gsirett

Is anybody going to the Dulwich Community council tonight to tell them that you're against this scheme? I REALLY want to go, but feel that my time may be better spent collecting signitures for our petition (as we only have until Friday) . If nobody else is able to attend, then I will go along 7pm, St Barnabas Church community centre, Calton Ave

Funny that, your main concern so far seems to have been to do everything you can to promote this scheme Have you finally started listening? or is it the local political abyss that's winding you in now?

Who's denying a problem James? The 45 people who, in 3 years, have asked you to introduce this? Or the 1000's of people who's lives that your scheme is about to make worse. I think you owe the people who voted for you some honesty: this is not about those 45 people, it is a political agenda to reduce car usage ( which I don't necessarily disagree with), faciltated by a new revenue stream for the council. Just start being honest with people please

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > TheRoses, > I honestly don't think the Labour run council will > increase parking permit fees this side of the 2014 > local elections. James You and honest in the same post on this subject?.....the words don?t mix . I?m sure, over many, issues you are a politician of the highest integrity, but on this subject you have demonstrated blatant campaigning to meet your political agenda and I think such behaviour is shameless. As an elected representative , your careful selection of data, you being complicit in a limited and biased consultation, your constant repetition of the positives (whilst neglecting any negatives) means you have completely lost my resect and that of many others. Why on earth would I ever believe you when you tell people that charges won't increase

NEWSFLASH from Grove Vale Library (I did the following calculation with the nice chap from Southwark in the library yesterday) There are currently safe 691 parking spaces available in the proposed CPZ area (although, amazingly, they did not have this figure anywhere. I had to work it our with the help of the very nice council chap) I think the figure being banded around is is c.20% commuters (although, according to said nice chap, that does also include the girls working in GM?s, some of the people working at the hospital, and the nice man from Caf? Mirto)........so 20 % of 691 is 138. Equals 138 commuters. This leaves (stay with me on this)....... 553 residents are currently able to park in the zone. The scheme proposes 507, yes you read it right, 507 residents spaces THAT IS A REDUCTION IN 46 PARKING SPACES FOR RESIDENTS. Residents of proposed CPZ area.......still sure you?re lives are going to get better?

Bobby P Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I've attempted to set up an E-petition against the > CPZ on Southwark Council's site. The petition > has to be approved by the Council, so am waiting > to hear back on whether they approve it. > Bobby, I tried to do EXACTLY the same on Wednesday. Haven't heard a peep from Southwark Council after the email saying "we'll consider your petition". Strange that. Is soutwharks shameless promotion of this, whilst maintaining a veil of "consultation", verging on corrupt ? I don't want to accuse people of such things, but "if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck.........it's probably a duck"

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi gsirett, > I'd encourage as many interested people as > possible to visit the public exhibition tomorrow > at Grove Vale library starting at 10am. Council > officers are bringing wadges of materials and > evidence so should be able to answer very detailed > questions. And, of course, they will be fair/balanced materials that take into account the disadvantages and negative impacts too? (just like all of your literature I?ve seen on this so far)? And they'll be presented by council officials who want to get the best overall solution for the whole community? (just like the 3 people for SC who?ve contacted me on this [including you]) And that evidence will be based on a very detailed, balanced data-set that hasn?t set out to look for the positives (oh, and takes into account the effect on neighbouring roads and the wider community)? then great - democracy at work :))

mastershake Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > all those saying 'there might be a problem but a > CPZ isn't the answer' - well then - what is? Maybe Mastershake, there isn't an answer...... Maybe living in a densly populated area area 4 miles from central london, you shouldn't expect the right to park directly outside your home. I often can't, so I have the same issues as you, and I'm outside the proposed scheme. I accept it as part of city life. I've lived inside a CPZ before....same problem, just cost me >?100 PA and made life really difficult What we all know WILL happen is that my situation is going to get much worse if this scheme goes ahead, along with 1000's of other people around the fringes. The only solution to THAT problem will be to create another CPZ,and then repeat until we join the edge of the one proposed in North Dulwich and SE LOndon is one big CPZ......i promise that you won't be as bothered about whether you have to walk 100m to your house then

This really scares me. I really scares me that something that is so clearly not going to work and wrong for the community can be steamrollered through by a bunch of people who seem to have just convinced themselves that it?s doing good. So many people on this thread, have made so many solid arguments against this proposal that I really cannot understand why our elected representatives seem intent on pushing this forward I?ve had contact from 3 different such representatives (James Barber on this forum, Barrie Hargrove and Paul Gallard) on the subject. They?ve all put forward sensible arguments, but every one of them have been a set of arguments heavily in favour of this scheme, telling me why it?s a good thing and how ?evidence has shown [x,y and z] I think they?re just trying to make a case. But why??? I?ve pasted Paul ?CPZ?s is what I do? Gallards response below. I feel that unless we, the people who will be affected, do all we can to stop this, that it?s just going to happen. So, please, please, please everybody make sure you write to: Barrie.Hargrove@southwark.gov.uk (he makes the decion) and COPY IN YOUR COUNCILLOR. Make sure you tell him/her that you insist your views, as an affected local resident, are taken into consideration. Tell them that their consultation method and data is not fit-for-purpose. Tell him where you live. Tell him your views cannot be ignored (cos that?s what hes trying to do) Make sure you ask your councillor to ask specific questions on your behalf. There?s so many good points on this thread: but we need to make sure these get pushed forward to our democratic representatives) Make sure you complete the comment on the consultation: http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200308/current/2280/grove_vale_area/1 Finally: anybody who is able to attend the Dulwich Community meeting on Monday, do so Response from Paul Gallard The majority of the streets around East Dulwich station do not have parking controls. The absence of controls on the public highway means that anyone can park: for some people this is a positive whereas others find it an inconvenience. CPZs have been successfully introduced in many parts of the borough, across London and the UK as a tool to manage parking demand, enabling priority to be given to residents and visitors ahead of commuters. We regularly consult with residents after introduction of a CPZ and they tell us that parking is much easier and that they support the continuation of those controls. With a finite amount of kerb space available for parking, the council?s policies do support the introduction of CPZs, where residents are in agreement. We do this to manage the limited resource of kerb parking, typically when demand exceeds supply as is the case in streets close to East Dulwich station. CPZs are also widely acknowledged as a tool for traffic restraint. Getting the consultation area right is a fine (and subjective) balance and it is for that reason that we discuss it, before starting, with the community council. The council?s constitution sets out that, before consulting on a CPZ, we will discuss the consultation boundaries (and methods) with the local community council. For this project we reported to Dulwich Community Council on 15/9/2011 and Camberwell Community Council on 22/9/2011 . Consulting too large an area (ie asking people we know don?t have a parking problem) is a waste of the available budget. Consulting too small an area runs the risk that people around the edge feel they are excluded. Finding an edge isn?t straightforward and it?s important to consider that this is only a consultation. No decision has been taken to implement a CPZ and therefore there may not be any effect upon your street. It is normal practice to consult only with those within the consultation area. However, street notices are erected within the area to inform the local community that a parking consultation is taking place. The consultation is generating a high volume of correspondence from both residents and businesses inside and outside the consultation area. All comments made during the consultation period will be summarised and included in our consultation report. I expect the draft report to be presented to Dulwich and Camberwell Community Councils in January 2012 before a Key Decision is taken by the Cabinet Member for Transport, Environment and Recycling in early 2012. We will update our Grove Vale consultation webpage closer to these dates. You can keep up-to-date on Community Council items here or make a request to be on their agenda emailing list. Kind regards Paul GellardPublic realm projects (parking design)

Below, email response from Barrie Hargrove I feel like I'm being given, as my Grannie used to call it, "the cold flannel" "Go away, council tax payer, we'll decide whats right for you." Well, I've had a glass of St Emillion (1/2 price Sainsburys) and the gloves are OFF THIS SCHEME WON'T F**KIN WORK YOU FOOLS, IT WILL P*SS A LOAD OF PEOPLE OFF WHO WONT WANT TO VOTE FOR YOU ANY MORE. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE LISTEN TO WHAT EVERYBODY IS SAYING (and, oh, this doesn't have to mean that you're no longer "green") ====== "Thank you for your comments and concerns. I am copying in Tim Walker, our Senior Engineer, who is responsible for collating responses to the consultation. Both Tim and myself are essentially neutral on the outcome of this. As a responsible local authority we do recognise that the ever growing numbers of vehicles on our roads is becoming increasingly unsustainable and that restrictions on commuter parking is one way to combat this. However, our policy is to install Controlled Parking Zones only where residents want them. If the outcome of the consultation is that residents do not think the benefits of a CPZ outweighs the possible disbenefits"

garnwba Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > gsirey - your concern for those of us who are > currently affected by the parking problem is truly > touching...... Touche !! Of course I'm concerned. I live in the area, cycle down your road (I guess) every day, have to cross Melbourne Grove with my kids and use the station regualry, but................... I live on Trossachs Road, a Road already at parking capacity, a Road (along with many others) that are suddenly going to have the same problems as you. I already (like you) often have to park on the next steet. Doesn't that come with living in London? There, I've got that out of the way, there is a definate hint of a NIMBY about me. But that is not what this is just about. If I thought this scheme would deliver an overall benefit to the ED community, then I'd be for it, but it won't @garnwba : do you really think that you're suddenly going to be able to park outside your house every day? Speak to people who live in CPZ's and see what they say.

James You are correct, Cllr Toby Eckersley is a councillor for Village Ward. He is also MY councillor.I live in Village Ward. That is why I have asked him to put forward MY frustrations. I live on a Road that is 200m from the proposed CPZ. People on MY Road will be greatly impacted by this CPZ. People in MY Road will not be able to park. People in MY Road will, no doubt, be part of the furture expansion of this scheme. People on MY Road have had no communication about the consultation. People on MY Road overwhelmingly do not want this scheme to go ahead But, it's not all about ME is it? I'm only one of 1000's of people who live around the edges of this scheme. Only 1 of 100's of people who are venting their frustration over this Cllr Eckersley is not trying to stir. He asked me to attend the meeting as I contacted him with my frustrations, one of which is that the consultation is flimsy at best ("sorry,we haven't got enough money to tell anybody who may be negativly affected" ) I am unable to attend, so he asked me if anybody else could attend Your attitude to this subject seems to reflect the attitude of Southwark so far "lets only worry about the people inside the CPZ, don't bother about everybody else" My guess, and it is only a guess, is that you've had stacks of correspendance about this and that it is overwhelmingly against this scheme (just a guess) . I completly respect the hard work you do as a coucillor (and your embracing of this forum) but this scheme is badly thought out, I believe it will not achieve it's objectves, it's proposed based on poorly conducted research, it will change our area, it will lead to extensions. Most importantly I think, put to a vote, the people of the area are overwhelmingly are against it So, maybe Cllr Eckersley is stirring, but at least he's LISTENING. I'd take his stiring any day of the week if it gets this scheme stopped James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi gsirey, > Cllr Toby Eckersley is one of the councillors for > Village ward and clearly trying to stir things. No > part of the proposed CPZ is in Village ward. The > western part of Melbourne Grove from East Dulwich > Grove to Lordship Lane is in his ward. He was very > much in favour of extending the Herne Hill CPZ. > The meeting is not planned to talk about this CPZ, > it is not on the agenda, as the consultation > doesn't end until the 11 November. The soapbox 5 > min section could be used but you have a > consultation which will have more import.

All There is a meeting of the Dulwich Community Council next Monday 7th November, 7pm, St Barnabas Church community centre, Calton Ave. This CPZ is on the agenda. I have been asked by my councillor, Toby Eckersley, to get people along to this meeting "with a soapbox". Toby shares the same concerns with the people on this forum, but does need his constitutants to play their part and support the case not to have this CPZ by attedning the meeting. Toby is a councillor for Vilage Ward, so ED station is not technically within his patch, but many roads neighbouring the scheme are.

Southwark have their own petition feature on their website. Google: southwark council petition I'd love to get one up and running (struggling for time to set it up myself) - any volunteers?

James I DO NOT WANT A CONTROLLED PARKING AREA IN EAST DULWIUCH I've never written to you in any context before and, like many others, really value your input on this forum. I am writing now because I know you listen. And I fear that, in relation to this propsoed CPZ, Southwark are not going to be listening very well. I want to tell you that I am ABSOLUTELY against the proposed CPZ at East Dulwich station and ask, as a councillor that you put forward my views and the overwhelming views of the people on this forum.....we do not want this CPZ. Please do the right thing, and listen. Do not hide behind the "you elected me" nonsense and also do not eat the pre-determined results of the "consultation process" I think it could also be argued that the views expresssed here will be a much better sample of the feeling in the area than the very limited, and poorly publised, consultation process currently in progress by southwark council That process is only consulting the reletivly small number of people who live within the proposed CPZ. I find it quite unbelievable, that the consultation does not intend to take on the views of any other members of the community....like people living on neighbouring roads for example. Or local businesses. Or local schools. Or the local hospital. To re-iterate, I am no "car nut" and generally respect parking restrictions as a necessesity in this city. But this proposed CPZ is wrong, it will not benefit the overall community. All it will do is raise money for Soutwark council (and inconvienience a lot of people) I am not a "pro-car" fanatic. I have a car, but I mainly cycle and use public transport.

I do feel that there needs to be a joined up protest about this (or could we ask Councillor Barber to make a judgement call on public feeling ???) Does anybody know if there is some form of official petition tool that everybody could use? Surely if there was a petition recording peoples postcodes (of course local postcodes) that got 1000's of results (which I guess it would) then that could be used to refute the findings of the very narrow bull&$%^t consultation process? If not, I used this to contact my local councillors easily As an idea, should be all write to our councillors and insist that they make strong representations against this scheme?

I don't subscribe the general theories that all parking enforcement = just a revenue generator for local authority, but after reading the information provided here and having experienced similar schemes, I believe that?s purely what?s going on. Here's my two-penneth: 1. Everybody I know who lives in a CPZ, still has trouble parking. The advantages of such a scheme provided in the consultation document are just nonsense. 2. A friend in Lambeth recently had her annual cost increased from ?120/year to ?180/year (just happens to coincide with the authirty?s need to tighten it?s belt)?.. No justification, just a 50% hike to carry on parking outside her flat. 3. The pressure on parking AROUND the proposed CPZ will only increase (thats where I live). So, I guess in a year or so Southwark will find that they have "received feedback from residents indicating that parking demand has increased in uncontrolled streets" and we'll have another consultation, this time for the surrounding streets. Give it a few years and everybody will be paying to park their car in SE22

Barry First ? I would like to echo what many others have said here ? it is fantastic to see somebody so committed and genuinely interested in making a difference ( Or could it be that you are in fact some sort of automated software developed by Southern, designed to give the impression that they really care ;-) ) I travel at peak times from ED to LBG and can?t buy a season ticket because I only travel 4-6 times a week. My point: there have been many comments around the ticket office and ticket machine at ED not being always available when they should be. I can see that you?re going to great extents to try to improve this, but I simply don?t believe that (on the basis that there is only one machine and one person) you are ever going to be able to make this perfect. Machines break, people need to go to the loo, and, unless you have multiple machines/people, it?s always going to happen . To a certain extent, I?m prepared to live with this. But what I am not prepared to live with is the ?penalty fare lottery? when I get to LBG without a ticket on these occasions. Every time I have to queue at the excess fares window, I break into cold sweats because it seems completely random as to whether they are going to accept my story with a smile or I am going to have to have a 10 minute row about the fact that the ticket office was closed. I know you have systems in place to allow the revenue inspectors to check, but on many occasions the office has been closed (or the machine not working) and they have been told otherwise (I?m guessing the office hasn?t been ?officially? closed ? or could it be that the staff don?t want to admit to closing the office briefly?) It normally only gets resolved when a whole group of people gang up on them and the power of the mob persuades them. I?ve even considered taking a photo of the office when it?s closed just to show the revenue inspector at the other end This probably happens to me once every 6-8 weeks (and, bearing in mind I only make 4-6 journeys a week, it probably happens to other more often). Some people here may say I?m being soft, but I do find it incredibly stressful, knowing I?m in the right and being Is there any way that you can make this whole process less stressful? There used to be a permit to travel machine ? that was perfect because I could show intent to pay but it hasn?t worked for years

I've been going there for years (occasionally) It used to be good - the staff at least seemed to know a little about food and how to make a good coffee The last time I went (about 4 weeks ago) - the staff seemed to have all been replaced by a bunch of teenagers who were poorly trained, and didn't know the first thing about the menu. My tea turned up - must have had a total of 3 leaves in it (and i like a strong cuppa). Asking for a few more leaves to be added seemed to complelty I've been going there for years (occasionally) It used to be good - the staff at least seemed to know a little about food and how to make a good coffee The last time I went (about 4 weeks ago)all had changed - the staff seemed to have all been replaced by a bunch of teenagers who were poorly trained, and didn't know the first thing about the menu. My tea turned up - must have had a total of 3 leaves in it (and i like a strong cuppa). Asking for a bit more tea to be added to the pot seemed to completely confuse our the teenager - he just couldn?t work that one out (so brought me another pot of weak tea ? which they then tried to charge us for) I had to ask two of them to stop them dancing (not proper dancing ? more wiggling) next to our table to the pumping techno (and don?t get me going on that) To cap it off, I watched them slicing up cakes for people and...wait for this...licking the knife between cuts. I don?t blame them - they clearly hadn?t been trained and had no experience in working in a cafe and I?m sure a lot of these things will be put right by the management but I won?t be going back until they get their act together