on Saturday and Sunday only.Several cars parked outside the Rugby club had been given tickets and it was only seeing them that stopped me from parking there.Investigation revealed 2 tiny notices displaying charging times and charges. What a rip off.I'm sure these would be deemed too small on appeal.Perhaps Mr Jennings would care to comment.

Derek Hill ● 1471d50 Comments

Motorists are an easy target! It gets worse by the year. Dont worry yourself, just give up and pay, I have.

Nicholas Beard ● 1471d

Yes, I noticed a while back that Guy Lambert and crew were not only responsible for destroying a beautiful grass verge opposite the bandstand area by laying ugly parking spaces over it they have now added insult to injury by charging for the spaces at weekends no doubt with the intention of snaring sporting folk.Running true to form the cheap, nasty looking tiny signs are placed in confusing locations.Disgraceful.

Adrian Irving ● 1471d

Luckily the Rugby club has two parking areas which I was able to use. Whether they are accessible to people on Sundays I don't know.

Derek Hill ● 1471d

Was mayhem last time I cycled there on a Sunday. Couldn’t move for parked cars, and those trying to find a spot, so not surprised they’ve cashed in.

Russell Pearson ● 1470d

I agree that the signage of these newly-imposed weekend charges is inadequate. There is also confusion about where Dan Mason Drive ends and The Promenade starts.  I'm currently awaiting a response from Hounslow to a PCN challenge.

Richard Jennings ● 1470d

There is a lot of confusion about where to park and which roads one can drive on without getting a fine. It’s best to avoid the area altogether.

Steve Taylor ● 1470d

The parking signs have been up for quite a while and there's a sign near the traffic lights on the entry to Dan Mason drive from the A316.

Nora Watkins ● 1470d

I suspect that like me, people would be more concentrated on vehicles coming out from Dan Mason Drive than a tiny notice about weekend parking.

Derek Hill ● 1470d

It's a little way down the road on a straight stretch with a clear view (so I suspect unfortunately that might affect any appeal).  I haven't been there for a little while,  but I thought it was quite a large sign.

Nora Watkins ● 1470d

No council does ''large signs''. They are small for a reason!

Peter King ● 1470d

I spotted it as I was driving past it.

Nora Watkins ● 1470d

Sometimes difficult to read all the small signs when you are looking out for speeding cyclists.

Steve Taylor ● 1470d

Richard Jennings says the signs are inadequate, he’s never wrong

Maggie Dodge ● 1469d

Maggie, you don't know me very well, do you?

Richard Jennings ● 1469d

I don’t know you at all. Just going on your reputation.

Maggie Dodge ● 1469d

When it’s to do with PCN related matters I reckon you’re right at least 90-95% of the time. Thank you for that.

Andrew Jones ● 1469d

I think there may be some confusion even here regarding the signs.I must admit I haven't seen the sign Nora refers to as I am within walking distance.The signs I am referring to are opposite the band stand and by the actual bays themselves. Well, only some bays with tiny arrows on them which are supposed to indicate the sign also applies to the unmarked bays and verge somewhere else.Confusing and easily missed.

Adrian Irving ● 1469d

I asked a family member to check as they were down that way and there are signs next to the new parking bays, but it might be confusing.  There are also controlled parking signs on the entry from the A316.  During the Winter there used to be a lot of parking on the verge/road which causes a lot of damage and makes it difficult for walkers. They’ve fitted grass mats, so I assume they’re trying to minimise that damage.

Nora Watkins ● 1469d

Hounslow has a reputation for poor signage. Specifically, I recall signs hidden behind trees and bus stops , at the beginning of the pandemic. The signs are essential guidance, and should I believe be of a prescribed size and easily seen and understood. Otherwise fines will inadvertently be earned.

Maggie Dodge ● 1469d

Let's see what happens.  The parking bays have been introduced to prevent parking on the grass which used to happen a lot.  The parking signs are a similar size to the ones you see on lamp posts in other parts of the borough,  and the charges are quite low as far as I can tell.

Nora Watkins ● 1469d

There’s got to be a prescribed size for the sign, perhaps someone on here with connections in the Council could check if these conform, instead of us guessing.  ASAP before the fines start accruing

Maggie Dodge ● 1469d

I've been there and seen them Maggie. I'm not guessing.  This post will warn people that the regulations in that area have change,  as will the restricted parking zone signs at the entry from the A316.

Nora Watkins ● 1469d

I cycled on from my morning swim today and I can say the first parking bay roughly opposite the cricket club has a notice, the following two I did not see any.If, and in my mind that's a big if, Hounslow's  motive was to protect the grass verge then it is a very odd way to go about it by creating ugly parking spaces over it when there was a far more environmentally friendly way. Simply lay tree trunks in front as they have done on the other side of the road.

Adrian Irving ● 1469d

The grass mats help to protect the floor,  and allow the grass to grown through the holes.  The area needs a lot of work to keep it in good condition,  as far as I could tell the charge was £0.50 for half an hour.  The bays have been put in to make designated parking spaces, and try to discourage some of the previous bad behaviour (of parking half on the verge over double yellow lines,  or vehicles parked in the bays for weeks). People used to park regularly on the pavement near Latymer rowing club,  pushing pedestrians into the road. It only stopped when the vehicles were ticketed.  If the signs are inadequate then it should be reported.  But the idea of designated parking in this location is a good thing.

Nora Watkins ● 1469d

0.50p to £8 actually, and weekends for now but how long before that is extended I wonder?If you genuinely wanted to discourage "bad behaviour" why charge at all? Simple fact is the mats look horrible and always will.It's called Dukes Meadows not Dukes Car Park.

Adrian Irving ● 1469d

The charge will help to maintain the area Adrian. Most people don't tend to park there for the full day,  so the charge is likely to be relatively low.  The grass mats may not be that good to look at now due to the dry summer,  but people use to park on the grass previously, so it was often just a mud bath anyway.  Grass mats are used to give a more secure area to park,  and eventually the grass will grow up through the holes so remove the likelihood of having bare patches or vehicles getting stuck if it's muddy.  Dukes Meadows has been a car park for years,  and the designated parking spaces and the parking restrictions will hopefully reduce the damage.

Nora Watkins ● 1469d

The area we are talking about has never been a car until now. Agreed there have been spaces off the entrance road but never opposite the bandstand.Yes people used to park there and it was sometimes muddy in patches but "mid bath" is stretching the point. Alot.Anyway whilst on the subject of Dukes Medows, if you hurry you will see the giant crane and auxiliary vehicles on the far side of the bridge to be used to lift the last section of walkway into position. Also much effort has been put into restoring the elegant entrance gates only for the effect to be ruined by a horrible stretch of plastic fencing plonked in front an left standing for weeks and weeks.I have reported this but no response.

Adrian Irving ● 1469d

It didn't have car parking spaces Adrian,  but that didn't stop people parking on the grass.  And yes,  it had worn the grass away in quite a few places.  And a quick look on streetview will show the damage to the ground from people parking.  Isn't this post about Dan Mason drive rather than the bandstand side of Dukes Meadows?

Nora Watkins ● 1469d

"Isn't this post about Dan Mason drive rather than the bandstand side of Dukes Meadows?"Yes, originally.  But the Traffic Management Orders that introduced the weekend parking charges cover Dan Mason Drive, The Promenade and Riverside Drive.  And there is confusion about where Dan Mason Drive meets The Promenade.

Richard Jennings ● 1469d

Wouldn't that be under the railway arch?  There don't seem to be any parking charges on the road outside the gym though do there?  Do you think they brought them in to discourage people leaving their vehicles in the parking spaces on Dan Mason drive.  There were a few that were either being lived in,  or had been abandoned for a few weeks in the summer.

Nora Watkins ● 1469d

Adrian, Sadly several of the signs on Riverside Drive have been vandalised and removed, which are the gaps you spotted.  The logs would be a good idea but some very strong individuals have started rolling them out of the way. Last but not least  I do agree with Nora's "mud bath" the corner where Promenade and River side meet is a real mess come February, nothing can get established after that type of treatment.

Joseph Forshaw ● 1469d

Thank's Joseph. I spent a lot of my childhood in the countryside and maybe have a different perspective on the meaning of mud bath.I have no issue with the Riverside Drive parking it is the newer  Promenade ones that should never have been created but, as it seems we agree, should have had old tree trunks put across.

Adrian Irving ● 1469d

"There don't seem to be any parking charges on the road outside the gym though do there?"Outside Virgin Active?  Yes, there are weekend charges there.  That road is shown as part of Dan Mason Drive on the TMOs.

Richard Jennings ● 1468d

Nora might do well to check in with Michael on the details.

Russell Pearson ● 1468d

Sorry Russell, I don’t understand what you mean. Could you explain please?

Nora Watkins ● 1468d

I presume (I could be wrong of course) that the Michael in question is Michael Robinson.Russell has you down Nora (I could be wrong of course) as an agent (or under the influence) of the ECL (Evil Cycle Lobby).If I've misinterpreted Russell's intentions then I'm happy to stand corrected.

Andrew Jones ● 1468d

He made some very odd comments to me on a previous thread, he kept on accusing me of being a man.  I find his habit of stalking my comments and talking about me rather than to me quite creepy too.  I wish he would just stop doing it.  But it seems odd behaviour is common on this forum.

Nora Watkins ● 1468d

Richard, A good bet might be that the Promenade extends to the old park gates by Emmanuel boathouse and is Dan Mason beyond that point. I'd be interested in what you find in the response. I'd always thought the demarcation was the railway tunnel, but perhaps not? The answer probably lies in the map drawers of Chiswick reference library so enjoy the hunt, best regards

Joseph Forshaw ● 1468d

I will let Richard answer your question Joseph but having googled Dan Mason's name it was interesting to find out that he and his brother were the entrepreneurs who founded the Cherry Polish business.

Adrian Irving ● 1468d

Dukes Meadows Trust has lobbied the council for years to protect the park from being used as a free car park for events at the sports clubs and the Boot Fair and for free commuter parking and for coaches lorries and vans to rest up. The response was always to seek to defend the clubs right to use the park as a free car park and ignore or deny the use by commercial vehicles. This despite the clubs taking up around 80% of the park and the public having just a small section. Why can't clubs accomadate parking needs in their grounds and preferably share parking? To be fair, some do.In 2016 when the council's intention to create a "masterplan" for the area was announced, without any prior duscussion with the Trust, park users  or residents, we lobbied again to have the parking formalised and regulated to less sensitive areas of the park, such as Riverside Drive and not on the riverside itself. We also asked that charges were set to preseve some spaces for park users, as is done in other parks, so some for maximum stay of say two hours.To our horror and dismay and without it being consulted on in the council's draft plan and without planninhg consent, the council installed parking bays on the grass verge on the Riverside Promenade. This breached many policies to protect MOL, including the mayor of London's Blue Ribbon Strategy. The lack of any consultation or even showing the plans and the lack of any site meetings or it seems thought, created all manner of problems. The wooden knee railing it was proposed to use would have made holding Heads of the River Races very difficult and reduced the number of boats that could launch. We supported the Chair of the Tideway Events and the fencing proposal was dropped. We lobbied for the already tarmaced areas behind the band stand to be used for car parking, but the grass verge to be preserved. The verge was not  badly worn, we have the photos to prove that. The bays behind the band stand were shown on various iterations of the parking plans as; "coach parking" then "Coach turning" then "coach dropping off". Clearly keeping the bays for coaches was why they weren't used for cars. After months of battling and asking what the final destination of the coach passengers was, to justify encouraging coaches so far into the park, we were  told that the bays weren't and had never been intended for coaches. So now they are just big tarmaced areas that can't be used for cars or coaches.Of the many mad justifucations were were given as to why the grass verge should be ripped up and tree roots dug into to create parking bays, we were told the area was sometimes abused as poarking. To end the abuse it would be "legitimised" by putting in parking bays and charging for parking, rather than stopped.We pointed out that the trees along the edge, if not killed by having their roots dug into, blocked site lines for cars reversing out of the bays, which would be a hazard to pedestrians and cyclists. We were told that cars would be obliged to reverse into the bays so they had a clearer site when driving out. How is that being enfored?It is an almighty mess and no funds raised are currently used to maintain the park.

Kathleen Healy ● 1468d

For you Adrianhttp://chiswickpolish.homestead.com/There’s still a memorial dedicated to Charles Mason sited in the Virgin Heath club car park.Being used sadly to say as a car wash for members, Chiswick company’s have no regard for the industrial history that surrounds them.Dan  Mason Drive as I was lead to believe goes under the bridge and stops at the T junction just after the bridge by the Barnes alley

Bernard Allen ● 1468d

Thank's Bernard, the picture of Dan reminded me of Mr Pastry!

Adrian Irving ● 1468d

> It is an almighty mess and no funds raised are currently used to maintain the park.Kathleen is absolutely right. It’s one area where restrictions are probably beneficial, but done properly and with good consultation. I’ve cycled there on Sunday mornings - not a good experience. All the tiny roads were jammed with traffic, with even taxis turning up to drop people off, and vans getting stuck and unable to turn back. Just managed to squeeze through on a bike.

Russell Pearson ● 1467d

Russell, Probably just enforce the double yellows which apply 24/7 and back to the rear of the verges would be a good start. I can recollect at least three consultations going back to Mark Frost and CCF back in 2009 , and other ones in 2015 and 2016, plus numerous CAF meetings, and a public meeting at Pier House and the river bank. The big thing is to value our open spaces, and we can all agree on that.

Joseph Forshaw ● 1467d

Mark Frost designed the scheme that removed the  roundabout from the junction with Riverside Drive and Stravely Gardens around 2008, replacing it with a "raised table". That was in response to concerns raised by residents of Staevely Gardens about the hazard when crossing Riverside Drive, particulraly in the morning when taking kids  to school and the nursery. The busiest time for cars crossing the junction to get to the gym. The removal of the roundabout means cars coming along Riverside Drive no longer have to  slow to give way and many accelerate across the junction if the lights on to the A316 are green. The "raised table" is just slopes on the trarmac, cars particularly 4 by 4s barely notice it. The vchange made the junction less  safe.That scheme also included the "beggars belief" arrangement where the footpath along Riversude Drive is swept away from the road, to give cars more room and there are two signposts right in the middle of the path, making access by someone pushing a pram impossible. One of the transpirt guys from TFL visited and couldn't beleive it. It is still like that.If you look at the what was consulted on in the "masterplan" in 2016, it doesn't show parking on the Promenae. quite the oposite; improved cycle and pededtrian access, was promised.The parking propsals were first shown at a meeting of clubs after the parks consultation finished. By then, most clubs had lost interest as the meetings were not informative or useful, the park using public was barred from them. So it was just me, someone from Kings House, as it was hosted there, and a couple of guys from Meadonians. I thought the plans were am initial draft that would be consulted on. I emailed the traffic officer who presented the plans, raising concerns about the proposals for coach and car parking on the riverside and asking to meet. I chased several times and copied in the Head of of Parks. There was no meeting and a request to bring the proposals to an Area Committee was refused. The proposals weren't in the planning application for the masterplan, but the council pushed on claiming they were. We challenged and raised the issue as a complaint, but it was farcical.Good news, is that there is a new adminstration and there seems to be a desire to work more openly and collaboratively. Sadly a lot of harm is already done, a great deal of money has been spent and six years on from the "masterplan" the area is still unsafe for pedetrians and cylists and some areas look worse than before.

Kathleen Healy ● 1467d

Hi Kathleen. Long time no see! Hope you're well.When the roundabout at Riverside and Staveley Gardens was introduced (I live in Staveley Gardens) I witnessed many dangerous situations with vehicles. When I, and others, were turning right at the roundabout to go from Riverside into Staveley Gardens, I had right of way to turn in front of traffic coming up Riverside. But that traffic had other ideas and drove straight through without giving way. I have seen several near misses involving myself and others. To compound the problem, the exit from Alexandria Gardens at the roundabout is not exactly opposite Staveley Gardens. A look at a map will explain. So, more confusion. Traffic turning right from Alexandria had right of way but, again, cars coming up Riverside from the river (many of them Chelsea tractors!) had no intention of giving way. It was a dangerous road lay-out.I lobbied LBH to remove the roundabout and was delighted when they did so. As a daily user of the junction, I can promise you Kathleen that it is now much safer. Take care.

Jim Currie ● 1466d

Hi Jim, yes, well thanks hope things are good with you and yours.The junctin was unsafe, even with the roundabout, as some drivers, particularly coming out of Dukes Meadows, accelerate across the junction if the lights onto the A316 are green. The junction arrangement had remained unchanged, despite a bg increase in traffic volumes from the Riverside Club opening and driving generally to other clubs becoming more common.I recall the meetings and being skeptical that removing the roundabout and installing a "raised table" would make the situation safer. I at least thought it would be a raised table like the one in front of Cavednish school, constructed of brick paving, so it stood out asa crossing point and had a hard sharp edge, so drivers felt it, going across it. The scheme was a cheap and nasty botch. You only have to look at the pavement with the two posts right in the middle of it to see that.Contrast it with all the money and effort put into measures to keep people on the other side of the A316 in Stavely Rd etc safe on their roads. The contrast between the two sides of the A316 is stark, they could be different countries. The junction could be made safer to slow traffic, particularly across the junction and improve the footpath, but it would cost money.The mess of orange barriers in front of Cavendish School could be replaced with a camera, as elsewhere, but the barriers were cheaper. They don't even achieve the aim of stopping parents driving to drop off kids to school, as they just go round the back of the school, down Alexandra Gardens. The planners don't seem to have noticed there are two roads either side of the school. I see the congestion of cars turning at the end in the morning.Closing the railway tunnel on Dukes Meadiws sends all the Virgin Active traffic across that junction, with peak traffic between 8 and 9, when children are crossing to go to school. No thought or consideration was given to the impact on residents in staveley Gardens. It was as though they didnlt exist.Hard not to conclude that the Dukes Meadows side of the A316 and the people who live there are thought of less important and deserving of measures to keep them safe than those on the Staveley rd side.

Kathleen Healy ● 1466d

Kathleen, with regards to the blocking of the tunnel under the railway I was, at first, in favour.Experience has changed my mind.This early morning along with other mornings there was a constant stream of cars making there way to the Riverside Club. One after the other, non stop.If the tunnel was opened this would surely make a difference.BTW the wooden planters used as a blockade are now full of weeds, rubbish, covered in graffiti, and slowly falling to bits. Another eyesore we can do without.

Adrian Irving ● 1466d

Adrian. The argument, not yours, that blocking the tunnel would create a safer pedestrian / cyclists route along the river is nullified by the very expensive bridge that will do that. The tunnel was closed to take traffic off Dan Mason Drive to improve the situation for the sports clubs. Access on that side of the park is very poor, something not considered before plans to develop the facilities were launched. A woeful lack of any initial feasibility work, presumably because the council leader was the main sponsor of the plans.A new entrance to the rugby club car park is to be created near the tunnel on the Dan Mason side, coaches and cars will use it. That stretch of road is narrow with no separation of cars, coaches and pedetrians / cyclists, so it will not be a pleasant environment for anyone not in a car. It will be a very hostile one.I used to cycle across the tunnel on the Virgin Active side daily as part of my commute to work. The turning into the tunnel is tight and the tunnel narrow, cars passed through slowly and there was a good distance out of the tunnel to where it met the path. I never felt unsafe crossing it.Much was sacrficed to accomodate the desire of the previous leader for a legacy project of upgraded sports facilities.

Kathleen Healy ● 1466d

The argument about being safer for pedestrians and cyclists is bogus.If it isn't why O' why has nothing been done in the decades the tunnel has been there to mitigate the so called "danger" by those responsible.No lighting, no signs, no sleeping policemen, nothing, zilch and as far as I know no accidents.

Adrian Irving ● 1466d