Forum Topic

More ANPR cameras to be installed LTN 30 is a problem

Thank you Ealingtoday for reporting this. I am not a road traffic professional but I worked in the safety industry and carried a Home Office warrant for some time and took courses at university in the psychology of perception. I've held a clean licence for 55years.I would strongly recommend the council review this ANPR camera at least before rushing to put in more. 1)There are 4 routes to the barrier in Culmington Road yet only one speed camera warning sign. That one is positioned after the camera at the barrier. In normal life warnings are given BEFORE the danger i.e. before the camera that allows the message to sink-in and appropriate action be taken.  The camera sign is often linked to speed cameras and many motorists probably check their speedometer when they see one; a dangerous detraction. 2)There are warning signs "No access to Culmington Road ahead except cycles". For strangers that means nothing. One sign is even sited IN Culmington Road. Strangers won't know what it means and even the Council have made 3 road name mistakes in public notices. These are "unique signs" and have to be interpreted by the motorist. Standard signs showing road closed ahead would have been cheaper and carried more information at a glance. Motorists absorb standard signs without thinking; subliminally. There should have been standard signs on each of the 4 limbs approaching this junction. To be continued

Arthur Breens ● 1794d36 Comments

Nicely done 😊✅

N V Brooks ● 1774d

There seem to be moore of them about than we need.

Simon Hayes ● 1774d

Oh how true that is.A little like the leading pro LTN campaigner on another social media site who demonises cars at every opportunity but who is routinely seen loading his bikes onto the roof rack of his large estate car to take them out of the area.Oh the hypocrisy.

N V Brooks ● 1774d

Oh how true that is.A little like the leading pro LTN campaigner on another social media site who demonises cars at every opportunity but who is routinely seen loading his bikes onto the roof rack of his large estate car to take them out of the area.Oh the hypocrisy.

N V Brooks ● 1774d

But why change bad habits?Some people are so desperate to eradicate the curse of the motor vehicle they are willing to simply make things up to suit that purpose. Yet these same people frequently rely on those very motor vehicles to allow them to enjoy the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed.How very strange!

Simon Hayes ● 1774d

Of course there is such a thing as a right of way. An easement or right-of-way is very clearly defined and in English law. Try Googling it preferably before you post inaccuracies.

N V Brooks ● 1774d

There is no such thing as "right of way".

Paul James ● 1774d

Well, Rosco, that depends if your South Acton councillors even live in Ealing any more, let alone South Acton.

Simon Hayes ● 1776d

Oh yes, very much agree, some CON Ward Councilors really are excellent. But the Leadership sucks, it's non existent.They're so good in fact that frustrated Residents in Labour held Wards have to turn to these few CON Councillors and a couple of LIBDEMers if they have a grievance and want anything actually done.Great lot most of these Labour Ward Councillors. They're held in particularly high regard in South Acton I believe?    🤣

Rosco White ● 1776d

Not all the local Conservative councillors are useless. There are some who do a really excellent job among the timeservers — the group seems to lack effective leadership. The best thing they could do for the people of Ealing affected by LTNs is make it plain to their own party's leadership that policies that they have initiated are doing a great deal of harm. Either Ealing Council are faithfully following national guidelines or they are not. In both cases the situation can only be permanently resolved by central government action.

Gordon Southwell ● 1776d

"The brief spell the Conservatives controlled the borough failed to convince people they were any better."Are you kidding?! The CONS under Jason Stacey were a country mile better than this lot, and proved it, beyond the shadow of a doubt.No argument obvs that the electorate spoke, but "the people of Ealing" I think can arguably be reduced down to Those Who Vote Labour Without Understanding There's A Difference Between National And Local Politics, Those Who Are Dependent on Council Benefits, and Students?You're probably right about Labour winning again though, Local Conservatives are beyond useless these days.

Rosco White ● 1778d

Philippa Hi,The council has a problem. They don't know what they are doing. They haven't a clue. The accident rate on roads within LTN 30 is near to zero. That's the recorded rate. Old ladies and gents tripping or falling with broken wrists ankles etc are not recorded. It is the same with deep potholes and cyclists hitting them and crashing at speed. Not recorded. To make things safer you should prohibit walkers over 70 or make them carry a bone density certificate and sign roads that have been cleared of potholes. There are plenty of these accidents.They are not recorded so there is no data. Sometimes people take the council to court. But not often so no data.The places where accidents occur are concentrated on the main roads. Logically we should cordon off Northfield Ave...That's all rubbish but not any more rubbish than the council have been churning out. And no one has come out to counter my arguement about the cameras being (unlike the speed cameras dressed in yellow) a form of ENTRAPMENT. Not written into English Law but actively disliked by judges. If you want to control carbon dioxide production you do it by logical and accurate persuasion. You have to have the people on your side by not felling 30 outof 50 trees in Dean Gardens and not knocking down Perceval House wasting millions of kWh of embedded energy.

Arthur Breens ● 1779d

We need some traffic calming and speed cameras since there are motorists who still speed along the road and straight through the barriers.The area between Walpole and Lammas Parks need to be redesigned to make crossing from one park to the other much easier and safer.It isn't just the Council's project.https://www.local.gov.uk/search/all/Low+traffic+neighbourhoods

Philippa Bond ● 1779d

'How on earth, and WHO, put this shower in power???'The people of Ealing did. An election was held in 2018. They won by a substantial majority. The brief spell the Conservatives controlled the borough failed to convince people they were any better. I suspect they'd win again as the LTNs have been concentrated in wards they don't control or can afford to lose and retain a majority.

Andy Jones ● 1779d

"Maybe some in Ealing Council are sensing that they aren’t always getting it right."I very, very much doubt that Mr Hayes, as I'm sure you also V much doubt.Much more likely is that there is further conniving and planning of their next diktat to screw residents over.How on earth, and WHO, put this shower in power???

Rosco White ● 1779d

A small victory Arthur, but welcome. Maybe some in Ealing Council are sensing that they aren’t always getting it right.Let’s see what happens on February 12.

Simon Hayes ● 1779d

News today that the green signs showing ROAD OPEN TO at our junction in Culmington Road has been removed. This helped to make this crossing between the two parks dangerous to pedestrians because it countered the sign indicating no cars or flying motorcyclists. Any dilemna placed on a driver causes lack of concentration. That puts pedestrians at risk who are starting to see this as a zebra/planter crossing where they have the right of way. I complained about this on 12 December 2020. Tortoises away.

Arthur Breens ● 1780d

& en route to wherever, the conniving, fiddling, thieving, lieing sods line their pockets with expense claims

Peter Yale ● 1780d

I have to agree about politicians. I do however feel that so much is wrong I am begining to run out of steam. I read these blogs and pick up real sincerity and then see the politicians ignoring it completely.

Nicholas Beard ● 1780d

Couldn't agree more. Many politicians when they get into power immediately behave like Dictators and start imposing their own personal agendas on the electorate. Whilst keeping a sharp eye out for that stepping stone into a lucrative Directorship/Consultancy in the City,  or maybe a Directorship/Consultancy with a friendly Social Housing or Property Development Company they have worked "closely" with.  😉What a very, VERY sad state we are in.

Rosco White ● 1781d

Ealing Council like many other local authorities that introduced LTN's were lambasted by Hugo Griffiths writer for Auto Express 26/01/21...Read the article on their Website; Exclusive:the high cost of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods. Just shows the incompetence of these people who run the show whether its Boris or Julian they do more harm than good.

Nicolas Ozegovic ● 1781d

A majority? A majority of people have cars?

Paul James ● 1783d

'We are seriously in a Mini Communist State.'Hmm...Firstly, I don't think it is correct to say that these changes are being driven by the demands of a few cyclists. They don't really specifically benefit cyclists and, if your normal route is one onto which traffic is being displaced, the LTNs are bad news. Don't fall into the trap of thinking that active travel warriors who are particularly vocal on social media speak for all people who cycle. The minority who are in favour of these schemes are more likely to be people whose road has been made quieter by traffic being diverted into somebody else's.Secondly, it needs to be remembered that this is not a policy that originated with London Borough of Ealing. The LTNs are primarily the brainchild of Andrew Gilligan who is the transport advisor to the Prime Minister. They are the only game in town in terms of getting funding and the council would have to find savings from elsewhere if it didn't bid for funding for projects the nature of which are determined by central government.The bigger question in my view is how deliberate is the transformation of these schemes into what were meant to be temporary trials with no fixed infrastructure into ones with expensive camera enforcement. The capital expenditure on these cameras has ultimately been provided by central government and represents an effective endorsement of this change of policy. The report on this site about the PCN revenue brought in so far by these schemes shows starkly just how much money will be raised. This will fill a substantial hole in the council's coffers. Central government appear to be conniving in this and they will be delighted that the pressure to provide proper funding to councils will be reduced and they will be getting all the blame for what is happening. Until the Conservatives start taking some of the heat for what is happening here, there is little chance of a policy reversal.

Mark Evans ● 1785d

I agree with your observations on non standard traffic signs. Read the highway code (it is possible to register your e mail for highway code updates) and that should get you through. Signs that dont appear in the highway code are a recipe for accidents.

Nicholas Beard ● 1785d

Residents should take a very long, hard look at the amount of REAL "say" we actually have in this "Democracy", on anything, under our Labour controlled LBE.The answer is, NONE, Zilch, Zero.We are seriously in a Mini Communist State.

Rosco White ● 1786d

They can take the criticism because they are making millions from motorists whether it is parking fines, LTN fines it doesn't matter we are a cash cow and unfortunately it will only get worse and not as Tony  Blair said in his parrty slogan "things can only get better" dream on...

Nicolas Ozegovic ● 1786d

You are, Mr Thorpe, absolutely CORRECT!!Welcome to a localised version of Communism.

Rosco White ● 1786d

without going into the details of each scheme and its legality or fairness, surely there's an overriding principle here, and that is that a local council exists solely to represent the needs of all of its constituents. to declare war on a significant number, probably a majority, of these people is fundamentally wrong - to issue fines of £130 for driving down one's own road as we have done for decades for no discernible benefit is wrong. what are our "leaders" thinking when they ride roughshod over the rights of residents who elected and pay for them? Ealing and other councils should look up the meaning of "democracy" in the dictionary and start to deliver true representation instead of continuing to act so dogmatically - just how can they continue to justify this policy against so much opposition?

Graham Thorpe ● 1786d

“After all, it was only a small group of cycling fanatics”...untrue and does not do much to engender people to your point of view.There are differing opinions on LTNs as with most things.  Stimulating debate, respecting opinions, agreeing to disagree - all good things to lead with. Labelling people, over generalisation and emotively expressing anger - not to be encouraged.

James Putland ● 1786d

The signs that matter at the modal filters are the "Motor Vehicles Prohibited" signs. The road closed signs are/were just for information and I don't think would have any legal status, in fact, they have been taken off many of the filters.No Entry signs can't be used on two way roads as they would also ban non motorised vehicles. An "Except Cycles" sign can only be added to them on one way streets with a contraflow cycle lane.

Paul James ● 1793d

There are strict rules on signage required to enforce any decriminalised road traffic offence (eg CPZs). The LTN restrictions are effectively No Entry orders and will be need to comply with the same signage requirements. I'm no expert but failure to put up signs before passing through the no entry point will make any ticket issued unenforceable, if challenged.

Vlod Barchuk ● 1793d

The signage in many of Chiswick’s schemes is poor, confusing or just inadequate.But thanks, Paul James, for your eloquent interjection. Clearly someone who only drives ‘when necessary’.The green signs aren’t officially approved signs and should’ve been removed. The road isn’t for people to stroll along. That’s what we have pavements for, if you can avoid the cyclists there.The point Arthur was making was that the set up of these LTNs is confusing for some drivers. ANPR is there for enforcement and how sad if the signage isn’t quite up to the job of deterring those terrible law breaking drivers (vans, motorbikes and lorries included). How nice for Ealing Council to have a bit of extra cash coming in.They have form in the crap signage stakes. Longfield Avenue raked in hundreds of thousands of pounds when the restrictions were put in there. The signage was deemed to be inadequate, particularly for night time driving, and a number of fines were cancelled.The simple answer would be to remove the bollards and planters and revert back to having open roads. After all, it was only a small group of cycling fanatics who wanted them in the first place. According to the council’s latest report 77 percent want the LTNs removed. Don’t worry, you will still be able to cycle to your hearts content.

Simon Hayes ● 1794d

A friend of mine received a penalty notice from Hounslow Council after he drove into Turnham Green Terrace. He objected saying the signs in the High Street were inadequate which I agreed with after I had walked down the High Street to check for him. The fine was rescinded but how many other people had money taken off them by these self appointed clowns? Next year we all have the chance to get rid of these power hungry little people at the polls, don't pass it by!

peter king ● 1794d

As many predicted, once in place never removed.There is also a proposal from Hounslow council to stop non residential traffic driving from Boston Rd up Swyncombe Ave.Saw an article but not heard much more, suffice to say they are the winners of the most ludicrous road scheme in London, Chiswick High St debacle

Peter Yale ● 1794d

Sorry, if you can't check your speed on your speedo safely whilst driving you shouldn't be driving.Road closed ahead isn't really enough information, what road is closed ahead?

Paul James ● 1794d

3)After taking a number of photos approaching this barrier from the south 1200mm (drivers eye level) above the road surface, at a distance you are presented with a clear road. The road is obviously not closed. OK there are planters but we've all seen pocket parks. Hey and the gap is wide. For some time and distance the driver impression is of a clear road with a wide gap to pass through. Parked cars and a road hump sign obliterate a clear view of a motorists no-entry sign and camera sign. Quite suddenly you are on top of all these signs. Then you have to read and interpret them because they are not the standard signs imbedded in your brain. That is the moment of hesitation. One sign in green (invented by the council) tells you Road Open. Another says enforcement starts 7 Jan 2020. At this stage you may have other information from your husband or satnav. You may even be wondering where you should go now. You can observe drivers doing just this.4) This lack of proper warning, conflicting messages and resultant dilemma makes this major crossing place for pedestrians a dangerous place. The role of the Council is to remove danger by design. They removed the clear motorists view and reduced driver concentration and removed the middle reservation putting in danger all those crossing from Walpole Park to Lammas Park. The official council response from D. Patel is that drivers should not cross the barrier. Icebergs shouldn't have chosen to drift into the path of the Titanic.5) Given the current signage, the offence of a driver passing through the gap is due in part to the LBE transport department incompetence and confusing messages. It is not due solely to the stupidity or the wilfulness of the motorist. Please tell me what you think.

Arthur Breens ● 1794d