Letters: Church Row bollards
- Credit: Polly Hancock
'A metallic crunch against the bollard'
Michael Daniels, Sparrows Herne, Bushey Heath, writes:
On July 17, 2021, I drove my Lexus CT200 along Church Row towards the High Street.
As I approached the width restriction adjacent to the church, I suddenly heard a metallic crunch as my near-side front wing was caught by the steel bollard and severely damaged.
Having driven through this restriction on previous occasions, until I read the article and saw the photographs in your newspaper on the number of vehicles being damaged at this point, I was not aware of the recent changes in the positioning of the bollard so it is hardly surprising that I too was a victim of this action which is proving extremely costly.
Needless to say I will be taking the matter up with the council.
Mick Farrant, full address provided, writes:
- 1 Family pay tribute to schoolgirl at West Hampstead bridge restoration
- 2 Fans pray for Bosco 'and his big stick' as he goes into surgery
- 3 Covid admissions on the rise at north London hospitals
- 4 Royal Free denies allowing Tory MP to influence medical decision
- 5 Bow Lock murder defendants blame each other for fatal attack
- 6 Heath patrols to increase after fisherman robbed at knifepoint
- 7 New Camden real-time pollution sensors show 'unhealthy' borough air
- 8 Alleged stalker sent '1,000 emails in a month’ to The Crown star Claire Foy
- 9 Bow Lock murder: Victim's two girlfriends give evidence at Old Bailey
- 10 Chalcots: Camden Council lawsuit ran up £6m legal bill in under three years
Your headline last week “Never move the bollards” was an instruction taken up by Camden Council some 20 years ago in Queen’s Crescent.
It installed two sets of rising traffic bollards at a reported total cost of £250,000. The supposed purpose was to keep vehicles out of the street market. But they never moved.
Now we have another scheme closing off the crescent 24/7 without bollards, only planters and camera, which levy fines on transgressing vehicle owners. The new and vigorously opposed scheme cost much less.
Of course the complete waste of money on the earlier scheme was “quietly forgotten” by local councillors.