E.D.Station controlled parking zone

[fazer71]

Thanks to genius of some of the last few posts.

I?ve decided to completely change my life.

I?m selling my car and I?m going to move closer to where I work.

I work in different places every few months so it?s going to cost me a few quid in agents fees and stamp duty every 6 to 12 months but it?ll be worth it for the environment and will help my neighbours as they won?t have to put up with me having a car so freeing up parking for people who want to use the station near my home and the people who work locally.

Yes the thanks to those posts on this thread which show the ideal solution I just didn?t see it before.

Some of you may think this crazy but just look at the logic it?s a no brainer.

It will benefit many who don?t live anywhere near me.

Pure Genius.

[peterstorm1985]

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> It is somewhat ironic that a community should be

> willing to protect a minority working unsociable

> hours when its convenient to them, but not to

> support a minority of families and elderly people

> who need to park close to their houses when it's

> inconvenient ;-)

>

> Double standards that perhaps reveal a more

> selfish motivation?

I really don't understand where you get this from Huguenot. Some of those 'families and elderly people' are of reduced means so a CPZ that they cannot afford to pay for would force them to park a much greater distance away from their house making it much more inconvenient than it is at present.

A CPZ makes it most convenient for those with the most money and, more importantly, it only has a temporary benefit (for reasons I'm too bored to repeat yet again) so there is a wish to save a fool from being parted from his money. I don't see a double standard. (But, as I have already said, I have off-street parking so this won't affect me - I just don't like to see the potential suffering that will be created for a much greater number than will have a net gain)

[peterstorm1985]

fazer71 Wrote:

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

> Thanks to genius of some of the last few posts.

> I?ve decided to completely change my life.

> I?m selling my car and I?m going to move closer to

> where I work.

> I work in different places every few months so

> it?s going to cost me a few quid in agents fees

> and stamp duty every 6 to 12 months but it?ll be

> worth it for the environment and will help my

> neighbours as they won?t have to put up with me

> having a car so freeing up parking for people who

> want to use the station near my home and the

> people who work locally.

> Yes the thanks to those posts on this thread which

> show the ideal solution I just didn?t see it

> before.

> Some of you may think this crazy but just look at

> the logic it?s a no brainer.

> It will benefit many who don?t live anywhere near

> me.

>

> Pure Genius.

fazer71 - if you move your work on such a regular basis and always use the car, why do you live where you do in ED? If you look around there are plenty of streets in ED that have ample parking at all times of day, so you'd only need to move once to get a certain parking space. And, if you moved away from the station you'd find the reduction in house prices would allow you to have a house with off street parking.

[gm99]

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:

The [parking] controls provide another significant tool that can be used to

help control the use of the private car. This, in turn, provides benefits in terms of

vehicular emissions, traffic congestion, social inclusion and maintenance costs.

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]

peterstorm1985

I rarely use my car I'm out of the UK for months I often park my car at friends near the airport.

Besides.

What I do with my car is not anyone else?s business it's mine and I love it it's a compete waste of money but it's my money and if I want I?ll buy another bigger faster one which uses twice the amount of fuel and keep the one I have too.

The last time I looked we?re living in a Stalinist state.

If people can?t afford it they that?s tough, it shouldn?t impact those who can!

The car has been the biggest social leveller in the history of man and it is going to continue to bring ease of movement and social equality and work and prosperity to more and more people.

Embrace the social change the car has made for the benefit of the poor.

In real terms it?s never been cheaper to own a car.

Sorry what is your genius solution to the parking problem around train stations?

[pk]

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> It is somewhat ironic that a community should be

> willing to protect a minority working unsociable

> hours when its convenient to them, but not to

> support a minority of families and elderly people

> who need to park close to their houses when it's

> inconvenient ;-)

>

> Double standards that perhaps reveal a more

> selfish motivation?

so do you really think that CPZ's are put into place to 'support a minority of families and elderly people who need to park close to their houses'?

wouldn't it then be more appropriate to limit the scheme to securing parking for those groups?

or shouldn't other steps be taken for these purposes e.g. the creation of disabled parking bays (which is pretty much the main/only reason that i can think of that means people need to park right outside their houses) and to meet genuine needs without charges?

[peckhamboy]

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> Only 25 years ago 40% of households had no car at

> all. However, kids still got an education,

> shopping still got done and people still got to

> work.

>

> Now 65% of cars are owned by households with two

> or more cars.

>

> There is no doubt that for some families cars are

> a necessity, but these figures also tells you that

> there are a huge amount of car owners who got rich

> quick off the back of their property and filled

> their boots remortgaging to satisfy a greed for

> cars.

>

> There is a great deal of confusion betweenn

> 'necessary' and 'convenient'.

>

> The forces allied against the CPZ are far more

> likely to be in the convenience segment rather

> than the necessity one - it's just a numbers game.

Let's assume that your figures are correct, for the sake of argument. How on earth do you jump from that to a general swipe at people getting rich quick off the back of property? For someone so quick to jump on 'inaccuracies' or 'inconsistencies' in other people's arguments, your own arguments seem somewhat twisted to fit a particular political bias without any justification whatsoever.

[Otta]

I don't think anyone has said that no one needs a car, some people clearly do.

A lot of people don't though.

[peckhamboy]

This thread is about the proposed CPZ, not the rights or wrongs of owning a car. The fact is that an awful lot of people do own a car (or in some cases more than one). Is the CPZ aimed at curbing and controlling car ownership? If so, the council should be open about that. If not, your arguments should be in the Lounge.

[fazer71]

What peckhamboy said.... +1

This should be a Controlled Posting Zone

CPZ

[peterstorm1985]

fazer71 Wrote:

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

>

> If people can?t afford it they that?s tough, it

> shouldn?t impact those who can!

>

Nice! Good sense of community spirit.

[peterstorm1985]

peckhamboy Wrote:

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

> Is the CPZ aimed at curbing

> and controlling car ownership? If so, the council

> should be open about that. If not, your arguments

> should be in the Lounge.

If you look at gm99's post above you'll see that they are indeed open about it.

[Chippy Minton]

I don't think anyone has said that no one needs a car, some people clearly do.

Wrong!

From earlier in the thread:

I don't hate cars at all, I just don't accept that people just couldn't live without them.

[Jeremy]

Most people who own a car in London (including me) do so because it's convenient. As far as I'm concerned, there's no need for any further justification. And as for all this "86p a mile" stuff, who cares? If you earn the money, then you spend it however you please!

[fazer71]

peterstorm1985 Wrote:

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

> fazer71 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >

> > If people can?t afford it they that?s tough, it

> > shouldn?t impact those who can!

> >

>

> Nice! Good sense of community spirit.

That's what happens when you live in a Stalinist state.

The neighbours start to get busy round your possessions and you get reported to the Police for peeking from behind your curtains in a funny way and told off because you have the wrong kind of car and people who don?t have don? want and don?t use make the decisions on what you should have and use and the way you use it and what you spend on it and how long you are allowed to own it and etc etc etc?

Look let?s face it Stalinist ideals as in Ken Livingstone?s congestion charge.

Just fantastic it?s great if you have the money you get to go up to town and there are fewer cars fantastic!

The same would be true for East Dulwich with the CPZ we?d be able to use the parking and it would be socially better for everyone even the poor they would be better off because they would have another reason to move to another area which would mean they wouldn?t have to put up with all the yuppies swanking around.

It?s a more orderly system and will help sort the chaff from the wheat.

CPZ is a great leveller it?s just another social way of making people find their place in the world.

CPZ The best thing for the whole comunity no question...

[gm99]

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.

[Huguenot]

"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."

FINALLY

Somebody's admitted that those within the CPZ have a whole load of commuters swamping their residential streets that are using their residential area as a carpark. ;-)

[Carrie]

gm99 wrote

"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."

So - not necessarily commuters!!

[peckhamboy]

And a totally different CPZ

[fazer71]

So - not necessarily commuters!!

Let?s get Sherlock on the case.

Who could they be ?..

Tourists?

Day trippers?

Lost OAPs?

Ramblers?

Dog walkers?

Plumbers?

Doctors?

Vicars?

Who knows could be an alien invasion

Maybe we Dr Who

Someone out there must be able to get to the Answer?

It?s a mystery.

Looks like the opposite of the Bermuda CPZ.

[gm99]

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.

[Senor Chevalier]

Interesting thought about equalizing the impact of parking - setting the tariff at a low enough rate (or free) should ensure that the displaced cars were those of people who do not reside in the streets where the CPZ was brought in. That would be a more interesting experiment.

[fredricketts]

One answer to the parking problem, especially around the station, would be for Southwark Council to acquire part of the pulled down Dulwich Hospital, it looks like it is going to be vacant for a long time, I think it?s been a couple of years now, and use that as a car park for Dulwich. What with all the markets that the Council wants round here, and the closing off of roads to accommodate these people from out of the area. And the Council allowing car parks to be built on. I think it would be a good investment for the council, as they could charge a small fee. But probably knowing Southwark Council, it would go up to a large fee.

[Loz]

gm99 Wrote:

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

> 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.

Let me see... the options:

1) Lower the cost of permits

2) Change the operating hours

3) Increase size of the CPZ.

Which do you think Barrie "A CPZ is the answer. Erm...what was the question again?" Hargrove is going to plump for?

[Otta]

Chippy Minton Wrote:

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

> I don't think anyone has said that no one needs a

> car, some people clearly do.

>

> Wrong!

>

> From earlier in the thread:

>

> I don't hate cars at all, I just don't accept that

> people just couldn't live without them.

And what I initially said.

there are plenty of people who would

claim, and probably even believe that a car

is a necessity. The majority of these people

are wrong.

Sorry people, I won't intrude further on the CPZ thread, I just don't like people using selective quoting to misrepresent me.

For the record, I couldn't give a toss if you own 5 4x4s, as has been said, if you can afford it, go ahead, you don't need to justify it.

I just hate people trying to justify it by claiming their life would be over without their cars.