Forum Topic

Another stupidly named initiative to benefit ALL ???

Reimagining Our StreetsAs part of our ambitious plans for a healthier, greener and safer Hounslow, we are looking to reimagine our streets for the benefit of more residents and businesses.We want to update how our parking and ‘kerbside’ spaces are used to create well designed streets and public areas that work for everyone. 60% of journeys in the borough are made by walking, cycling and public transport, and we would like our streets and spaces to benefit everyone.Apparently described by locals as  another biased consultation that will be ignored if it doesn’t go the right way. They never stop !

Maggie Dodge ● 567d101 Comments

Ed you don’t know me except through this forum. You’ve said some sharp things that you don’t seem to have a problem with .  You assume you’re aware of every post I’ve put on here and every post written against me. Paul Campbell definitely seems to have everything I’ve ever written filed away and drags it up at the drop of a hat.Ruth Mayorcas has frequent trawled up old stuff and posts mis information. In a vain attempt to stir trouble. So if I’ve got things wrong, backed the wrong horse from time to time because I read and believe someone that doesn’t make me a bad person. There some terrible things going on in this world. So many good people suffering while the bad guys match on.

Maggie Dodge ● 553d

You're the apologist and cheerleader for stalkers Maggie, so you tell me if it is OK.From what I've see though, no, you've never been stalked.  But if you'd like to make an accusation, I'm sure you've got a libel lawyer on speed dial by now!

Ed Saper ● 553d

I think muggings and car crimes are what I call crimes. No social justice involved I think I’ve been stalked on here but that’s ok isn’t it Ed.

Maggie Dodge ● 554d

"I’d need to check your figures Ed but all this to make Paul’s home territory safer? No car crime in Grove Park?"Measures that make streets safer are generally to be welcomed.The data for Waltham Forest shows an 18% decrease in street crime and a much larger decrease in violent and sexual crime.  https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/ftm8d/It stands to reason that having more people on the street and not in their cars helps to make a street feel and actually be safer.Some categories of crime increase - bicycle theft is one, although that's partly due to more people cycling in the area.I am sure we've seen an increase in anti-social vandalism in Grove Park, specifically the vandalism of traffic counters and cameras, but I'm sure Maggie would argue these aren't really crimes - like stalking.

Ed Saper ● 554d

Quite possibly it was Paul.

Keith Iddon ● 554d

I think the “except for access “signs caused confusion. No one ever really understood the “access” part of it. The number of LTN supporters who lied about it adding a couple of minutes to a journey knew it wasn’t true. What Hounslow need to do is accept these road closures are counter productive and unfair and remove them. But they never take the easy route when a complicated oppressive one will do.

Maggie Dodge ● 554d

I see that the creative process to cover the selfish needs  caused by a lack of financial success still burdens you Paul.

N V Brooks ● 554d

No, U cannot. I alluded to the desire of the unsuccessful to live in such areas no claim that LTNs had met their selfish desire.

N V Brooks ● 554d

I have to drive into Grove Park about 3 times a week to visit my elderly mum as I don't live in the area I have to to drive the long way in. Some clown on this forum said it would only add few minutes to the journey but he was clearly talking out of his arse!All Hounslow have to do is put up accept for access signs up and the people who want to get to places somewhere in Grove Park can do and the people who want to so called rat run can't.

Brian Green ● 554d

Nobody in Chiswick is envious of people living in Ealing Nigel. Apart from Maggie because she loves residential streets being filled with angry drivers beeping and swearing at each other. Each to their own I suppose.

Paul Campbell ● 554d

I think their issue Ed is that at some point in their lives change became intolerable. LTN at Thornton Avenue or Chiswick Common Road perfectly fine in the 80s or 90s; Chiswick Road in 2003, Beverley Road in 90s, Prebend what 15 years ago. No toys thrown out of prams.But change a road system in the 2020s? Outrage! How dare the right of people to live on quiet, safe, healthier streets be prioritised over the desire of drivers to rat run and save a few mins on their journey. No toys left in the prams.

Paul Campbell ● 554d

It used to be you had to live in an exclusive estate and pay for a private road, now you just need to be or be friends with a cycling Councillor ,boom! Although it must also have its draw backs living on a road that’s difficult to access

Maggie Dodge ● 554d

Ed, there are too many private roads in London for me to waste my time telling you about.Just google 'private roads in London'.

Keith Iddon ● 554d

No, but then again you aren't either rich or successful enough to live in Bedford Park are you?  How sad to wake every morning envious of the success of others. I am sure that, in turn, the residents of those roads dream of living on Park Hill, West Road or on the 'Haymills Roads' in Ealing. So many nice roads, occupied by those who have 'made it' and not an LTN in sight.

N V Brooks ● 554d

Could Keith provide an example of a "private road", that's a road with no public right of access, that's been created in Chiswick by an LTN?Could NV provide an example of a "gated estate" created in Chiswick by an LTN?  Ideally with a photo of the gate / gatehouse?Would David mind providing an example of a "private estate" created by a Chiswick LTN?  Something like Thames Crescent perhaps?  But created by the Council as part of an LTN.As far as I was aware, LTNs don't create private roads or gated estates because anyone can still drive to any house or flat or business inside an LTN. All LTNs do is prevent rat runners using these streets as through routes.  For instance, the Thornton Avenue bollards prevent rat runners, but closing off one end to vehicles doesn't make it a "gated estate" or "private road" by any normal definition:https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4947113,-0.2553079,3a,75y,113.49h,93.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8cObWhzMSPeh5CYC3Okj_Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttuBut if the chaps would like to provide an example of one that meets a reasonable definition of a private road or gated estate, then happy to reconsider. 

Ed Saper ● 554d

Keith people in Chiswick have been successfully lobbying their Council for 60 years to install low traffic neighbourhoods precisely because they were fed up with rat runners using their streets to save a few mins on their journeys across London. I have counted over 90 LTN restrictions in Chiswick. A huge majority of Chiswick people now live on streets that have had traffic reduced on them.  What’s good enough for people on Beverley Road and Prebend Gardens is good enough for people on Staveley Road and Grove Park Terrace. Somehow I don’t think the residents of Airedale and Homefields and Woodstock are spending too much time looking over at Ealing residents with envy at their success in accumulating money and property.

Paul Campbell ● 554d

I recently had two bus journeys on Twickenham Rd,one on a miserable,slightly rainy day.I was on the bus for half an hour,congested traffic meaning a 10 minurte journey took 30, a a with cycle lane on both sides of the road.I saw 3 cyclists in that time,two using the lanes and one using the footpath.The next time was quite a sunny day,I was on the bus for 20 mins,not as much traffic and 5 cyclists seen,4 in lanes and one on footpath.Make up your own mind.

Keith Iddon ● 554d

Rat running is a made up argument with no substance. Open roads disperses traffic and the cycle lobby don’t want smooth flowing traffic. Sadly they have LCC members pulling strings. Disgusting way to disadvantage the majority in favour of a few cycle zealots but they’ve got the say and no scruples. There’s something wrong with local politics, rotten in fact

Maggie Dodge ● 554d

Didn’t work though and was LTNs mostly undone. We marched for that but still don’t know what made them listen.  Ealing is better for it of course.

Maggie Dodge ● 554d

I’d need to check your figures Ed but all this to make Paul’s home territory safer? No car crime in Grove Park?

Maggie Dodge ● 554d

How about they spend some effort and money repairing the pavements and the potholes in the roads and sweeping up leaves and litter. Maybe more people would walk if thy weren't likely to get soaked by loose paving trapping water or tripping up and slipping.

Charlotte Kasner ● 554d

It's called double standards,pull the ladder up,I'm alright Jack or whatever else along those lines.There is no such thing as a rat run,there are only roads and streets.If you don't wanr cars going past your house and can't afford your own private road,move to a cul de sac,a close or a crescent.

Keith Iddon ● 554d

David,I'm assuming that you live in LB Ealing given the reference to Acton Green.If you are concerned about cars rat-running through the area, then I suggest you take this up with your local cllrs.However, they may not be supportive given they opposed closure of Fishers Lane.I haven't heard their views on existing low traffic neighbourhood measures in the area, such as the barriers preventing rat-running at Evershed Walk/Acton Lane and Priory Rd/Wadhurst Rd.  You could always campaign for these barriers to be removed so cars can drive through them again.

Michael Robinson ● 555d

The same rat running argument is/ was used in Ealing by those who wanted/ want to live on private roads but are simply not successful enough in life to afford a house on a gated estate with restricted vehicular access. They believe that simply shifting the traffic  onto their neighbours streets is the solution to their lack of success. How selfish and petty of them.

N V Brooks ● 555d

Rat Running? Is Grove Park a private estate now then? They are normal roads and streets. Guess you live there. Why is grove park so special?  Adds probaly 30 mins to my journey sometimes.Do you drive if so how about saving my area Acton Green from filthy cars. Going north?Do me the same sevice you get,left A4 right north circ right gunnesbury ave ,keeping my area as clean as yours. Fair point isn't it.

David Harmes ● 555d

Maggie asks: "where are these safer quieter healthier streets"?Grove Park is safer, quieter and healthier as a result of the changes.Traffic on Burlington fell 45% and Staveley by 59% in 2022 by reducing rat running.

Ed Saper ● 555d

So where are these safer quieter healthier streets than Paul . Chiswick is awash with traffic and crime.

Maggie Dodge ● 555d

Yes so it’s clearly not all about the money after all. It’s actually about safer quieter healthier streets.

Paul Campbell ● 555d

Hold on Paul,you missed my point or maybe you are double bluffing.The Council would not do anything to sully their cycling agenda,imagine thousands of pounds on Chiswick High rd alone, every day

David Harmes ● 555d

Good point David. You make a very strong argument against the anti-LTN echo chamber's argument that LTNs and ULEZ are money-naming schemes.

Paul Campbell ● 555d

I remember when the Council employed those guys dressed all in black.Kingdom something or other.  Fining  people who fed a bit of bread to a bird in the park or falsely accusing people of littering. They seemed to have disappeared but there’s not much the Council won’t sink to to fleece people

Maggie Dodge ● 555d

If you approached the council with an initiative with a sure fire way of bringing in hundreds of pounds an hour what would they say.Jump at it or once known what this initative was  back off and run like squeeling piggies.  Remember hundred of pounds an hour in fineshttps://road.cc/content/news/police-catch-18-red-light-jumping-cyclists-90-minutes-289991  Ive seen other data showing 40 an hour in Central London,money for old rope 

David Harmes ● 555d

Why not? 😂

Maggie Dodge ● 555d

Why would you add 'Have a nice day' on the end of your 'contribution'?

Anne England ● 555d

Michael I think you’re delusional and obsessed with both me and OneChiswick. You need help because you’re talking nonsense. It’s amusing but completely made up. If you have questions of OneChiswick I suggest you man up and ask them. If you continue to write this nonsense then I suggest you back it up with some substance.

Maggie Dodge ● 555d

There must be a lot of people in Chiswick who are embarrassed at ever having had any association with OneChiswick.

Paul Campbell ● 555d

It says something that Maggie Dodge became an embarrassment even to the Onesies given their tolerance of hatred and abuse on their Facebook group.

Michael Robinson ● 555d

Michael, how can you expect to be taken seriously while you still use childish language line onesie.  I have not participated in oneChiswick for probably a couple of years. Why do you not know that. Because you are a bit of an idiot I susoect with one brain cells like Paulo, ‘let’s lynch an old lady ‘Campbell. Climb back under your rick you sad excuse for a man. Have a nice day 😂❤️

Maggie Dodge ● 555d

Maybe Maggie can tell us what has happened to the Chiswick Onesie's twitter as their last 2 retweets have been one calling Glasgow Celtic a "Vile terrorist loving club" and an anti Meghan Markle story from the Daily Mail.Are the Chiswick Onesies Rangers fans? (Glasgow, not Queens Park)Or more likely, does the person running the Chiswick Onesies twitter run multiple accounts and they get befuddled about who they are meant to abuse with each account.

Michael Robinson ● 555d

Take off the blinkers and try to leave Grove Park once in a while. Compared to the chaos that ensued after the implementation of blanket LTNs in Ealing the traffic is like a remote Welsh Welsh  village on a quiet dayOf course you would not know this as you probably never avenger further than Chiswick high Road or a bike Lane in Hammersmith. How sad.

N V Brooks ● 556d

Streatham Wells is the latest ground zero of the LTN wars. Local LTN supporters have quickly captured the energy of the anti-LTN opposition:

Paul Campbell ● 556d

Maggie quoting a Joanna Biddolph retweet of a John Stewart tweet citing a Times article from a year ago. The anti-LTN echo chamber in a nutshell. Meanwhile more LTNs being made permanent and new ones announced with the same pattern of outraged drivers taking to social media in droves in pure despair and rage at the effrontery of being told they can’t use their favourite rat runs any more. All the same tropes and deflections being rolled out. Even Ealing, like Greenwich, is going to go back to LTNs because they have no choice. They are the only way for them to meet their commitments on car reduction and pollution within their budgets. Cheap and fast to implement and profoundly effective as evidenced by the anguished cries of inconvenienced drivers.

Paul Campbell ● 556d

Maggie - you made a mistake. Your default mode is to lie, so now you’re lying to cover up a stupid mistake. “ I didn’t say  in “Todays Times”, that was what the article said.”No, the article didn’t say “Today’s Times”. The tweet from John Stewart on 24th October 2022 said “Todays Times”. Biddolph retweeted it yesterday - also missing the date - and you assumed it was current. The article was wrong then, and even more wrong a year later because traffic has fallen in Hackney - not that you even read the article I suspect.  You could make different arguments by manipulating the data to prove your point, but not the one you made. Funny that you are calling other people “idiots” though!

Ed Saper ● 556d

Dates don’t matter Paul, facts do. The facts remain that the general principle of LTNs doesn’t work. Nice try but no cigar, for your pointless but less aggressive than usual post . Well done you must have taken your Kalms before posting. NV Brooks reminds us that Ealing had to be pushed, but finally saw sense. No getting away from the truth there.Hounslow would won’t risk us saying “see how much better things are without your stupid schemes”.

Maggie Dodge ● 556d

Usual load of waffle dragged out to bore the reader. I didn’t say  in “Todays Times”, that was what the article said. The principle is the same whenever it was written. London is a mess because of LTNs 🤷‍♀️

Maggie Dodge ● 556d

But rain gardens and other suburban drainage schemes are designed to mitigate a lot of that flooding by providing areas where that rainfall can collect and dissipate.

Philippa Bond ● 556d

Traffic flowing freely in Ealing! You missed your calling at stand-up Nige. Ealing is a traffic sewer and Peter Mason will never be allowed to get away with what he did to damage communities for personal ambition and gain. He has an albatross around his neck.

Paul Campbell ● 556d

Ealing residents will always remember 22 September 2021. This was the date when the very sensible decision to remove all but two (very short and sensibly planned) LTNs was made.Traffic flowing so much easier as result and the two extant LTNs are working well. Perhaps something that Hounslow, with it's invisible Transport poftfolio holder, should consider.

N V Brooks ● 556d

I’ve noticed a trend of anti-ULEZ, anti-cycle lane, anti-LTN people being unable to observe the date in the articles that they access when they are shared in their social media echo chambers. The world is so bewildering to them.

Paul Campbell ● 556d

Rather misleading to say "Today's Times" as the article is from October 2022 - over a year old.https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/london-ltns-councils-that-closed-rat-runs-now-have-even-more-cars-on-their-roads-7330p9hhbThe gist of the article is that in 2021 traffic increased following the pandemic, and did so more quickly in inner London boroughs like Hackney (the case study) where LTNs were introduced, than other inner Boroughs such as Westminster or Kensington & Chelsea where they were not.The data showing an increase of 28.7m miles per year (11.8%) in 2021 in Hackney comes from the DFT:https://roadtraffic.dft.gov.uk/local-authorities/122Traffic rose less in 2021 in inner London boroughs that didn't put in LTNs: Westminster by 8.1% and Kensington by 10%.  Thus the article concludes that if Hackney hadn't put in LTNs, it would have had less traffic growth.  As over a year has passed we now have data for 2022 as well.Well, unfortunately for Maggie the data does go her way.....Kensington UP 4.8%Westminster UP 3.3%Hackney DOWN 1%Now you could argue that things are a bit more complex and you can't just say that traffic levels are directly affected by LTNs by cherry picking boroughs to suit your narrative.  However, that's exactly what Maggie via The Times is doing, so by her methodology, LTNs reduce traffic and anyone who says otherwise is an "idiot".

Ed Saper ● 556d

Time to remove LTNs they do the opposite of their intended purpose. Trial period is over.  Fine the idiots who installed these because everyone could tell they wouldn’t work but refused to listen to common sense. “Today's Times reveals total vehicle miles driven in the 10 inner London boroughs that put in LTNs or equivalent in 2020 rose by 11.4% on average last yr as traffic returned to more normal levels but in the 2 inner London boroughs that didn't put in LTNs the average was only 8.9%.”

Maggie Dodge ● 557d

Orwellian you say.

Mark Frost ● 563d

Wrong.  It isn't.  Did you watch that programme about Amazon? Have you seen the way in which there are couriers employed who are monitored all of the time and who do not have time to stop to eat a sandwich at lunchtime?  Have you ever thought about their working conditions?  Or do you only think about getting your next day's consumerist fix?

Philippa Bond ● 563d

“ couriers who are doing this work it seems don't even have the time to stop to find a loo”Couriers needing to find a loo has nothing to do with customers wanting next day delivery. It’s irrelevant and a stupid argument.

Steve Taylor ● 563d

Rain gardens I might get but why parklets? Chiswick is awash with green areas

Maggie Dodge ● 563d

I like the idea of rain gardens and parklets and would be happy to see them in Chiswick but first the Council should ensure that the current schemes are functioning as well as they can before spending money on new ideas.  There is no point is spending money on a nice new, properly segregated, cycle lane if for at least a couple of months a year it is unusable due to leaves and rain creating a slippery mess that as soon as this heavy rain clogs the drains and turns the cycle lane into a long paddling pool.

Justin Stephenson ● 563d

Depends on the change

Maggie Dodge ● 563d

How do you adjust to changes?  Well you can nudge or use martial law.  I happen to think nudging is preferable.

Philippa Bond ● 563d

If you don't know what the council statutes are,it's probably better not speculate what they are.And I am opting out of nowhere,I am just not interested in activists,councillors and politicians blowing smoke up our collective backsides when it comes to publicly funded projects that make little or no difference, and that just make themselves feel better and raise their profiles.What do you do more than me exactly,except preach and harp on about it ad.nauseum,to save our planet?

Keith Iddon ● 564d

Better drainage systems to prevent flooding and pollution of rivers are about as local and practical as it gets. This must be the point where the culture warriors start eating themselves.

Paul Campbell ● 564d

Which bits of our shared planet are you considering opting out from?

Philippa Bond ● 564d

Councils have a statutory duty to provide many things like social care for various groups,housing and repairs,rubbish collections etc.Vanity projects to save the planet is not on the list.

Keith Iddon ● 564d

Rubbish, I don’t care or heed what is happening elsewhere. I care about what is happening in my local area and being bullied by people who have an unfair bias.

Maggie Dodge ● 564d

What do you mean 'water companies WENT private'?They were part of Margaret Thatcher's great privatisation endeavour with the idea that new owners would put money instead of Govt.  Unfortunately it seems they were asset stripped.

Philippa Bond ● 564d

It isn't all about Councils interesting and pleasing people.  There are statutory responsibilities.  The Govt had to be taken to the High Court and lost several times over air pollution.  They don't like being unpopular so passed the buck.You need to look at what other countries are doing instead of just having a whinge every time you have to make any changes to your routine since it is something that we all have to live with.  It is one world.

Philippa Bond ● 564d

We know what this Orwellian double-speak means, Mark.  Only cyclists may benefit from these initiatives - and not always even them,  Public transport users, and almost always pedestrians too, will be much worse off. The elderly, sick and disabled will be even more massively disadvantaged than they already are.Councils, most of whose members seem completely detached from the real world,  using our hard-earned money to dream up schemes that we don't want to justify their jobs.  No wonder so many councils are practically bankrupt.

Claire Moran ● 564d

Councils need to stop spending so much time and effort on schemes that only a minority are interested in .  Active  travel schemes including LTNs have failed to boost walking and cycling rates despite £3.3 billion being spent, study suggestsBy David Churchill Chief Political Correspondent01:12, 03 Nov 2023 , updated 02:27, 03 Nov 2023

Maggie Dodge ● 564d

Philippa,Hounslow council or any other council is not tasked with'solving all life's and the world's problems', believe it or not.It,they,cannot do that and never will.That's part of the problem.They were tasked to deliver their manifesto comitments.

Keith Iddon ● 564d

This is far more important than silly little Labour Party schemes for Hounslow which are a total waste of money and won’t work. https://act.38degrees.org.uk/act/water-standards-lbda-nov-23

Steve Taylor ● 565d

Much of the money used to pay for initiatives now seems to come with strings attached and also has to be won in competition with other councils as direct govt funding has been reduced.  It can't just be spent on something else.Putting more rainwater down drains doesn't solve all life's and the world's problems.

Philippa Bond ● 565d

I would say less virtue signalling, more vested interest in many situations

Maggie Dodge ● 565d

“ What a waste, why not think things through properly before spending massive amounts of our money, or is that being too simplistic? Blasted parklets and rain gardens can wait.”Totally agree.

Steve Taylor ● 565d

"virtue signalling" Benefits of SuDS (aka rain gardens)Sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) mimic natural drainage processes to reduce the effect on the quality and quantity of run-off from developments and provide amenity and biodiversity benefits. When specifying SuDS, early consideration of potential benefits and opportunities will help deliver the best results.The benefits of SuDS include:flood risk management – reducing the risk of flooding from developmentwater quality management – reducing the impact of diffuse pollutionimproving amenity and biodiversity – the integration of green infrastructure with SuDS solutions can help to create habitat, recreational and biodiversity areaswater resources – SuDS can help to recharge groundwater supplies and capture rainwater for re-use purposescommunity benefits – attractive, well designed public open space that incorporate SuDS can help to create better communities through social cohesion and quality of life improvementsrecreation – multi-purpose SuDS components can not only manage surface water, but also act as sports/play areaseducation – SuDS in schools provide a fantastic learning opportunity whilst also providing additional recreational spaceenabling development – SuDS can help to free up capacity in already established drainage networks, and the provision of SuDS can often be a prerequisite of planning permission.Recent revisions to planning policy and the National Planning Policy Framework recognise the role that well-designed SuDS have in managing surface water.Downsides:trigger people with reactionary conservative tendenciesalarming to the feeble-mindedget in the way of parking or driving cars on pavements

Paul Campbell ● 565d

No, we don't need everything delivered next day - especially when it appears that many of the couriers who are doing this work it seems don't even have the time to stop to find a loo and leave bottles of wee littered all over the streets!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rbl-LTdnZA

Philippa Bond ● 565d

Keith - I agree - it's about getting the basics running properly before you go off at a tangent. We now have 'wands' along Twickenham Rd. delineating another cycle track that runs parallel with an existing one, and the bloody thing had been unusable in this weather as it's been flooded because the soakaways aren't working efficiently, and the leaves in the gutters are preventing the water from running away The gutters in these lanes cannot be cleaned with machines so they get left and cyclists then can't use them as they are too slippery with rotting leaves. What a waste, why not think things through properly before spending massive amounts of our money, or is that being too simplistic? Blasted parklets and rain gardens can wait.

Vanessa Smith ● 565d

I just wish councillors and politicians in general just stuck to what they were elected to do in their manifesto first,rather than embarking on virtue signalling vanity projects that will likely last a couple of years at most.Clean and safe streets,good public transport,parks and public spaces kept in good order would be a start.

Keith Iddon ● 565d

You'll find more and more initiatives to try and mitigate the increased changes in the weather.  It is years now since we first saw rainwater goods for buildings being increased to take the sudden and increased volumes of rainwater from those sudden cloudbursts.  When the soil is dry it just bounces off and when it is already very wet it has nowhere to go.  And when it has been tarmacked or concreted without consideration (even despite Planning and/or Building Regulations stipulating permeable surfaces) there is nowhere for it to go fast enough.https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/who-we-are/research/climate-change-adaptation-guidance

Philippa Bond ● 565d

Improving an area to sit and stay and walk in and visit the shops and eat in tends to give people more pride in the area they are in.  Just driving through doesn't.

Philippa Bond ● 565d

“Litter is most often caused by the can't-be-bothered- brigade... who are just too lazy to find a bin to put it in or to take it home or to teach their children to do this.”That’s right. And the Council has to recognise this fact as the demographic of the Borough. And it’s their job to deal with it. More fines, more bins, more prosecutions. They can’t just ignore it and think about rain gardens and other such nonsense when the Borough looks like a third world dump.

Steve Taylor ● 565d

I keep my rubbish in my car

Maggie Dodge ● 565d

“ Do we really need everything on next day delivery?”Yes. That’s why online shopping has taken off in such a big way and why Amazon is such a successful company. It’s in their business plan. Take away the next day delivery option and they will lose millions of customers.

Steve Taylor ● 565d

There also seems to be a complete lack of a sense of volume and space nowadays.  I do wonder how children deal with this in their maths class!  It isn't hard to flatten a pizza box but if you thoughtlessly place it across the top of a bin you will stop the use of the bin by others who would choose to use it.  Most cardboard packaging nowadays is designed to be flattened for recycling but people just don't bother. Standing on an aluminium can will reduce its volume and stop it from blowing around so much if it is has just been left balanced on top!

Philippa Bond ● 565d

The Environment Agency has spent some time putting the wiggles back into a river so as to slow down the water when there is heavy rainfall to reduce the speed of the rise in river water level and subsequent flooding.  Landowners can be taken to court for straightening the route of a river because it can lead to greater flooding and damages the flora and fauna especially when there is too much run off from their farmland with a lot of nutrients into it. Here's one:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKW6bZ1MitoHere's the Royal Horticultural Society on rain-gardens:https://www.rhs.org.uk/garden-features/rain-gardensThey also have info on bog gardens, and also plants to grow in very dry areas with little rainfall.

Philippa Bond ● 565d

"Litter is most often caused by the can't-be-bothered- brigade... who are just too lazy to find a bin to put it in or to take it home or to teach their children to do this."True up to a point - but when you see many bins full to overflowing it hardly encourages their use.

Richard Greenhough ● 565d

I've spent a lot of time walking around the pavements and looking at the damage caused to them and most has been caused by motor vehicles being driven over them and by tree roots and probably also caused by greater fluctuations in temperature and rainfall. There are utility covers which have been broken and not presumably not reported.  Once upon a time you would see shopkeepers sweeping the pavement outside their shops - and they would certainly report broken paving stones and utility covers so that they were not a hazard to them or their prospective customers and they would not have to call an ambulance.  Perhaps there should be greater restrictions on motor vehicles? How about fewer deliveries by online companies?  Using the collection points for these and using click and collect as much as possible would help to reduce some of these larger vehicles.  Do we really need everything on next day delivery?Litter is most often caused by the can't-be-bothered- brigade... who are just too lazy to find a bin to put it in or to take it home or to teach their children to do this.

Philippa Bond ● 565d

Why doesn’t the Council make a start on tackling the flytipping and weeding the gutters and clearing all the litter strewn around the bins rather than come up with these nonsensical rain garden ideas. It’s all very well to copy these ideas from the USA but the USA has a totally different demographics to the UK and ESPECIALLY to Hounslow Borough.

Steve Taylor ● 566d

Frankly Guy, when the footpaths are in a pretty appalling state and there are potholes in many places, coming out with this load of sphericals is insulting. Exactly how are these 'rain gardens' for 'residential use' when they are in the street? This is just 'kidology' - trying to big-up your biodiverity credentials. Why do you let your Chief Officers make so many decisions that affect constituents? Just for once I'd like to see our councillors insist on proper, full consultation, not the half-arsed variety foisted on us now, and for them to actually make the bloody decision. After all, we vote for you  - not the paid employees of the council.

Vanessa Smith ● 566d

Yeah, apologies.. just like to call a spade an 'earth inverting agricultural implement'

Keith Iddon ● 566d

What is a parklet?

David Turner ● 566d

" I think the people who make up these bloody stupid names for things....."I've just left some feedback (good) for something I'd bought on eBay. The page is now headed."Tell Us How You Loved Your Experience"Next purchase : a vomit-proof keyboard.michael adams

Michael Adams ● 566d

'The rain gardens for residential use were developed in 1990 in Prince George's County, Maryland, when Dick Brinker, a developer building a new housing subdivision had the idea to replace the traditional best management practices (BMP) pond with a bioretention area'https://wiuag.wordpress.com/2017/04/08/rain-gardens-impact-on-landscaping/Really horrible, aren't they?

Guy Lambert ● 566d

I think the people who make up these bloody stupid names for things are possibly not long out of Uni.after doing some fatuous degree,and have found themselves covered in brief authority and are trying to justify their existence and their futures by trying to wind up anyone with any sense.

Keith Iddon ● 566d

Junction Grove Rd./College Rd.

Vanessa Smith ● 566d

People objecting to rain gardens with widespread flooding in the UK is approaching peak Chiswick forum.

Paul Campbell ● 566d

Sustainable urban drainage systemsI'm surprised you haven't noticed from the news the sudden increased amounts of rainwater that have been crashing down in a short amount of time causing flooding all over the place.

Philippa Bond ● 566d

Where is the 'rain garden' please? I'd like to see it next time I go to Isleworth. Is it in South Street?

Anne England ● 566d

I was assured that NO parklets were taken up/installed in Hounslow - although the latest wheeze in one area in Isleworth is a 'rain garden' - go figure. (Another Chief Officer decision imposed on people). I do agree though that ongoing maintenance for these small areas has to be done - or they  just turn into weed beds and litter traps.

Vanessa Smith ● 566d

Vanessa, the parklets have been installed all over London. At a cost of many many thousands. They are then left to deteriorate and become eye sores and rubbish dumps. Their clear intention in many cases are to remove parking spaces.  When people accuse me of being obsessed with cyclists,  it is this sort of bias and waste of money that infuriates me. The anti motorist Councils are equally obsessed , but the difference is they are wasting tax payers money tofuel their obsession

Maggie Dodge ● 566d

Well you’re right there. So much fuss about how many people are driving unnecessarily and yet according to Hounslow “60% of journeys in the borough are made by walking, cycling and public transport” Still the push to make driving difficult regardless of need. Such a caring attitude. They unashamedly dare to say “we would like our streets and spaces to benefit everyone. Blatantly not the case. The feedback on the Brentford Facebook page  is scathing so I’m not alone.

Maggie Dodge ● 567d

Well, as it happens I tend to agree with Maggie. Remember the 'parklets' that Hounslow were keen on installing? I was told by a councillor that there had been absolutely no take-up, so what does that tell you? This is yet just adding more clutter to our footpaths at a time when the council are banging on about people walking more, and it is a barely disguised attempt to again have a go at the motorist by taking away parking spaces. Some of the footpaths are pretty dicey and if the council really want to do something practical to help residents - how about having a bash at repairing them? I doubt whatever the outcome of this 'consultation' that the public will be listened to, as an officer I was speaking to just last week about another so-called consultation, informed me that even if a majority of people objected to something they could be overruled by a Chief Officer decision. Came as a surprise to me that we elected these officers, what the bloody hell are our councillors doing? Outrageous, seems employees of Hounslow are calling the shots, and it is just plain wrong.

Vanessa Smith ● 567d

Only you could find something in that text to moan about.

Mark Frost ● 567d