Forum Topic

No umbrage taken David about not being cc'd, but you often say LBHF state things or told you this and that and it's only on querying that context comes out especially whether it was publicly stated or privately stated.We go round in circles about the time plate that used to be in Beadon St. I'll refer you to what you wrote originally:"Mark then said the appropriate signage was a half mile away. He then also directed me to signs on Glenthorne which is down the hill and around the corner. His colleague repeated his words. Me being me, I counted the signs on Glenthorne. Sixteen. All stipulating site-specific conditions. I asked Mark why he's telling me to reference signs when the sign with the information that was there was removed as opposed to updated which it should have been. They have been issuing tickets relentlessly. It is now a revenue trap. Change the CPZ all you want. But you must inform the public in a way that the council itself has demonstrated. A reasonable expectation that, as on all adjacent streets, site-specific signage will inform effectively, easily, fairly, openly. Sixteen signs versus zero. Sorry, the computer says no."The 'appropriate signage' is the CPZ Entry signs. Did Mark make that clear to you? The site-specific signs in Glenthorne Road have got nothing to do with whether you can park on Beadon Road legally. The only reason there are site-specific signs elsewhere are because the restrictions there apply at different times to the default zone restriction times. You still haven't ( as far as I remember) said what the various LBHF personnel said to you about what relevence the time plates in Glenthorne Road have in connection with whether you can or can't park in Beadon Road.So, once again, what exactly did LBHF say about the time plates in Glenthorne Road when they referred/directed you to them? I've asked you this multiple of times but never got an actual answer when you've responded. You said they (council representatives) were confused. How so?You said they couldn't sort out their own crap. You say other people told you they were "fobbed off". You said "They repeatedly point to a sign saying the sign applies until such time as they decide that maybe it doesn't."  Once again, what did LBHF actually say when they referred/directed you to/mentioned the time plates? The highway code ( https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/road-markings.html ) informs people what waiting restrictions yellow lines have:"Double yellow lines mean no waiting at any time, unless there are signs that specifically indicate seasonal restrictions. The times at which the restrictions apply for other road markings are shown on nearby plates or on entry signs to controlled parking zones. If no days are shown on the signs, the restrictions are in force every day including Sundays and Bank Holidays."Is that what you mean when you say "They repeatedly point to a sign saying the sign applies until such time as they decide that maybe it doesn't."? Is it simply that they are trying to explain what the highway code says?  You called it exploitation. I call it the council issuing PCNs correctly somewhere where the restrictions have changed.When you parked on Beadon Road a month or so back you parked in contravention of the restrictions that now apply there. You didn't realise it, and that's totally understandable given that you have been parking there legally for years and hadn't realised that the restrictions had changed.It would have been better all round if the council had put up a sign where the time plate had been advising that restrictions had changed to save you and everyone else the hassle of having to try and get a correctly issued PCN cancelled - I totally agree with that, but you are just assuming that the sign was removed to entrap people like you. You've no evidence for this. You just jump to this conclusion because you got issued a PCN and all of a sudden the council are out to get you. I've shown you an example of where the council have been trying to inform people and warn them of restrictions that have come in, rather than enforcing them from day 1. Here's another example - there's a school street near where I live where again the council sent out warning letters before starting to enforce the moving traffic restrictions  ( and when they did start to enforce them, they quickly found out that the signage was inadequate and installed additional advance warning signage)."To me, that has the stench of a money grab. Certainly the people I've spoken to who received PCNs agree." - well that's not exactly surprising - you (and some of them) made an understandable mistake and are peeved about receiving a PCN, and probably don't feel best disposed to the organisation that has issued you with a PCN. I went to a driver awareness course many years ago and it was laughable how some people said they were victims of entrapment because a police officer they hadn't seen suddenly appeared out of nowhere and stopped them because they were on their phone while driving. I'm sure I would feel very annoyed if I strayed into an LTN I wasn't entitled to be in, but if you don't actually fine anyone how are you going to expect the restrictions to be adhered to.Yes it would be counterintuitive that less signage sometimes means you have more restrictions, but I disagee with you that things are vague. The highway code makes it crystal clear how to know what the restrrictions on Beadon Road are. There's a yellow line. There's no time plate. The enforceable restriction is therefore the times on the signs at the entry to the CPZ Zone. It ( CPZ Zone Entry times determining yellow line restrictions) has been like that for many, many years. I know it's been like that for many many years because I've had to write letters to councils explaining this very point to them when appealing against a PCN that was correctly issued ( from their point of view, and I agreed with them) but which was unenforceable given my particular circumstances.Penalize for the obvious you say. Well as I've asked you at least twice ( and you haven't answered) already - Would you just park on a yellow line with no signs next to it in a CPZ in London on a Friday at 4pm if you weren't sure whether you could park there? Well, to me the obvious thing is that you can no longer guarantee that yellow lines are free to park on, at the weekends. I park in Westminster a fair amount. Very few yellow lines there have time plates - there might be some somewhere I'm sure. I know I can park on a Sunday all day, I know I can't park between 08:30-18:30 Mon to Sat. Should someone be penalised for parking on a yellow line at 4pm on a Saturday in westminster David? You tell me. I'm aware of the highway code, I know the rules, it's obvious to me that I can't park there because I pay attention when I'm driving somewhere. If I was driving to anywhere like Beadon Road ( but somewhere I'd never been before) where perhaps there might once have been a sign, but now there was no sign, I'd be asking myself what were the entry times of the CPZ I'm in before parking there.I've never thought of you as one of those "god-given" right drivers by the way. And, I partially agree with you. "LBHF could have easily simply said, oh yes, we see your point, understandable mistake and on this occasion we will waive it." Councils can be very abrupt in their communications and intransigent. I remember Hackney repeated ignoring my points and reiterating the mantra it is up to the driver to park in accordance to the restrictions in place. I totally agreed with them and pointed out that it was up to the council to ensure that the restrictions were correctly signed at entrances to the CPZ. It really pissed me off that they didn't seem to be willing to answer any of the points I was making. In the end, I just said I was taking it to appeal, and Hackney dropped it before it was heard.I am genuinely surprised why you should have had such a hard time in getting your PCN cancelled at LBHF's discretion given you were used to parking there regularly. I presume that you parked there a week or two previously and no PCN was isued. I take your point about being told you were consulted when you weren't, and if, as you say, they said everyone had been consulted, they should have accepted your say so on that.

Andrew Jones ● 22d

Sorry, Andrew, I haven't shared with you all of my LBHF correspondence. That is where they mention traffic flow. You seem to take umbrage you weren't CCed in. But please, do continue to focus on political rhetoric as opposed to lived experience and reality. Insinuating based on ignorance is never a good look. In my humble opinion.There is a current court case going on with regard to how councils use/abuse the consultation process to implement LTNs in particular. Who among us hasn't responded to a consultation questionnaire wondering why the answer you want to give isn't one of the options forcing you to commit to a response that doesn't fully represent your position? This has happened repeatedly with TfL as well, so color me sceptical when I hear the word "consultation." In fact, recently TfL and Rachel Aldred were called out for their abusing the process as well. Removing the sign wasn't about removing clutter. Sorry, that I simply won't buy. Not in the center and not with regard to how parking is used or not. This is precisely where people from outside the area will come and park as a one-off going to any of the local theatres in the area. With more yet to come at Olympia. Again, simply compare it to the clarity and experience customers have when going to Westfield. You know precisely what you're going to get, each and every time you go. No surprises. No shock. No hidden fees. Again, I'm not sure why one has to explain why a time plate was there. Clearly to inform of the timings. No? It really is rather obvious. Just not to you. Duly noted. I don't think people will cotton on to the extent they would by a simple update of a pre-existing time plate. Of course, that would mean no income. Which I maintain is the point.I've said it once, I'll say it again. Change the CPZ. Fine. But do so in a clear, concise, transparent way obvious to all. Signs make things obvious. Especially those site-specific ones. Like the one that was there for years. I was mentioning this experience to two friends, both British, both Oxford grads. Both said they would have interpreted less signage as being more lenient, not more restrictive. I thought that curious. You may not know this, Andrew, but I'm American here for 20 years now so often I chalk things up to simply not knowing how things get done in this neck of the woods. You all seem to like making things unnecessarily complicated, that I know. A bit like this Exhibit A. To me this discussion is part of the point, Andrew. There shouldn't be a need for people to debate and research and appeal when things are so vague. All of that does a disservice to businesses by penalizing visitors in a needless manner. Not just businesses, but residents and their guests as well. Penalize for the obvious. This isn't that.There was never a warning sign things were changing. Not even a temporary one. Nothing. Nor was there an easily bestowed courtesy/grace period. To me, that has the stench of a money grab. I don't think any reasonable person could see it any other way. Certainly the people I've spoken to who received PCNs agree. FWIW, I'm not one of those "god-given" right drivers. If you recall, I started the topic by saying I adhered to the regulations for years prior to them changing without any notification of any sort in any place at any time. LBHF could have easily simply said, oh yes, sorry about that, on this occasion we will waive it. But they didn't. I had to fight for it. Leaves a bad taste in your mouth especially when you're smack in the middle of the very zone affected. They could have asked if I was consulted instead of them telling me I was (that's called gaslighting, FYI). They could have apologized that we weren't or offered to look into why we weren't. But they said ALL. That's on them. I do agree with you unequivocally, LBHF is a better run borough than LBH.

David Lesniak ● 22d

"LBHF stated the change in CPZ was also about traffic flow." Oh really? Where did they state this? In https://haveyoursay.lbhf.gov.uk/parking-zone-a ?Nope. Can't see any mention of traffic flow there, what I can see is: "We are now consulting with residents in Zone A. This is your opportunity to protect your streets for years to come and prioritise parking for you and your visitors.You can choose whether to keep the parking controls as they are OR to extend controls across all of Zone A until 11pm, seven days a week with a two hour maximum stay, in line with the Olympia zones.We invite you to complete the short questionnaire which will help us to understand if any changes are required to improve parking on your street."Now if LBHF said privately to you that the changes on Beadon road were to do with Traffic Flow, that's different, but I'd be interested in you providing me with a link to where LBHF 'stated' the change in the CPZ was also about traffic flow. When LBHF first introduced a CPZ where I live, they asked residents if they would allow signs to be affixed to their boundary walls, adjacent to parking bays, in preference to posts being erected - which is why in some places the signs are on walls rather than posts. Now that was years ago, but this is a recent report by a local residents association that is present on the LBHF council website.https://www.lbhf.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2024-08/better-brackenbury-signage-and-street-clutter-report.pdfThe feel of Brackenbury is, of course, very different to the environs of Zone A, but removing unnecessary street clutter is a thing. I take your point about lime bikes, but two wrongs don't make a right."The time plate needed to be there. It still needs to be there. Again, you keep ignoring that LBHF personnel are referencing the Glenthorne time plates themselves. Confusion wasn't the problem. Now it is."You never explained why the time plate needed to be there, and when I asked you said it was obvious. Even if it did need to be there once upon a time, it doesn't need to be there now. In a month or two ( when people have cottoned on to the fact that you can't just park on a yellow line and assume it's ok, even on a sunday) there won't be people parking on Beadon Road when it's not allowed.I don't keep ignoring the fact that LBHF personnel are referencing the Glenthorne time plates, and I asked you what LBHF personnel told you about the relevance of these time plates to whether you could park in Beadon Road. I offered an explanation of why they might have been referring to these time plates, namely they were letting you know that you could park there because of the time plates in-situ on Glenthorne Road, and contrasting the ability to park there (because of aforesaid time plates) and the fact you can't now park on Beadon Road on a Sunday because there isn't a time plate overiding the default CPZ Zone times."Sorry, what is the difference between a double yellow and the current time restrictions exactly?"No need to apologise. Double yellow is 24/7. Assuming that the TRO/TMO for Beadon Road has been made correctly, then the current restrictions on Beadon Road are no parking between 08:30 and 23:00, Mon-Sun. "majority" means nothing without context. - Indeed, I'd suggest this context in this case - more people expressed a preference to increase restrictions (out of the responses received during the consultation process) than those who expresses a preference for the alterbnative option of keeping restrictions as they were.Oh, and you're totally wrong about my agenda, and I certainly don't think it's ok for councils to penalise drivers, no matter what. I've frequently advocated sending out warning letters for initial contraventions, I've pointed out where I believe signage is inadequate. I've mentioned how LBHF used their discretion to cancel an entirely reasonably issued PCN when they didn't have to, and were entirely within their rights to demand I paid it. Hardly the actions of a money grabbing council seeking to penalize drivers whatever what which is what you are trying to portray LBHF as.I approve of the way LBHF mostly go about things e.g. https://www.lbhf.gov.uk/news/2026/01/trial-make-wormholt-safer-and-quieter where they were sending warning letters to drivers for two months before starting to enforce the restrictions with PCNs. There was even a sign on the A40 before the turn off onto Bloemfontein Road warning of the new restrictions now being enforced.What I object to is those drivers who believe they have some God give right to drive where ever and whenever they like, and consider any restrictions as unfair to them.

Andrew Jones ● 22d

I couldn't find information about the numbers of residents expressing support for and against extending both the hours and days that restrictions operate in CPZ Zone A on the council website.So what are the numbers? Ask the council David, and if they don't play ball and supply them, you could then do a freedom of information request so they have to provide them.I have no doubt that there was a majority who voted in the consultation to bring in the increased restrictions.Why am I so sure? Firstly, residents nearby, in the Olympia area "overwhelmingly" voted in March 2015 for restrictions in their six nearby CPZs to be extended.https://www.lbhf.gov.uk/councillors-and-democracy/consultations/olympia-parking-zones-consultation-outcome-and-next-stepsYes Zone A is a mix of domestic residences and businesses, so not exactly like Olympia (https://www.hammersmithsociety.org.uk/olympia-update-3/) but it is pretty close to the CPZs in Olympia, it's got a lot of go-to places in the environs of Hammersmith Broadway, so it was quite likely to be experiencing some degree of parking stress in the evenings and on Sundays, so I'd expect residents in Zone A might have similar feelings to those who voted in the extensions to the six CPZs near Olympia.And a second reason, I really don't think LBHF would have gone ahead with expanding the restrictions if there had been a majority voting against this.Prove that I'm wrong about there being more residents who answered the consultation and supported the new restrictions compared to those who expressed opposition  David, and I will gladly apologise to you on this forum.Why is the access to Beadon not further restricted? What, beyond the 08:30-23:00 restrictions that are the default times for the whole zone? What a ridiculous question - they don't need to be extended any further. I'm sure all the businesses in Lyric Square would really love you if you campaigned to have double yellow lines on Beadon Road. The residents who voted for the restrictions don't live on Beadon Road, and are more interested in what is happeing in the streets they live in, so why would they be somehow placated if Beadon Road was restricted 24/7?"The pinch point remains on Glenthorne which negates the intent of the increased CPZ." The CPZ isn't there to control traffic flow - it's to allow people to be able to park near where they live when they return home.The timeplates on Glenthorne Road are ( assuming that what I see on Google Streetmap is still valid) 7am-7pm Mon-Sat. Restrictions start earlier and finish earlier than the default restrictions in the rest of the zone. Those time plates need to be there.If the restriction on Beadon Road is 8.30am - 11pm then as I have repeatedly said, no timeplate is needed. Would have been nice if there still was one, but that would go against the prevailing trend of trying to reduce street clutter.Join the dots David. If there's a timeplate then the timeplate times apply. No timeplate - then the default CPZ times apply to the yellow line. So the restrictions on Beadon Road start later than those for the yellow lines (with adjacent timeplates) in Glenthorne Road, and they finish later.It really isn't rocket science, and anyone who has never parked before in the area shouldn't fall foul as long as they realise you can't assume you can park on a sunday on a yellow line in some boroughs these days. As I asked rhetorically, would you park your car on a yellow line in a CPZ in London at 4pm on a weekday?

Andrew Jones ● 25d

I'm sure it (the new restrictions) does have an impact on sustainability for high street trading in the area, and you will no doubt have far more of an idea on the impact than I have as you are an affected trader.How is extending the hours of control antagonising to the majority of residents if the majority of residents voted for increasing the hours of control?"all residents and businesses in Zone A were written to in June 2025." - this is the first time on this thread you have said that (according to the council) all businesses were supposed to have been contacted - fair enough - I'm happy to accept your claim that this didn't happen but don't accuse me of not following on and then saying (incorrectly) immediately afterwards (in a previous post of yours) that "I have said I was told "all businesses" were consulted ..." - you may have said this beforehand somewhere else, but it wasn't on this thread."Why not tighten up within the entire zone which is what is implied by the entire communication with LBHF." Not sure if this is a rhetorical question or not - but if it isn't.So what do you want David, for the new 08:30-23:00 restriction to apply to ALL yellow lines within CPZ Zone A? That's not exactly going to help trading conditions is it?Do you want two lanes of traffic being able to drive along Glenthorne Road but not be able to park there, or would you prefer there to be only one lane and the ability for visitors to park on Glenthorne Road - wouldn't that be better for trade?"Plenty of people travel from one borough to the next not expecting to be penalized for parking on a single yellow on a Sunday. And if the nearest sign says you may, why would anyone think "hold up, let's look back a half-mile to double check?""Would you park on a single yellow line on a weekday at 4pm? I doubt it. Sunday restrictions have gradually become far more widespread, and drivers need to realise that they need to be more careful about where and when they park than they used to be. For years, there have been places in London where you can only park on a yellow line between midnight and sometime in the morning. Near Westfield for many years you now couldn't park on a yellow line until 22:00, even on Sundays.I'm not so opposed to updating a existing timeplate ( I think I may even have mentioned that I said that would have been a better option, and I certainly advocated putting up some information about the changes).Why was the time plate sign there? Yes it's obvious on one level, that the time plate was there to inform people of the restrictions, but that's not what I was driving at. There are plenty of yellow lines all over London, and most don't have any adjacent time plates.This particular time plate might well have been put there because LBHF chose to have different restrictions for the yellow line on Beadon Road compared to elsewhere in the CPZ that Beadon Road is in, when the CPZ was brought in. It was brought in years ago.It might have been, because they found that loads of people were parking there during restricted hours, it might even have predated the CPZ.Or there may have been some other reason it was put there.But, the bottom line is that the time plate is no longer needed to indicate the restrictions in Beadon Road because these are (I presume) between 08:30-23:00 every day, the same as what's on the CPZ Entry Zone signs.

Andrew Jones ● 26d

It's clear, Andrew, you think it okay for a council to antagonize visitors and residents and you've no clue how this has a negative impact on the sustainability for high street trading.In an email from someone at LBHF (I'd name names because they are public servants and as such, they are public, but I also know people get a bit touchy about it) he states ""all residents and businesses in Zone A were written to in June 2025." This suggests physical mail. But no. None was received by any of us. Not sure why if that detail was omitted in the thread should be of any significance, but you do you, Andrew. Carry on,. It then goes on to say how 85% of those voted requested longer controls. Nothing to back that up. Could have been so people for all we know. Wouldn't be the first time a council has abused the consultation protocol/results/purpose. Plenty of examples out there. Have a look see for yourself."Having signs showing different times is exactly how you are meant to inform a driver in a CPZ that a different time restriction on a yellow line applies"Precisely the point, Andrew. LBHF did that for years on Beadon. Things changed. The signage did not. It got removed instead. yet oddly, the repeater signs on Glenthorne remained despite the so-called 85% wanting tighter restrictions. Why not tighten up within the entire zone which is what is implied by the entire communication with LBHF. Surely reducing traffic to a single lane on Glenthorne on a Sunday is adding to the problem. This is what the existing time plates allow for.Why, Andrew, are you so opposed to updating a pre-existing timeplate to allow for a clear indication of what to do and what not to do given the circumstances changed? Plenty of people travel from one borough to the next not expecting to be penalized for parking on a single yellow on a Sunday. And if the nearest sign says you may, why would anyone think "hold up, let's look back a half-mile to double check?""Who knows why that time plate was originally put there years ago? I don't - do  you?Please, Andrew. You embarrass yourself with this. It's completely obvious why the time plate was installed.

David Lesniak ● 26d

I have said I was told "all businesses" were consulted yet no proof of that has been provided.When did you say this David? Time and date of posting would be sufficient.I do recall you writing the below:Apparently the CPZ was recently changed. This after a "consultation." I mentioned that none of us here at the Lyric were consulted.and They "consulted" but funnily enough cannot prove that they did. When I learned not even the theatre personnel were made aware, a sensed a rotting rat carcass somewhere.but this is the first time I can recall you mentioning "all businesses".The council has repeatedly contradicted itself by saying look at the signs both at the CPZ entry and also on Glenthorne. Those signs contradict themselvesIt depends what you mean when you say contradict themselves.I totally accept that the signs on Glenthorne Road may show different times to the times shown on the CPZ Zone entry signs.So what? Having signs showing different times is exactly how you are meant to inform a driver in a CPZ that a different time restriction on a yellow line applies.Let's for a moment put ourselves in the shoes of a person who hasn't been parking in Beadon Street for years like yourself, and has driven there for the first time ever.What do they find? There is a yellow line on the road. They ask themselves, can I park here legally? There are no time plates anywhere along the yellow line that they are contemplating parking on, so, in a CPZ that means that the times on the Zone Entry signs apply. Now, if you are not sure what those times were you can either look to park somewhere else, or you can take a chance and hope that no restrictions apply.You keep saying that LBHF removed a time plate that they deemed necessary. The timeplates on Glenthorne Road are necessary to indictate the restrictions on the yellow lines there are different to the times on the CPZ Entry Zone signs. If the restrictions on Beadon road are the same as the CPZ Zone Entry times then a time plate isn't necessary.Who knows why that time plate was originally put there years ago? I don't - do you?You are the one who finds contradiction where there isn't any.

Andrew Jones ● 26d

Andrew, it seems to me you haven't followed along.I have said I was told "all businesses" were consulted yet no proof of that has been provided. Clearly that would be easy to prove had it happened. And, as I have said repeatedly, nor did the management team at the Lyric Theatre know anything about it either.The council has repeatedly contradicted itself by saying look at the signs both at the CPZ entry and also on Glenthorne. Those signs contradict themselves. Beadon had a timeplate. Glenthorne still has multiple time plates to which I have been directed. So really, what is someone supposed to do with that amount of confusion?You'll have to ask LBHF personnel why they do what they do. This particular curious and tenacious person asked multiple people multiple questions. Would an uncurious person have persevered to get a PCN cancelled? Nah.You can't have it both ways. You say LBHF could have done better and then you say they are reasonable. I disagree. They didn't consult as represented.They removed a time  plate they themselves deemed necessary.They did not notify anyone of the change except by issuing a PCN - a lovely temporary sign would have been nice alerting the public to new conditions.They repeatedly point to a sign saying the sign applies until such time as they decide that maybe it doesn't. Today. Or maybe alternate Thursdays. In months with and "R."Why make something that was ridiculously clear so confusing now? I think LBHF can do better and be more transparent. You accept mediocrity and contradiction.

David Lesniak ● 27d

So you accept there may have been a consultation about the changes, admitedly one that looks like it didn't approach businesses in the area. I expect I would feel peeved about this if I was in your position."Doesn't explain why four LBHF people have referred us to said signage." - Agreed - of course it doesn't.You have mentioned that (four) LBHF people have referred you ( and others I think) to said signage in Glenthorne Road, but you have provided no additional context as to what they said when they referred you to this signage. So what did they say? Was it for example that you can park in Glenthorne Road, because there are time plates there specifically stating you can? And there aren't any in Beadon Road, so therefore you can't?Or maybe they said something different. But surely they said something as well when they referred you to the signage in Glenthorne Road - if they didn't then yes, there is no explanation why you were referred to this signage, but then a curious person might have asked what is the relevance of signage in another nearby road to enforceable restrictions i n Beadon Road.  I've no direct connection with LBHF by the way - though I am a resident ( in CPZ I) but you are presenting a one sided view of these changes and portraying yourself as a put upon victim of nefarious activities by LBHF, whereas from my POV,  LBHF have acting in a mostly reasonable manner after the scheme was implemented, though there was quite a lot of things that could have been done better as far as consultation and informing people of changes goes.

Andrew Jones ● 28d

Sorry, Paul.Oxford Street and Oxford are tourist attractions in a way the average high street will never be. It always amuses me how context is lost in these discussions.Oxford Street benefits from a density of population serviced by multiple public transport options. Not to mention public parking scattered around. All of that delivers footfall to said pedestrian amenity current or proposed 24/7 or thereabouts. Footfall comprised of national and international tourists, workers and residents.Oxford also has public parking scattered around. As a university town it will also operate under different circumstances and draw different types of businesses than the average high street given the demographic again including many tourists.Chiswick has one tube line servicing it, a few buses and zero public parking (neighboring Hammersmith and Brentford have spiffy new public parking). It has an influx of people on some Sundays, but that's it. Let's call them local tourists. Even then we see businesses closed because they've determined market customers aren't their customers nor is it worth the expense to try and get them. That comes from experience. Something I'm guessing you don't have.Hounslow has a pedestrianized section. It goes dead about 7pm. And that's with public parking all around. Before getting up on that soapbox, try learning a bit more about how urban environments and demographics influence and impact trade. Of course we should also mention the continued increase in online shopping and delivery, but that's so obvious that's like me saying "hey, Paul, have you seen your nose?"

David Lesniak ● 32d

Steve is absolutely correct.Local councils are oblivious to their part in the destruction of High Street trade. What they fail to realize again and again is how High Streets compete with retail parks and malls. The latter curate the offer and are in control of the experience from the moment a customer arrives. The former are completely clueless to this part of the equation. Arriving and staying and leaving shouldn't be a crap shoot for those looking to spend time and money whatever the reason. Councils punish people for doing so while retail parks and malls are very clear about what you can expect. One is user friendly. The other is not.Case in point:Every Sunday, after doing deliveries, I have parked on the single yellow line on Beadon Road. Next to the sign stipulating hours. About a month ago, I got a PCN for doing the same thing I - and many - have done for years. I noticed the sign was gone. In fact, there are no signs on Beadon. So I contacted LBHF and corresponded with the guy who oversees parking. A guy named Mark. The conversation went on and on and on and on. Apparently the CPZ was recently changed. This after a "consultation." I mentioned that none of us here at the Lyric were consulted. Mind you the Lyric is inextricably linked with LBHF and theatre management are always in contact with various people from LBHF. Mark then said the appropriate signage was a half mile away. He then also directed me to signs on Glenthorne which is down the hill and around the corner. His colleague repeated his words. Me being me, I counted the signs on Glenthorne. Sixteen. All stipulating site-specific conditions. I asked Mark why he's telling me to reference signs when the sign with the information that was there was removed as opposed to updated which it should have been. They have been issuing tickets relentlessly. It is now a revenue trap. Change the CPZ all you want. But you must inform the public in a way that the council itself has demonstrated. A reasonable expectation that, as on all adjacent streets, site-specific signage will inform effectively, easily, fairly, openly. Sixteen signs versus zero. Sorry, the computer says no.Mark said it was good for business to change the CPZ. Just prior to seasonal influx? With panto at the Lyric catering to families visiting? No. False. I said it is not beneficial to any business nor visitor to create a hostile environment which is precisely what they have done. I don't care how much money you have, if you get a PCN it leaves a bad taste and you're less likely to visit for fear it will happen again. Especially when there is nothing to indicate what you've done is a contravention. So the annual panto now has an added punitive component.I also mentioned to Mark the sheer irony that he expected people to park, do a quick Google followed by a deep dive into the minutia of parking regulations on one street when they know precisely what to do on several streets mere meters away. In the end the PCN was cancelled. It should never have been issued in the first place. When possible, I have taken to speaking with people perplexed by the PCN on their windshield. I tell them how to go about getting it cancelled mentioning there is precedent.Note to LBHF: when you mess with business, business will mess with you.

David Lesniak ● 37d

Oh I remember it well, Michael.When those of us who advocated for a better design for CS9 were blasted with all manner of vitriol, we just wanted to know why the design which touted the business park as a destination didn't, in fact, get people to the business park. Anti-cycling is what it was called. Go figure.I can't wrap my head around why TfL can't get it right. Nor the mayor. Nor the various cycle campaigners. There should be consistency and continuity throughout London. TfL wouldn't change rails from one tube station to another, why all the mishmash with a new layer of infrastructure? New cycle paths in Kings Cross are painted blue. They're easy to spot. Complete segregation like in Chiswick is not. Why not paint all cycle lanes blue? Or make the cycle logo blue when a lane doesn't exist? I feel safer in Hammersmith than I do in Chiswick. At least in W6 you're adjacent to every other road user and easier to spot. In Chiswick I think the detachment creates a false sense of security for both cyclist and driver. As for connecting to Hounslow town center. That made me laugh. Why connect any town centers when the e-bike provisions are so sporadic? There is no such thing as connection now that Katherine Dunne botched her remit. And people like you, Michael, can't be bothered to advocate for actually connecting things. You can't even connect Hammersmith to Chiswick apart from one awful provider. And the Hounslow Cycle Campaign remains silent. Completely laughable. Other boroughs offer a choice of up to three providers to cover all bases. Perhaps even more.

David Lesniak ● 51d