E.D.Station controlled parking zone

[peckhamboy]

Sorry, to clarify, those figures were given by the council and related to areas covered by a CPZ. Hope that makes more sense now.

And to further clarify, you are welcome to give your opinions. However, you have consistently sought to dismiss the opinions of those living metres outside the zone as being motivated by self-interest, which is true, or a hidden agenda, which is probably not. My point was two-fold. All opinions on this topic are motivated by self-interest, including those of the oppressed minority within the zone you are so valiantly protecting. So what is your interest? You are spending a great deal of time on this topic so I assume you have one, beyond a simple desire to interfere. Or are you acting purely in the role of amicus curiae?

I assume that as a learned sort of fellow you are well aware of the disingenuity of your 'it's just maths' argument, which frankly is so plainly wrong it's worthy of the council themselves.

[Huguenot]

Amicus Curiae will do me - but my interest is from my time living in East Dulwich, the often aggressive sense of entitlement that people applied to the parking space outside my house, and my experiences running the first parking survey on this forum.

I remain shocked by the number of people who tried multiple entries and lied about their location to try and influence the survey. I was staggered by the extraordinary actions of individuals who rammed parking notice signs on LL. I was disappointed by the number of traders that claimed that the spaces outside their shops were needed for customers whilst using them themselves.

In particular the traders refused point blank to do the kind of surveys that could resolve parking problems intelligently - for example spending a week asking buying customers how they came to the shop, and what distance they travelled. At a shot they'd know how much of their business came from pedestrians, local or distant trade and could build an appropriate strategy.

I reached the conclusion that they wouldn't do this because they actually didn't care - the car issue was about their personal needs not their customers.

Above all I'm intrigued by how obsessed people are with their private cars that they will bully, lie and manipulate others to try and leverage their own convenience.

I support Southwark's desire to build a community and successful economy not dependent upon private cars - it's building for the future.

Now in my forties I've never owned a private car.

[Huguenot]

BTW your logic regarding controlled parking zone issues still doesn't stand up.

CPZs are created in areas immediately adjacent to accessible and effective public transport or central London commercial areas - exactly the areas that attract residents who cannot afford or do not need or want a private car.

[fredricketts]

I have lived in East Dulwich since 1963, and it has gradually become over crowed like the rest of Britain. I have dealt with Councils and Government, when either one of them has an agenda, no matter what their promises, they end up doing what they want, and not what the people want, and sadly the public are getting more and more disillusioned with Politicians and Councils. They bring in laws that really cannot be upheld because of the lack of funds, yet every year our taxes are going up, and there are more and more stealth taxes, So many different agencies, funds, and quango`s it?s no wonder we are skint. On this site I can have my say for what it is worth. I like living in East Dulwich, I have brought my family up here, and they, are bringing their families up here, one thing I know, it?s getting worse in Dulwich for parking and road rage over it is increasing. The point I want to make is that we all live here, and the Council is ignoring all of us, as they have their own agendas, and it is not always what most of the people want, Consultation should have been done on the whole of East Dulwich, as it affects us all, we should be able to thrash out something for ever body, without the Council having to earn money out of it, We already subsidise TFL, why should profit come from part public services. If by talking on here, we get the politicians to listen, to real people, in the real world, then we have achieved something good.

[peckhamboy]

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> BTW your logic regarding controlled parking zone

> issues still doesn't stand up.

>

> CPZs are created in areas immediately adjacent to

> accessible and effective public transport or

> central London commercial areas - exactly the

> areas that attract residents who cannot afford or

> do not need or want a private car.

Post of the week. That one really did make me laugh. I realise you are pushing an anti-car agenda (not a pro-community one) but let's not pretend that ED is a deprived area where people can't afford cars and hordes of affluent bankers from the outer suburbs are driving their Ferraris in to steal parking spaces and save a few quid on their train fares. If people in those streets could not afford cras, or did not need or want them, there would not be a parking issue. Even on the council's dubious stats, at least 80% of the cars belong to residents, accounting for around 100% of the "safe" parking spaces.

And I don't think ED has boasted "accessible and effective" public transport for around 40 years or more. It has a functional but hardly world-beating service to a single Central London hub that generally works for around 5 days a week. Perhaps if the train service really were accessible and effective, people wouldn't want to use their cars so much. Maybe you should focus your efforts on improving public transport rather than trying to deny the alternative.

[citizenED]

"......CPZs are created in areas immediately adjacent to accessible and effective public transport or central London commercial areas - exactly the areas that attract residents who cannot afford or do not need or want a private car." And to this end I would suggest that instead of imposing a CPZ near the station, the council marks out 50% of the on-street parking in said CPZ area to Car Club spaces and puts in place a rule that states anyone buying or renting a house or flat in that area have to sign a no-car agreement.

[peckhamasbestos]

"I support Southwark's desire to build a community and successful economy not dependent upon private cars - it's building for the future.

Now in my forties I've never owned a private car."

slightly off topic I appreciate but went to the Barbican last night (McCoy Tyner if you're interested).

decided to leave the car here, not because I wanted a beer, but because I felt taking the public transport option was the right thing to do.

at 18.00, I walked from just off L/ship lane to the station.

No trains, rail replacement service........

jumped on the 40, to L Bridge, hopped off at Borough, as fed up with slow bus, and intended to get the tube to Moorgate & walk.

Borough "this station is closed due to engineering works" - oh.......ok, walk to Lon Bridge, go down to tube....err majority of Northern line closed due to engineering works........run to bus stop @ Lon Bridge......wait.....wait....wait.....no buses!

run across Lon Bridge, dive into cab, Barbican by 19.35, take seats by 19.40, 1.5 hours after leaving se22 (7 miles away!) just in time.

moral?

public transport stinks.....apologies if you have to rely upon it, but generally I don't, and will never agan because it just doesn't work!

you will not get me out of the only solidly reliable form of transport which is my car ( & bike) until there is a cohesive and reliable transport network in SE London!

And as previously stated I do not wish to pay an additional ?125.00 pa tax to not park my car anyway near my house (which obv. I can't at the moment anyway)!!!!!!

PA

[BrandNewGuy]

peckhamasbestos Wrote:

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

[snipped tale of woe]

> moral?

>

> public transport stinks.....apologies if you have

> to rely upon it, but generally I don't, and will

> never agan because it just doesn't work!

>

> you will not get me out of the only solidly

> reliable form of transport which is my car ( &

> bike) until there is a cohesive and reliable

> transport network in SE London!

Moral: check TFL's website and you'd know that there were no trains from ED this week and no Northern Line Bank branch. We went from ED to Camden and back last night on public transport and it was a breeze (176 to Waterloo, Northern Line to Camden Town). Just sayin'...

[Jeremy]

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> I support Southwark's desire to build a community

> and successful economy not dependent upon private

> cars - it's building for the future.

I've not read the whole thread (who has?) but surely the aim of this whole CPZ scheme is to make it easier for residents to park their cars. I don't see how it's related to reducing our dependency on private cars. Have I missed something?

If they want to build for the future, they need to start thinking about providing us with a 21st century infrastructure - instead of the 19th century infrastructure which we're currently stuck with.

[Moos]

It seems to me that the thread is about providing the streets near the station with slightly fewer parking spaces so that when their residents still can't park outside their houses they're going to have to blame their neighbours instead of commuters, adding cost to local businesses (luckily there's no economic downturn), turning Oglander into a commuter parking zone, and charging me ?125 pounds a year to be able to continue to park on a street not far from my house.

[mummypig]

Isn't there a proposed trial period of about 18 months? So we can give it a go and then see who was right / wrong.

The statistics and percentages are all very well, but if you've lived in a street in the proposed cpz for 10 years like i have you would want the restrictions asap.

all i know is that at the weekend i can park my car with no difficulty at all, yet on weekdays it's almost impossible.

this implies that it's a commuter problem during the week and always has been and having a restricted hour / 2 hours during the day should work.

[Carrie]

Actually the fact that you can park at weekends does not necessarily mean it is a commuter problem. For example during the week I walk to work and my husband cycles - therefore our car remains taking up a parking space on the road during working hours.

At weekends we tend to go out in the car thus freeing up a parking space.

And no - there is no proposed trial period once they bring in the CPZ you have got it for good whether it works or not!

[peterstorm1985]

mummypig Wrote:

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

> Isn't there a proposed trial period of about 18

> months? So we can give it a go and then see who

> was right / wrong.

>

Wherever did you get this idea from? There is no official suggestion of a trial, certainly not one that could reverse the installation of the CPZ. The only 'trial' that may happen is the 'lite' version of the CPZ (if that's what gets the vote) before it goes for the full on.

And I guess you haven't read much of the rest of this thread. The streets are empty across East Dulwich at weekends (except those just off Lordship Lane) simply because so many people go away, or out each day, not because there is a lack of commuters.

There are certainly commuters parking during the week but the statistics that you dismiss so easily clearly show that they are a relatively small percentage (and may be a very small percentage as there is no distinction between them and local business people who will be entitled to pay for a permit). The CPZ will reduce the number of on-street parking spaces and the reduction in commuters will not compensate. The only way you will get easier parking is if sufficient numbers of residents choose not to pay and park further away.

I walked up Derwent Grove on Thursday, very late evening (9.30ish). Unless some commuters were working very late indeed, they certainly aren't the problem.

[henryb]

I imagine it would be annoying if you lived there. I have lived in a CPZ zone before and it is not the end of the world as some people are making out. Free parking is a privilege not a right.

What is frustrating about the whole thing is that the reason why people park commute isn't being addressed at all. People have told me that the same thing happens in the streets around Honor Oak Park and I know people who drive to Deptford to get the train.

I suspect the reason is the isn't any sensible planning around providing adequate public transport links to these hubs. Has any analysis been done on where the commuters are coming from?

[peterstorm1985]

henryb Wrote:

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

> I suspect the reason is the isn't any sensible

> planning around providing adequate public

> transport links to these hubs. Has any analysis

> been done on where the commuters are coming from?

This is one of the most frustrating things. The surveys carried out made no attempt to ascertain who the 'non-residents' parking actually were so, despite the local residents feeling that commuters are too blame, there are no actual numbers to confirm the size of their contribution to the problem and certainly no attempt at all to find out why they have used their car to get to the station.

There are good bus links to ED station for the majority of those who are beyond walking distance. Of course, there may be a few who simply prefer the car, and some for whom minor disability (but without badge) mean a car is easier than a bus but, considering the likely real numbers of commuters parking (a percentage of the 20% 'non-residents') it is quite possible that they are just people who use the car to get to the station on the very odd occasion ie when they have something heavy to carry, or know they will be bringing something/someone back with them on their return.

[woodleigh]

Dear James Barber

There have been many posts on here questioning why the Council has failed to consult residents of the area immediately surrounding the CPZ for their views on the proposals. Despite various posts on here from you, I cannot see any reposonse from you to this question (I will gladly be proven wrong - I have not been through all 20 pages).

Please could you reply to this question? I live just outside the CPZ and given that I will be severly adversely affected by the CPZ, I am riled by the fact that I haven't even been notified of the plans.

Parking is usually just about ok where I live, despite a number of commuters already parking on my street. When the plans are introduced (I have no doubt that they will be given that the consultation appears to have been carefully engineered to achieve that result), it will become impossible to park in my street - until, of course, having backed me into a corner, the Council invites me to buy into the scheme.

The point about moving rather than solving a problem has already been well made. I would like you to explain, please, why the consultation has been limited to those who stand to gain from these plans.

[BrandNewGuy]

I'm curious as to the savings made by any commuters who are parking near East Dulwich station to save money. We are on the edge of Zone 2, but a monthly Zone 1-2 Travelcard is ?106, while a Zone 1-3 Travelcard is ?123.70. I haven't checked the rail season ticket prices, but assuming that many commuters take a further leg of their journey after arriving at London Bridge, a Travelcard would be the preferred option.

So are these commuters putting up with the hassle of finding a parking space five days a week (plus petrol etc) in order to save ?4.42 a week? Assuming most commuters aren't on the breadline, this seems like an unlikely trade-off to me.

Please note, I'm not denying the possibility that commuters park near ED station - but I would ask for far more useful data (as outlined above) before we rush headlong into a CPZ.

[gm99]

@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)

[Jeremy]

BrandNewGuy - I think the idea of out-of-towners using ED station is a red herring. I think it's mainly people who live locally, but not near a station.

[James Barber]

Hi Peterstorm1985,

Virtually all changes to roads in Southwark are implimented via Experimental Traffic Management Orders and then typically 12-18 monhs later a consultation to see if they should be made permanent or not usually with some tweaking. That is my understanding for these proposals.

PeckhmBoy,

FYI - 20% of East Dulwich ward housing is social housing. The national average for the UK is 17% so despite appearance of many wealthier people in ED it isn't a rich area and most people are not wealthy. Such housing in East Dulwioch includes 500 council properties called 'acquire street properties' where the council 40-60 years ago bought victorian homes often subdivided them badly into flats.

Hi woodleigh,

I think I've said various times that I would have prefered the council to have formally consulted more widely. That as an opposition councillor I failed to persuade the administration to formally consult adjoining streets in East Dulwich ward and did ask for Mathem, Tell, Ashbourne, Chesterfield, Blackwater and Bassano to be consulted - the money didnt stretch that far and on reflection I can see an even better case for those neighbouring street in South Camberwell ward due to the strange shape of streets north of Grove Vale.

Hi henryb,

TfL regularly does origination and destination studies of commuters.

I'll ask GLA Assembly Member Caroline Pidgeon who to ask in TfL and if we can view that data.

Hi hugenot,

I suspect you're correct that IF controlled parking proceeded then any commuters who still wanted to park in the area would be dissipated over more neighbouring streets but that is obviously no comfort to residents on those streets. And the uncertainty to what degree that takes place. I think arguments that no problem exists has'nt helped with this issue.

[woodleigh]

James

Thanks very much for your quick reply and I appreciate that you were not in a position to decide who should be consulted - thanks for your efforts. As you suggest, in addition to the streets neighbouring the CPZ in the East Dulwich postcode there is potentially a significant impact on the streets in South Camberwell just to the north of Grove Vale where both East Dulwich and Denmark Hill stations are within short walking distance. I am quite shocked that residents of these streets have not been consulted and it will not do the Council any favours if they find out after the event.

[Siduhe]

Hi Peterstorm1985,

Virtually all changes to roads in Southwark are implemented via Experimental Traffic Management Orders and then typically 12-18 monhs later a consultation to see if they should be made permanent or not usually with some tweaking. That is my understanding for these proposals.

James, is there any way to get clarity on this? A review of the current CPZ being proposed on Southampton Way (which is currently under consultation as well) doesn't show it is being implemented on an experimental basis at all. This is in contrast with the Herne Hill TMO back in 2004 which clearly stated it was being done on an experimental basis. Procedures may have changed and everything now may be done on an experimental basis, but given the strength of feeling on here, it would help to understand exactly what opportunity there is going to be to assess how this proposed CPZ works in practice (given it appears to be pretty much a foregone conclusion IMO that a CPZ will result from the approach taken to the consultation so far).

[gsirett]

Removed

[peterstorm1985]

gm99 Wrote:

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

>

> Southwark's own website refers to CPZs being

> 'usually introduced under experimental powers' and

> further states 'experimental procedures also allow us to

> review the zone soon after introduction and make

> changes where necessary'.

You are quite right - thank you for highlighting this. But, as you say, there is no explanation for how this would work in practice (which may simply mean that the 'lite' version gets changed to an all day version) and, as I hope has been referred to frequently enough for the significance to be obvious to everyone, the proposed CPZ includes streets that have lower levels of parking.

Consequently, any measure of success will be against parking capacity over the whole zone.

So, if you live in Derwent and cannot find a space but there are spaces available in Ondine, you will have nothing to complain about.

It sounds to me as if better stats should be acquired for the streets with the greatest pressure now (actual cars parked/free spaces at various times of day, not just percentages that mean very little), and an absolute promise from Southwark that if the parking pressures are not alleviated on a street by street basis, then a removal of the CPZ would follow. Somehow I doubt anyone is going to be able to get that.......

[mynamehere]

Barrie Hargrove is Labour. His portfolio seems endless. His presence is everywhere. I don't think he does nuance research or researched reflection.