Controlled parking and other issues

[all_star]

CPZ would be great - our neighbour has 5 cars parked on the street and only ever drives 1 at a time, which often means no spaces near our door (when he leaves he shuffles the rest up to make sure that his 5 spaces are always preserved for him).

Can anyone top that for anti-social street parking behaviour?!

[Huguenot]

That is absolutely outrageous. I did hear of a similar scenario not so long ago, and it transpired that the vehicles had been purchased as an investment - this meant that he was using the public highway as a storage facility for a business proposition, which put him in breach of parking regs. He had to take them away... ;-)

[capt_birdseye]

Must take him hours to leave the house!

[all_star]

Tell me more about parking regs - are these local laws? Might it be worth having a word with the council do you think?

CB - it is ridiculous watching him out there with 3 or 4 sets of keys moving them all a foot. We used to have a mini and I always waited for the time when he would leave a big enough gap for us to squeeze in, but it never happened :'(

[capt_birdseye]

Have you seen this?

New Gym on Lordship Lane

Expect an influx of health-conscious people driving to the gym...

[Huguenot]

I'm not sure about the details, there was some talk of an asbo, but I don't believe that was what transpired. It was definitely the fact that he was using the road for commercial storage that got him. I'd probably talk to the CAB as a first stop. I think you could probably demonstrate that five vehicles is beyond personal use. If you could identify him buying or selling either full vehicles or parts on camera that would be an asset.

As it happens, residents don't have a 'right' to a parking space on any road (including their own) unless there are specific local regulations - however, you do have a right of access to your own driveway, and the police or traffic wardens can tow vehicles that block it on request. This is probably what's behind the concreting over of some local front gardens.

All in all the best possible solution is probably a CPZ - it would also defuse any tension between neighbours, as it would be 'someone else' wot did it.

[capt_birdseye]

Out of interest all_star, is your neighbour a recent addition to the ED community or was he born on Lordship Lane?

[all_star]

I'd say he has been here quite a while... 2 4X4's, 2 People Carriers and a Van - he's certainly not an environmentalist, thats for sure!

[Huguenot]

Surely that must be commercial storage!

[capt_birdseye]

Wow, so if they bring in a CPZ with anti-urban tank weighting it'll really hit him in the pocket! >:D

[snorky]

capt_birdseye Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Do you drive Snorky? If yes are you happy to pay

> ?80-?120 pa for the privilege of parking outside

> of your house?

yes I drive - yes I have a car - yes I would pay for a CPZ ( not the whole thing mind you, just my share )

[snorky]

all_star Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'd say he has been here quite a while... 2 4X4's,

> 2 People Carriers and a Van - he's certainly not

> an environmentalist, thats for sure!

I know him - not personally - and hes a long termer.

that is no excuse tho'

[capt_birdseye]

snorky Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> yes I drive - yes I have a car - yes I would pay

> for a CPZ ( not the whole thing mind you, just my

> share )

Fair play to you then. As for the five-car maniac, I was just interested because I remember someone (not sure who) complaining about all the newcomers and their cars. This guy is obviously a bit of statistical freak but I guess it's dangerous to assume that it's just the invading legions who are contributing to the parking nightmares we face.

I'm certainly in two minds about the CPZ, yes it would be great to be able to park on my own street on a Saturday, but having to pay an annual premium likely to cost upwards of ?100 for the privilege rather puts me off.

[monica]

Hi all

Just to add on to my initial posting,the meeting regarding the controlled parking zone in East Dulwich is the 14th of march not february.I do apologise about the wrong date.

[Ko]

Hi Monica

Do you have any idea how far the CPZ may extend? Are they thinking of the whole of ED or just around Lordship Lane?

I think the parking problems are due to a number of factors:

(1) Some commuters.

(2) Some people feel the need to always drive to Somerfield and it is certainly much busier than in the days before the revamp.

(3) People who move to ED now are wealthier (they would have to be to afford some of the prices!) and they are more likely to be able to afford a car, if not two cars sometimes. A couple near me have 3 cars!!! They only have one parking space in front of their house. They have one work van and two private cars - ridiculous. However, if they can afford to run so many cars, having to buy extra permits at ?100ish a go, is not really going to discourage them I think. Multiple car ownership is a big problem though.

(4) More houses are being converted into flats now. Planning permission just doesn't give enough thought to where all the flat owners are going to park.

[swiders]

i can't wait for the hysterical hyperdrive reaction that will follow once the issue starts to be looked at. classic phrases such as "stealth tax" and "anti-motorist" etc will be wheeled out. certainly if the last CPZ consultation is anything to go by that will be the case. lest the facts get in the way.

I guess people just have to face facts, when there are too many cars around the lack of control may just create more problems than solve and thus a form of road space charge can be an effective solution. Its true that people have to change some of their travel habits (we don't use our car for local trips except for the odd big shop to sainsburys) but hand in hand with this, people have to accept with greater affluence comes greater pressures on road space and ultimately parking. Its really a matter now of examining, as factually as possibly without people getting juvenile and maniacal, the problems (if indeed there are any and what is the most likely cause) and if a CPZ is a logical and acceptable form of response.

[Bobby P]

I'm afraid those of you asking for CPZ's are in for a shock if they actually bring one in. It will make NO DIFFERENCE to whether you can park outside your houses. Parking DOES NOT improve if a CPZ is introduced. It will, however, cost you money not just in the annual charge, but in extra fees/permits for visitors, and (for those who have vehicles) horrible hassles and possible fines when bays are suspended etc. In practice, it is just another needless annoyance of urban living, another thing to worry about, which reduces your quality of life just a little bit more.

As I've said in previous threads on this subject, I've had the experience of free parking roads being turned into CPZ's at my previous address, and all it brought was endless hassle, arguments with the council over wrongly issued parking tickets, expense and major restrictions on who could visit me (i.e. no one with a car for a start). It is CERTAINLY a revenue earner for the Council first and foremost, and anyone who thinks this really benefits local people (car owning or otherwise) is merely falling for the big con that is the CPZ.

I live in Melbourne Grove, am a pedestrian/cyclist who owns one car for work, but - from hard experience - I truly believe a CPZ would make this area a much less pleasant place to live. In fact the lack of one is actually one of the things which makes the quality of life in ED better than other areas. Take it from me, you will regret it if you fall for the sweet utopian words the Councils use to rip off gullible residents and blight whole areas.

[geh]

i have to agree

[Jeremy]

Not to mention that frankly, in ED the transport isn't great, and having a car is very, very handy. Without it, my journey to work would be an extra 20 mins each way...

[Guest]

Hey, hey, Bobby P, I live in a CPZ now, and it makes a big positive difference. It makes it much easier for residents to park near their own homes (which seems reasonable), stops people using your street as a free car park, so reducing traffic volume, noise, smell, and danger.

Don't join in with the paranoid pro-car lobby, who think they're SO IMPORTANT that everyone's out to get them. The cost of private car ownership continues to fall in real terms year-on-year, while public transport gets more expensive - and our children pay for it all with their futures, or their lives.

Support that CPZ - you know it makes sense.

[Jeremy]

"The cost of private car ownership continues to fall in real terms year-on-year"

Could you please explain? Petrol and road tax are rising. Congestion charge is going up. Other tolls are being introduced and proposed. And as far as I'm aware, servcing, MOTs, parts and insurance aren't getting cheaper?

[Guest]

Oh blimey, Jeremy, I wasn't expecting to have to justify this claim. I need to do some searching. Please bear with me, I'll get back - promise.

[Guest]

Come on lets face it we're not all going to give up our cars until we have a safe clean and reliable public transport system.

For my sins I lived t'other side of the river for many years where CPZ was the norm, you were certainly never guaranteed a parking space anywhere near your home but as most have the ability to be able to walk was never a real problem just a mild irritant...unfortunatley i think all these issues are the joys of living in one of the most vibrant and exciting cities on the universe!!

[Guest]

Here goes, Jeremy - from the BBC:

"Separately, the cost of owning and running a car has changed relatively little in the past four decades.

"The cost of running an average car in 2003 - including car price, tax, maintenance, insurance and fuel - was ?5,335, according to the RAC motoring group.

"Using Office for National Statistics figures, BBC Breakfast calculated that - in today's money - an average car in 1975 would have cost ?5,387 to run, ?52 more than last year.

In 1985 the cost would have been ?5,128, while in 1995 the cost was ?5,024."

So it's fair to claim that motoring was cheaper in 2003 than it was in 1975, wouldn't you agree? And at the very least the cost is bumping along the bottom.

Will this do? Surely you'll accept the claim that public transport is more expensive now?

[Guest]

Eliza

London has one of the best public transport systems in this country, by a large margin. It's a victim of its success for sure, with big problems of overcrowding, but buses have definitely become much more reliable, clean and safe in the last decade or so. There's been huge investment in public transport in London, compared to most cities and nearly all towns in the UK. How good does it have to be before people use it?

In my experience, most people who claim London's public transport is rubbish are people who don't use it, and certainly people who don't use PT in the provinces, so they've nothing to compare it with. For sure, they use PT a bit on continental city breaks, and say they want systems in London like them. But this is so unrealistic, as we're light years behind most of the rest of Europe on PT spending.

This is not about people exclusively using their cars until we reach some sort of PT nirvana, and then abandoning their cars wholesale. The change simply HAS to be incremental, and that means using our cars a bit less, and using PT a bit more - warts and all.

Why is it that motorists put up with a totally sh*te private car system, but are only prepared to consider PT if it becomes totally flawless?