AdamTait

I appreciate all the arguments made here, unfortunately I haven't had time to read them all so apologies if I repeat any points already made. As a resident of a road within the potential cpz I'd like to make a few points. The argument that people who would potentially be within the cpz would choose to not pay and instead park their cars in other people's roads is ridiculous. The very point here is that residents within the proposed cpz are so fed up of not being able to park in their own roads and instead are having to park in roads a fair walk away from their homes is the reason they are now willing to pay to be able to park on their own streets. If they were going to park in roads other than their own to avoid paying, there would be no request for the cpz. The parking near the station has been an issue for so long that the residents are no willing to pay, if that's what it takes. There was a remark made that the parking problem is not from commuters using the station, but is rather people parking here to work in ED. I have lived on Derwent Grove for over 20 years, and can tell you that the parking issue far predates the arrival of mass commerce in ED. Long before there were businesses in the area that people would be commuting to work at, there was an issue of parking by the station. Additionally, it strikes me as odd that if the parking spaces are being filled by people commuting to work in ED, they should choose to park largely in the street around the station. Shouldn't it be the responsibility of the ED businesses to provide parking spaces for their employees, and coordinate with the council to arrange this? There also seems to be some misinformation about the proposal being spread around Lordship Lane, leading to businesses putting up posters opposing the cpz based on unfounded concerns. A brief conversation with a shop owner on lordship lane, who had an anti-cpz poster in their window, revealed that they were opposed because they didn't want parking changes made to Northcross Road (where the business is based) and the installation of parking meters. Neither of these things are proposed in the cpz. Once the actual proposal was explained to the owner they said they were in fact in fair of the proposal. I wonder who is responsible for this misinformation, presumably the shop owner did not simply guess at the details of the proposed cpz. Perhaps it would be pertinent for someone within the council to distribute a simple and clear explanation of what is actually proposed. It would be a shame if the final decision was influenced by people campaigning against something that was different to what is in fact proposed. It seems that there is an opinion going around that this cpz is some sly plan by the council to bleed money out of people. This is simply not the case, it is the last ditch attempt by residents who have been here a long time and have tried time and again to solve the problem of parking on their streets. It has now got to the point where the y are willing to pay to be able to park near their homes. Shouldn't the first step in this process be to ask the residents of the effected street ONLY if they would be willing to pay for parking permits, or if they would rather continue to put up with having to pass several street away from their homes? I know for a fact that the residents of the effected streets would happily accept the majority vote, and if the majority of effected residents would rather continue to have to park a distance away than pay for a permit, then the discussion would need to go no further. If they would rather pay for the permit, then perhaps it would be time to consider the effects on the wider community. Finally, I have a slightly more personal remark to make (and as a personal point, feel free to ignore it, but I feel obliged to express it). I feel the way people in this area are going about this issue is typical of what East Dulwich has become, and it saddens me. It really seems that the sentiment is "we know there is a problem for the people living near the station, but it's not my problem and I want to keep it that way. Let's keep it your problem." What a disgraceful way for a community to comport itself. In fact, it means we are not a community at all, but rather a collection of individuals only looking out for themselves, who just happen to live near each other. Perhaps 15 years ago the area didn't have the gloss it has now, perhaps it was slightly rougher, but at least it felt like a community. At least it felt that the members of that community cared about each others problems, or at the very least empathized with each others complaints. In what way is it fair that people who have lived here for 30 years, elderly people and families should have to walk three blocks to and from their cars because they are never able to park on their roads? Shouldn't a community be trying to solve the communities problems together, for everyone, rather than just ensuring that one part of this community shoulders the problem consistently? If the concern is that the cpz would move the parking problem (whether it's caused by commuters using the station of people working in East Dulwich) to another area (by the way, this seems odd as the cpz would allow residents within the zone to park in their own road rather than using the spaces in other people's roads...) then why aren't we pressing the council to provide a station car park, or why aren't businesses pressing the council to provide their employees with parking spaces? It really is sad to see how little people in this area care about the problems faced by other members of this community. Perhaps I'm in a minority, but I really didn't want this area to turn in to another Dulwich Village, but is apparently what's happening. The classy boutiques and expensive eateries might make ED more up market and desirable, but it really seems that people who live here now just do not care about any one else, and yet will still expect help once they have a problem. I'm sure there are those that will have a sharp response for me, so have at it, but I've been here a long time and I've watched it change, for better and (shamefully) worse. Sorry to go on a bit, but it's been on my mind for some time.