Galileo

I tried last year to engage with Sainsburys about St Francis Park and they took ages to respond then said I should speak with the council. I need to respond to them and remind them it is their responsibility.

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes I believe the schools are Oakfield and Dulwich > Prep early years and the issue there is that the > catchment areas are huge so many people drive and > aren?t able to walk as Galileo suggests. But as > far as this council is concerned charging people > who send their children to private school is to be > encouraged! I love the fact that the council says > they would entertain not charging for parking if > people could suggest other revenue generating > opportunities....they have to be careful as when > we all see the wastage they are so famed for this > approach may backfire....like the 42k on the Love > Dulwich lampposts.... Are you arguing that a good reason for council car park not to impose parking charges is because it will put off parents from nearby private schools from driving their kids from far and wide and using the car parks for the local park in order to drop their kids at said schools? There are lots of valid arguments as to why a park car park should not have charges, but I don?t think that is one of the better ones!

?However for some people cycling/walking/scootering is simply not an option - those with nursery-aged children for eg.? I have three kids in nursery and school - we use the pram, scooters and bikes to get to nursery and school - the full drop off/pick-up routine takes us an hour twice a day. This keeps us fit as a family (too many kids to go to or afford a gym) except for the fact the air we breath whilst on our run is foul. We could drive instead, it would be much quicker, but we refuse to because it?s not good for the world and we don?t get exercise that way.

We?ve been up to the Biscuit factory with toddlers in tow with our climbing buddies (who all now have kids of a similar age) and ended up getting the older ones to do a bit of bouldering themselves (they were about 3 or 4 at the time). The one with the newest baby stayed in the sofa area and supervised younger kids and the rest of us subbed in an out to help. It was great fun, tho tricky to stop the kids wandering under people climbing and risking getting fallen on but we did manage it. We?ve had a third as has one lot of our other climbing buddies which makes it all more tricky now due to being outnumbered but we will give it a go again at some point soon. There is a small wall at JAGS we?ve been meaning to try but I think it?s roped rather than bouldering. We have once (for hubs birthday) had a babysitter and driven to the biscuit factory after bedtime. We got there about 8.30 and managed a good climbing session before being chucked out at 10. That worked well.

I would call the RSPCA helpline and ask for their advice. Alternatively local vets have emergency contact details, you could call and ask them.

Grove Vale has also been backed up a lot recently. I haven?t noticed an increase in traffic on my road, which is where the drop offs for Charter East Dulwich would be, but so far I have seen relatively few drop offs, much to the credit of the school and it?s pupils and parents.

If that?s what they?re doing then it?s terrible! I?ve often wondered why they don?t try to deliver them, it happens a lot to us. I call and complain to Royal Mail and say that I?m in and they tend to send the driver back within a few hours.

It was queuing along EDG all the way back from Mag to Lordship lane mid afternoon today. The traffic was horribly and crossing the road felt like the Wild West! I don?t know precisely what is causing it but there is a definite worsening of traffic queuing on both EDG and Grove Vale st the moment.

Hi ED_Moots Yes happy to discuss that with the committee and just need to amend as either we have the email addresses or need to make clear the collection of email addresses isn?t going to the VRA due to data-protection issues. Perhaps we could discuss practicalities via the VRA email address? We can also discuss data generally and next steps when the consultation returns as we could assist with identifying and meeting other residents with similar views which might assist?

Hi Ed Moots The response got amended before being filed to remove any statement of whether residents were in favour or not, given that that point would be answered by the consultation itself, and focussed only on design points should the CPZ go forward. I?ll check if the final version got circulated to the membership.

Abe_froeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yesterday was unusual because melbourne grove was > closed for a play street day. > > That i think has been part of a tactic of the > Melbourne Grove Traffic Action Group to end the > other great plague in their street: rat runners Sorry to disappoint but we don?t have a traffic action group at our end. We do have a lovely group of neighbours with small kids who like to let them play happily together for 3 hours one Sunday a month. It?s a great community event.

Cardelia Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Galileo Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Aside from the myriad of reasons why people may > > need to use their car, we also suffer our cars > > being scratched and dented as people try, and > > fail, to pass on a road narrowed by cars parked > on > > each side, there is constant congestion and > > beeping as cars try to pass, the air quality > > suffers as cars try to pass, try crossing a > road > > with a buggy where there?s no gaps between the > > cars, try crossing a road with small children > > where you?re all emerging from behind parked > cars > > because there?s no option. The effect of > parking > > stress goes beyond whether you can use your car > or > > not. > > > > Edited to add: also if you need deliveries they > > can?t park, or you have friends or relatives > > coming to stay they can?t park anywhere near > your > > home, tradespeople have to park ages away, or > try > > to unload tools whilst parked in the middle of > the > > road and then go and park ages away and walk > back. > > As I've previously mentioned, I walk down > Melbourne Grove every day to get to ED station. On > the bit north of EDG, apart from all the dropped > kerbs creating natural gaps for pedestrians to > cross, there is also a 10 metre stretch of road > with a single yellow line. You can't park here, > but there are no loading restrictions hence any > tradesman (or visitor with small children...) can > load/unload before reparking elsewhere. One other > thing that I've noticed is how many of the cars > don't move very often. If I wander down to ED > station on a weekend I still see many of the same > cars that I see on weekdays, which implies they > belong to residents and not commuters. > > By the way, you shouldn't take Southwark's > promises of 40% more parking at face value. Do > your own research and decide whether their claims > are realistic or not. My estimate is that if the > CPZ proposals come in, you'll lose over 40 metres > of current freely available parking on Melbourne > (north side) due to the increased double yellow > lines. That's room for 8 cars. There are also a > couple of dropped kerbs on Melbourne which aren't > marked on the CPZ plan, so that would be the > equivalent of another two parking spots gone due > to the double yellows. 10 spaces. That's a lot to > lose. > > The question you need to ask yourself is whether > the loss of 10 parking spaces (plus the additional > ?125 per year per permit) is a good trade-off for > getting rid of commuters. Thanks Cardelia. You?re right, I was giving a general sense of the wider implications of parking stress rather than only those right outside my own front door. The ones about no passing places are ones I find when I?m on other entirely parked up streets. Generally yes, on my stretch of road there are crossing places - provided cars are not waiting in them for other cars to pass, or someone hasn?t just parked up there for a moment to load/unload/deliver/pick someone up etc. Crossing the street is better on our street than neighbouring streets, for example Derwent Grove - pretty much fully lined on both sides. Yes, there is the yellow line space - this is for a care home where the residents have regular disability buses turning up to take them out - previous to this being put in a couple of years ago they regularly missed their outings because some residents were fearful of going too far to get on the bus and it was causing issues for the carers. This is often however still parked in despite the yellow line. The dropped curbs are often parked over or so close to them that one of my neighbours sometimes struggles to get her car out when she needs to. So on the rare occasion I got out in the car in the week, which I pretty much avoid doing and have to save those jobs for the weekend, I can and do unload on the yellow line, provided the bus doesn?t turn up and hoping it doesn?t turn up mid-unload. But then take the car almost to the other end of Melbourne Grove (down by LL) and drag the kids all the way back. It?s a great way to spend time and the kids really love waiting in the car whilst you unload then driving away from home, searching for a space and walking back home. Same for my sister-in-law if she turns up with the cousins on a Friday. She loves it at the end of a long journey. This is on Melbourne though, I don?t know what people on Derwent do if they need to unload, block the street I presume. I had to do that once (before the yellow line was put in) 8 months pregnant to get some supplies to a workman - it took 2 minutes before a man got out of his car and verbally abused me in the street for daring to unload something to my home. That was a fun moment. As for whether we?ll be able to park, you?re right, there is no guarantee and yes some spaces may be lost to yellow lines, tho for those neighbours who get blocked into their drives by people squeezing too big cars into too small spaces between dropped curbs I suspect they might have a view on whether those are bad or good, but also I understand the Council may reduce those to 1m where there is good reason so it might be worth explaining any concerns about these on your CPZ form however you vote. As it stands we can park at night and at the weekend (other than sometimes if there?s a big service at the church). The road is really quite pleasant on a Sunday. So my feeling is it will be ok. I was having this debate with a neighbour so thought I?d get some figures - having recalled that when planning permission went in for the new house on our street they did a parking stress survey. I checked it out today and it came out at 50.6% parking stress - taken between 1am and 5.30am on a Tuesday morning (on the basis it was likely to be mostly residents parked at that time). It was 2015 the survey took place but I don?t think we?ve seen a 50% increase in residents with cars since then. We?ve had a couple of new people perhaps in that time?

Rockets Yes, of course I care about local businesses. I?m one of their customers too. I particularly care about the ones I know right by me, and they suffer from the same problem: their customers can?t park. As for Lordship Lane, it seems to be that deterring train station commuters or car-dumpers, who aren?t contributing to the local economy should free up spaces to allow people to drive to the Lane if they need to. Now if a parking charge focussed their mind on whether they need to drive, or a different method of transport is required, that might be a good thing. There are of course times when everyone needs to drive, but congestion and air quality is a real issue and nudging people?s behaviour away from cars where possible is a good thing. Did you see the report on BBC News this week about the affect of air quality on kids growth and development. It?s a sickening realisation what is happening to our kids. We use our car when we have to, when public transport and walking/scooting/biking/pram really isn?t practical, but for the most part we try to plan our journeys around active travel and public transport. That doesn?t mean we never need to use the car, it means the times we need to use the car are lessened.

At a certain point it will no longer be worth people driving to the station if they have to walk the last x bit. The CPZ should therefore change the habit, rather than move the parking stress along. Also, with the medical centre and school opening up by the station, the current parking stress is going to get moved out further than it is already by people assuming they can drive to the medical centre, finding no parking nearby and parking as close as possible. It won?t move the stress all the way down Lordship Lane, and you?d have to ask the Council why they chose the zone that they did, but it is going to have an effect. Those cars won?t be parking on our street - the commuters are already there, but having driven to the site because they?ve seen free onstreet parking online, they will then have to park where they can to get to their appointments.

intexasatthe moment Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm thinking that having a CPZ in roads near East > Dulwich station might in fact encourage car use > ,especially for short journeys . > > Residents of those roads ,prior to a CPZ ,might > have been discouraged from making short and medium > trips because of difficulty parking on return . > They might have been encouraged ,living so near a > railway station and bus routes ,to use public > transport instead . > > > But with a CPZ they can pop out and back at will. > And the domino effect will mean commuters driving > further to look for car parking in neighbouring > roads . > > Thoughts? Aside from the myriad of reasons why people may need to use their car, we also suffer our cars being scratched and dented as people try, and fail, to pass on a road narrowed by cars parked on each side, there is constant congestion and beeping as cars try to pass, the air quality suffers as cars try to pass, try crossing a road with a buggy where there?s no gaps between the cars, try crossing a road with small children where you?re all emerging from behind parked cars because there?s no option. The effect of parking stress goes beyond whether you can use your car or not. Edited to add: also if you need deliveries they can?t park, or you have friends or relatives coming to stay they can?t park anywhere near your home, tradespeople have to park ages away, or try to unload tools whilst parked in the middle of the road and then go and park ages away and walk back.

Hi Eileen It?s so difficult to interpret the different issues faced by each street isn?t it! In our case we can park easily at night and the weekend (except sometimes when there?s something on at the church) but being by ED station we can?t park at all from 8am to about 5 or 6pm Monday to Friday. So when people say to use ?it won?t guarantee a space on your street? then yes, they are technically correct, there is no guarantee, but given we can park outside of commuter times then it seems highly likely we would be able to park with a CPZ. I?m trying to think how you might be able to get better information on that point. I think if you ask the CPZ lady (Joanna?) it might be possible to get a number from the DVLA of how many cars are registered to addresses on your street, might that give an idea of how much of the parking pressure is caused by residents, and how much is other?

Abe_froeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > James do any of the Councillors (Goose Green Ward > or otherwise) actually live in the area under > threat of the CPZ? What difference does that make?

colville09 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dear Jimlad48, I'm sorry I am confused, do you > actually live in the area covered by this proposed > CPZ? It is not only people who have a car will > have to pay, we will have to buy tickets for > anyone coming to see us for repair work. We have > lived near ED station for thirty years and can't > say the parking has got any worse, just stayed the > same. Not everyone posting on this thread lives in the CPZ area - you?ve not been asking that of any of the negative voices.

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Would rather pay to guarantee parking,... > > That's not what's on offer. You will be competing > with all other 'residents' - which may, depending > on the size of the zone, be quite a few, and > include families with multiple cars, if they can > afford it - for many fewer parking spaces, > absolutely (because of the double yellows etc.) By > all means vote for a CPZ but do not think that it > offers any kind of guaranteed parking, and > certainly not necessarily close to your home. The > 'offer' of 40% additional spaces (once others have > been forced out) is not based on any forecast or > experience of ED - but is based on other studies > -possibly of residential only areas close to > stations where there is a high incidence of > through commuters - and does not take into account > the draconian imposition of extended double yellow > everywhere. However if you can currently park of an evening or a weekend then you can make an informed choice as to the likelihood of being able to park in a CPZ.

singalto Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sadly I don?t think closing roads will stop people > driving. They will simply park in the nearest > available street. I went to a meeting about the > building of the Harris primary school and asked > about parking as there?s was clearly not going to > be any onsite parking. I was told that the > catchment area for the school would be very small > and a condition for getting a place was that > children would all walk, cycle or use public > transport to get to school. I said it would never > work. It hasn?t. Children from far and wide go > there and the parents park wherever they want. > Nothing will stop people driving their children to > school. As a new school, the catchment was quite wide for the first year and perhaps the second, as people were effectively taking a leap into an untested school. As the school has progressed the catchment has got progressively smaller and is now very local. So there are some parents who drive from further distances but the vast majority walk and over the years the proportion of students who come from any great distance will further reduce.

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Actually, for something as controversial as a CPZ > I think it does matter if you have a dog in the > fight, or not. In that case, should everyone state if they are within the proposed CPZ area or not? Many are, but there are certainly some voices on here who are from just outside the area, not currently suffering parking stress where they are and perhaps motivated by their own convenience of parking within the CPZ whilst downplaying the problems faced by those of us affected daily by no parking, congested roads, polluted air and constant beeping as people try to pass each other. Edited to add: I do feel everyone affected should have a voice in this. It?s about working out if there is a problem, if so what is the best way of balancing everyone?s needs. If part of that discussion is someone saying it?s worked for them then I welcome that voice alongside that of someone who does need to drive to the area ... although I would query whether that is in all instances a need and not simply a prefer.

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I do appreciate that we need local workers but I > am not sure the answer is to allow everyone to > drive. > > The 'answer' would be good and effective public > transport, including bus services which operate > effectively East: West as well as North: South. > Most of the (few) East: West routes are amazingly > tortuous, take an age and often require changes. I > used to work in Greenwich - it took me 15-20 > minutes by car and 90 minutes by public transport. > Guess which I used? > > Amended to add - the 90 minutes wasn't just travel > time but included waits for changes. Which rarely > matched any published timetable. I had to set off > much earlier than the journey should have required > because of this uncertainty. That is exactly right (and the disconnect between here and Greenwich is a particularly baffling one - why there is no direct public transport option across south London is beyond me.) But everybody driving these commutes can?t be the answer - for one, the congestion caused contributes to those busses not turning up on time which make your commute so much more arduous and uncertain. Public transport won?t get better in the places it is needed without the public calling for it - and if they can just jump in their cars then they?re going to. Southwark planning have placed huge public facilities behind our back gardens with the stated aim of encouraging people to use public transport to use them. It?s now on the Council to deliver on that aim by ensuring the public transport gets people there efficiently.

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Do you follow these 'commuters' to the station? > There are many schools, hospitals etc. locally, > which rely on incomers to service them. How many > of these 'commuters' are here to serve our local > ED needs - their timings of e.g. arrival and > departure would be the same as through commuters > using ED To start with, I don?t ?follow? anyone with the intent of finding out where they are going (apart from the time I sawKevin McCloud in Chandelier and wanted to know where the Grand Design was!). I rarely see them in the morning - by the time I leave on the nursery/school run at 8am there are no parking spaces left despite there being spaces overnight every night. When I do see them is on my way home from the station. I must admit I don?t actually see them getting off the exact same train and follow them down the street to their car so it could be complete coincidence that they just got mixed up in the flood of commuters coming off the train - or we could opt for the more common sense interpretation of the situation. I do appreciate that we need local workers but I am not sure the answer is to allow everyone to drive. Adding to the statio pressure and those that park to get the bus to kings, they are just building the health centre behind us which at its maximum capacity will have 467 people in it and 46 parking spaces - then there?s the school with 183 staff when full - I know people have got to get to work, so do I, but we are right by a train station and about 6 bus routes, the council have restricted on-site parking to encourage public transport use, if there isn?t a CPZ as well then the parking lot that we currently live in will soon extend much further as people see online that there is free parking and they chance it for their visit. They?ll circle our roads already full by 8am and then they?ll have to head outwards - with all the congestion and pollution that comes from circling cars. We already have this, the parking can?t get worse for us, the congestion and pollution can, but the parking will get worse for someone if people expect to be able to park by these facilities and arrive here to find that they?re not getting in on our road.

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > d.b Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > This is the point really. I come out of ED > station > > every day and cannot for the life of me recall > > seeing people immediately get into cars parked > > nearby. > > > > And isn't it really obvious that they wouldn't? > If > > someone wants to "park and ride", why on earth > do > > it in ED? Not only is the actual train service > > pretty shoddy, but the traffic getting to/from > ED > > is awful, there must be many better places to > > drive to with more space to park, better road > > routes into the area, and a better train > service > > to board when you get there. > > > > Just like the double yellow line fiasco, this > > proposed CPZ is a reaction to a problem that > > doesn't exist... > > I can't speak for the areas around Lordship Lane, > but I can assure you that on Copleston Road this > happens a fair bit (which accounts for the fact > that during the working day, it is very rare to > see a free parking space between Grove Vale and > Avondale Rise), see them all the time. The > problem is, in fact, getting worse now they can't > park on Quorn or Pytchley, and we frequently have > selfishly dangerous parking on the corners of > Soames Street etc. I don't know why they do it or > what the benefit is to them, but in this street at > least it is definitely not an imaginary issue. It?s the same on the north end of Melbourne Grove by the station. If you live on a street where commuters park then you will see them getting into their cars, I do every morning and evening. If you think of the number of people coming off one single train then you?d have to be pretty lucky to be behind the person going to their car - most do walk or use the bus but it doesn?t take many of the thousands of commuters that use the station every day to fill up the parking spaces around the station - if they all drove then I doubt they?d be a space for miles around!

Clarke Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Documents arrived a week after the start of the > consultation and the west side of Lordship Lane > were excluded from consultation through the impact > of parking displacement from one side to the other > is absolutely obvious. > Total incompetence from the consulting engineering > company employed by the council. What do you mean ?the west side of Lordship Lane??