gm99

@MsB I'll second that. I had to clear up what I think was a smashed water glass from the road outside our house last week after the recycling men had been.

Conceivably a survey of parking could cross-reference number plates of parked cars with DVLA data about where the cars are registered to establish what proportion of cars are visiting/commuters rather than local/residents/businesses.

It is early days and these things must be quite context specific. It seems reasonable to think that in the particular case of the Lucas Gardens area a mix of commuters and residents have been displaced. In terms of the former, the Town Hall and other council offices are down the road, King's College/Maudsley are a 12 min walk away and Peckham Rye and Denmark Hill stations 10mins. As to the residents, I could easily imagine many not getting round to buying their permit in time for day 1 - especially with parking available nearby. We'll see how things bed in. Where context is less of an issue is that displacement was forseeable, those of us just outside the CPZ were not consulted, and we are now apparently accommodating a moving problem. Meanwhile it appears that the CPZ has gone overboard leaving empty roads. Surely a reasonable objective of CPZs would be to even out the impact of parking? I just hope the council agree to at least revisit the hours of operation if things remain like this.

Update on the Lucas Garden CPZ (0830-1830 Mon-Fri): Day 1: parking occupancy inside the CPZ at 4pm roughly 50%. Some roads more like 30%. Parking occupancy outside (South and East of) the CPZ now effectively at 100%. It will be interesting to see how this changes over time, e.g. if people have decided not to pay for permits because they reckon they can simply park a bit further away, or haven't yet got round to buying one. But my first impression is that a decision made on the basis of a consultation with a response rate of 21% of local residents appears to have overshot. Unfortunately, according to someone I spoke to at Southwark involved in implementation, there is no budget to review and the CPZ was not introduced under experimental laws.

The Lucas Gardens CPZ comes into force today in SE5 and we live just outside it and have at a stroke been swamped by displaced parking. One problem apparently solved. Problem moved. New problem created. Lack of joined up thinking wins again. Incidentally, in case any one had any doubt about the agenda of Southwark: Para 5, p. 1. My emphasis. One final thing, I can't see where the hours of operation were proposed and formally approved in the decision details, which makes me wonder whether the decision is valid and enforceable.

@Fazer71 Not sure if you have been to either Peckham or Camberwell recently, but my daily experience is that both are pretty busy and very much alive.

Bellenden Belle, you can make a complaint directly to Southwark's planning department.

The week before last on our doorstep at 20:30 - my wife answered the door, while I was trying to settle our daughter, to a young man holding a crate of tea-towels etc. Young man: 'Hello darling, nothing to worry about. I'm working with the youth and wondered if you would be interested in buying something' My wife: 'No thanks, we're just trying to get our daughter to sleep' Young man, aggresively: 'Come on, it's not like I'm asking to come in for dinner' My wife: 'No thank you' and closed the door. The young man then stood outside shouting and swearing.

@Gsirett In my humble opinion you should have respected the embargo and waited for formal publication, not least so that everyone can judge the full report on its merits and see the detailed analysis of responses and the Council's justifications for their proposals before the mud-slinging starts. As it stands, you have privileged yourself. (No, I don't work for the council) That said... @James Barber "...all of the proposed options have been consulted upon" Are you sure? I thought the consultation document asked respondents to choose between two-hour and all-day controls, not one hour 'experiments', and did not mention improving the road layout as a stand-alone option to alleviate parking pressure. It looks to me at least like Southwark are making this up as they go along, and whatever your position with respect to the merits or otherwise of CPZs that cannot be satisfactory.

You might be interested to read the report for the Lucas Gardens and Southampton Way 1st and 2nd stage CPZ consultation. This explicitly followed the introduction of the neighbouring East Camberwell CPZ, given concerns about displacement, which was duly found. In the case of the Lucas Gardens area, it is notable that not all streets consulted reported that they wanted a CPZ, and overall a majority of respondents indicated that they wouldn't change their mind even if a CPZ was introduced in neighbouring steets. Moreover, two streets that rejected the CPZ also had the highest response rate to the consultation (p. 15). Nevertheless, the recommendation being put forward is that they should be covered by a CPZ anyway, not least in order to 'provide a logical CPZ boundary'. So in that case the Council knows better. It is striking in the language of the report that the authors routinely acknowledge the fact that the profile of respondents is not representative of the local community (and in any case only a small minority actually responded at all), which rather implies that the consultation model employed is not suitable in the first place and begs the question whether using the reponses to form any kind of conclusion about local opinion has any validity at all (in the statistical sense)? Related, it might be argued that the statistics and graphics presented lend a false sense of accuracy. Finally, it may be relevant to note reference to a petition being taken into consideration - in this case in favour of the CPZ (pp. 4-5). [Edited for typo]

@ Chener Brooks Just to mention that my impression, formed from living just outside a different CPZ currently being introduced, is that not consulting 'impacted adjacent streets' is general policy and not specific to the ED consultation. Ideed, my recollection is this was something that the Lib Dems (Kate Heywood) campaigned on during the Brunswick Park bye-election in March 2011 - calling for the Lucas Gardens and Southampton Way consultation to be re-done specifically because it did not formally include neighbouring streets.

@Mummypig / Peterstorm1985 Southwark's own website refers to CPZs being 'usually introduced under experimental powers' and further states '[e]xperimental procedures also [allow] us to review the zone soon after introduction and make changes where necessary'. What they don't explain is what this means in practice, how any review would work, nor what the timeframe would be. Unless I have missed something, the consultation documents relating specifically to Grove Vale do not seem to mention any of this. (For the sake of disclosure, I don't live in or just outside the proposed ED station CPZ - but just outside another one)

Hi Mark/Admin, I started a thread on the Businesses etc forum, which includes a suggestion about introducing a more formal 'feedback' section. I would be interested in your views. Thanks, GM

I'm sceptical about the value for money arguments regarding replacing single with double glazing if the windows don't have to be replaced (e.g. because they are rotten beyond repair) and would be interested to hear any views informed by experience or professional expertise. [This is specifically about value for money - not sound insulation, the environment etc.] My thinking is: If 20% of heat loss for an average house is through the windows, and double glazing reduces that by a half, the maximum saving per year is around 10% of heating costs (c. ?80-100 on a 3-bed Victorian house?). Given the cost of replacing all windows with double glazing (?5-10k+?), and the more limited lifespan of double glazing (20-30yrs due to seals failing) it looks like it makes more financial sense to simply cut out draughts where possible and leave the heating turned up. Am I missing something?

They have - there are at least three threads relating to that subject in one way or another (here, here and here).

Full details of the proposed changes are on the TfL website. My reading of the details is that: Between Peckham Rye/Denmark Hill and Victoria there are currently 5 trains an hour peak, and 4 off-peak. By 2012 there will be 3 peak and 2 off-peak. If I understand correctly, the plans are for 4 trains an hour eventually, to be achieved by stopping trains from Ashford/Ramsgate/Gillingham (the so-called 'Option 7' proposal). Between P Rye and London Bridge it looks like there will be a reduction from 8 peak/6 off-peak trains to 6/4 in 2012, then rising again to 8/6 by 2015.

I have to broadly agree with Ziggy and others: the new blue wheelie bins are both a major eye sore (why such a zingy blue?) and a logistical nightmare. I am all in favour of both recycling and efficiency/cost effectiveness, but it now feels like the appearance of the front of my house (indeed the whole area) is being dictated by those concerns (and yet, if I want to change the appearance of my windows I need to apply for permission...). Does anyone (James Barber?) know whether the visual appearance of our neighbourhoods was considered before this decision was taken? At the very least I would imagine that a little bit of creativity could have come up with something much less visually (and spatially) intrusive. As an example, one of my neighbours has their green bin covered in a beech hedge pattern plastic wrap, which neatly disguises it (just googled and found e.g. this).

This exchange reminded me of something I saw Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall promoting on one of his programmes recently: http://www.landshare.net/ It's basically a brokerage service: if you have a plot you would be happy for someone to cultivate - or if you are interested in growing fruit and vegetables but don't have the space - then you can register online. There seems to be a distinct lack of plots in this corner of London. Shell - I wonder if the issue with your landlord is the potential for a contract/rent? If you were happy for someone to use your garden for free and without any contractual obligation would that make a difference?

Thanks again all - some very useful contributions. I am reassured that this process can work - as in the case of Indiana's neighbour, and another reader who PM-ed me. I believe that the bit of garden I would be interested in would not be considered suitable for building on, which I think means that the land values quoted by e.g. Huguenot would be much too high. For one thing there is no access (it is mid terrace and there is no rear alleyway). For another, I can't see anyone being given planning permission to build up to the back fence - which in any case would, I believe, add a greater additional volume to the property than is permitted. I suppose the point about land/property values is the incremental additional value of garden, and I don't feel qualified to answer that (any estate agents / surveyors reading this?). My sense is that gardens can be too small, which can detract from the attractiveness of a property, and perhaps in some cases too big and unwieldy, but it may not be much of a science. Neither applies in my case. The amount of the garden I would be interested to buy would also leave a perfectly useable garden for the current owners - just a smaller one than is the case today, perhaps 70%. The houses behind mine have bigger gardens than my side of the road - I guess I am basically hoping to reverse the ratio in my case, so nothing too drastic. Assuming that my neighbour might be interested to sell, that would seem to leave a finger in the air judgement about how much I want the extra space, and how much they need some extra cash...

Thanks all - some useful perspectives and ideas. In my case there is only a single fence between the two gardens, so that side of the practicalities would be quite easy to deal with. Pugwash, any chance you could reveal how much your neighbour offered (by PM if preferred). Similarly tllm2, how much did you offer - and how did you decide on that amount? If anyone else has any experience/advice they can share I would be most grateful. Cheers, GM

When I was growing up a friend's parents bought some garden from a neighbour who had more than he needed and was, presumably, happy to cash in. In the present case, the garden in question is like a bramble jungle and only used occasionally by the local foxes. I would love to have some extra space (for gardening not building) and perhaps the owner would be happy to turn part of their garden into cash. I'm just not sure how to go about it, or what would be a reasonable price, hence the request for advice. Incidentally, my guess is that the cost of moving house would be massively greater than the value of 15m2 of land - plus, I like my house and am happy where I am. Nothing ventured, nothing gained etc.

I am considering approaching a neighbour to offer to buy part (about 15m2) of their unused garden and wonder if anyone here on the EDF has done likewise and/or can offer any advice? In particular, guidance on an appropriate value, the legal process, and any pitfalls to avoid would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks, GM