CPZ: Proposed Controlled Parking in East Dulwich

[Lynne]

I've never actually timed every one of my searches for a parking space, but I think a 20 minutes search sounds reasonable. I know I've spent 15 minutes looking time and time again. Get stuck behind a delivery lorry or a refuse cart and it can be 10 minutes getting out of your own street.

[intexasatthe moment]

So sorry everyone missed the fact that the clinic was a chiropractioner in Crystal Palace Rd .

[tomskip]

I will definitely go elsewhere to shop if I have to pay for parking on or near Lordship Lane. Such a shame for our local independents.

[Galileo]

Rockets, it?s a turn of phrase that complete belittles the very real issues many people have in this area, although evidently differently on different streets. Parking has got worse and worse up by the station over the past few years, and the problems will only be exacerbated when the new health centre and school are fully operational taking a predicted further 64 parking spaces on street in the area. Hopefully where you?ve moved to the parking pressures are less and you feel this CPZ won?t be necessary ion your street.

[Ampersand]

That you are too lazy not to use your car? I guess it is yes.

tomskip Wrote:

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

> I will definitely go elsewhere to shop if I have

> to pay for parking on or near Lordship Lane. Such

> a shame for our local independents.

[tash b]

I own a car I never drive down to lordship lane always walk, and if I have to go somewhere where there is a cpz I get public transport if I?m ill then a cab so why can people not do that if we end up with a cpz.

[tomskip]

Not at all. I live at the furthest outpost of SE22 so it is a good 20 minutes walk for me to get to LL. If I want to do a food shop at the Co-Op or M&S plus a potter around all my other favourite shops and the market that's another 20 minutes walk back up the hill with a load of shopping bags. I'll still nip down to LL for the odd thing from Greetings or Farmers, no doubt, but can see myself otherwise driving to Crystal Palace for High Street type shopping.

As an aside, I'd suggest you don't accuse people you don't know of being lazy - just incase they have a disability of some kind, or are maybe in the 70+ age bracket. That would be embarrassing for you.

[Ampersand]

Not really. People with serious disabilities tend to have a blue badge. However I see a lot of older people and those with mobility issues on the bus. Do you?

tomskip Wrote:

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

> Not at all. I live at the furthest outpost of SE22

> so it is a good 20 minutes walk for me to get to

> LL. If I want to do a food shop at the Co-Op or

> M&S plus a potter around all my other favourite

> shops and the market that's another 20 minutes

> walk back up the hill with a load of shopping

> bags. I'll still nip down to LL for the odd thing

> from Greetings or Farmers, no doubt, but can see

> myself otherwise driving to Crystal Palace for

> High Street type shopping.

>

> As an aside, I'd suggest you don't accuse people

> you don't know of being lazy - just incase they

> have a disability of some kind, or are maybe in

> the 70+ age bracket. That would be embarrassing

> for you.

[Sue]

My memory is not great (and getting worse) but I'm sure somebody on here will know.

I'm sure I filled in a consultation on the exact same subject some years back, and said that I didn't want controlled parking in my road (off North Cross Road).

Am I imagining it?

And if not, why are "they" having another consultation?

[Penguin68]

And if not, why are "they" having another consultation?

Because you got the answer wrong (cf 'People's Vote')

[bels123]

siousxiesue Wrote:

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

> Not sure if this has been mentioned yet but the

> guy in 'Greetings' card shop in LL is very

> worried, as he is living outside the borough, and

> business owners living outside Southwark do not

> qualify for a parking permit.

>

> This despite him being in this community for 30

> years!

Yes he?d qualify if needs his vehicle to run his business (eg delivery van), doesn?t have anything to do with which borough he lives in. If just to commute here then no, but there are lots of public transport options that run past his shop. Or the station v close too!

Don?t be taken in by some LL businesses campaigning it will damage the highstreet, again only 22% travel by car and of those 90% are local. The consultation actually opens up the current 30 mins restricted bays to be stayed in longer (and the first 30 mins remains free!) so shoppers wouldn?t have to rush off. I suspect some vocal business owners overriding concerns are really their own currently convenient parking arrangements if truth be told.

[Rockets]

And if not, why are "they" having another consultation?

Because you got the answer wrong (cf 'People's Vote')

Spot on! And because they have had time to add double yellows everywhere to make parking even worse to help justify their stance. Just remember, the CPZ is not for our benefit but theirs......

[Galileo]

Rockets, will the CPZ really make no difference in your area, or is it not needed? The streets I see in the area seem really packed to me, so I?m interested: how do you manage to park down at LL and then repark reasonably close to your home?

[Rockets]

Our road is not currently in the suggested CPZ zone but parking can be problematic but I would always put my personal inconvenience over the potential to kill Lordship Lane and other facilities that will be impacted by this. The process seems to be neglecting the fact that Lordship lane is quite unique in that the parking problems are caused by a combination of commuter parking, people using the lane and multi-vehicle ownership and the CPZ solution the council is suggesting cannot address all of those factors without detrimental harm to the hubs of our community.

[goldilocks]

I think that one of the things that's clear from these discussions is that having one large consultation throws up lots of different issues.

The parking pressure on the roads around the station is clearly different in terms of severity and the types of parking to those on roads to the east of Lordship lane. To the extent that parking genuinely isn't a problem on these streets then responding accordingly is the right response. However, its not the case that just because there isn't a problem with parking that needs addressing in the streets off lordship lane, that the streets around the station shouldn't be a CPZ.

In terms of the 'station parking', one of the normal concerns for a CPZ is the displacement effect. If the problem is genuinely commuters parking, then this displacement effect would not go far as it would quickly not be worth driving if you had more than a 3-4 min walk to the station once parked (I can't believe people are driving further than from the far side of East Dulwich to get the train). Whilst there may be a minimal number of residents who would seek to park outside the zone to avoid charges, I would imagine these would be very few in number in any event.

[Earl Aelfheah]

I agree, but 'if it were genuinely about commuter parking' is a the point.

For what it's worth, I don't think it will have a significant impact on shoppers. It is more likely to adversely effect those who travel in by car to work in the area. I don't understand why residents should have priority over school teachers, shop workers etc. Genuinely I don't. The roads are paid for out of general taxation and should exist as a public amenity. There is no entitlement to the space outside your house and actually many residents vehicles barely move during the week (my own included). Surely the school teacher travelling to work has more claim to parking than the person just using a space for storage, if we're going to start creating a hierarchy of deservedness?

[goldilocks]

I think that my point is more that the streets around the station are disproportionately affected by parking pressures as the commuter problem is a genuine issue but one that is unique to these streets because of their proximity to the station.

If people are driving to work in the area, even if they are based at ED Charter or Goose green etc, its more feasible that you have to park slightly further away and walk than it is if you're travelling to commute. From the views posted on this forum (which are obviously only a small non representative sample) it seems as though there's a view that spreading out people who drive into the area for work wouldn't be a problem and therefore that could end up being one solution put forward.

Again, as I have noted before, I think its a shame that there has been no official comment as to whether the CPZ could be implemented in a smaller section of the consultation area. The pack seems to indicate separate 'zones' within the area, so maybe that would be the boundaries of any segregation of decisions, but again it isn't clear.

[bels123]

goldilocks Wrote:

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

Again, as I have noted before, I think its a shame

> that there has been no official comment as to

> whether the CPZ could be implemented in a smaller

> section of the consultation area. The pack seems

> to indicate separate 'zones' within the area, so

> maybe that would be the boundaries of any

> segregation of decisions, but again it isn't

> clear.

See below quote from Cllr James McAsh from his councillor thread - 2nd Sept 18

?The consultation will identify what appetite there is for controlled parking in different areas. The consultation area is quite big but the results will not be all-or-nothing. In other words, if controlled parking is popular in some areas but not in others then the former can have controlled parking and the latter not.?

[MarkT]

"See below quote from Cllr James McAsh from his councillor thread - 2nd Sept 18

?The consultation will identify what appetite there is for controlled parking in different areas. The consultation area is quite big but the results will not be all-or-nothing. In other words, if controlled parking is popular in some areas but not in others then the former can have controlled parking and the latter not.?"

Did James provide written evidence to support that promise?

It was certainly not the case in Dog Kennel Hill, where only 14 of 29 streets voted yes. Here are some quotes from the 2017 Dog Kennel Hill CPZ Report:

"Street-by-street analysis shows that 14 streets support a parking zone and ten streets are against. Three streets were undecided and there was no response from Grove Vale or Henry Dent Close."

Based on the results of the informal consultation, officers are making the following recommendations:

1. To implement a parking zone throughout the whole study area.

[jimlad48]

The reason why some areas get CPZ even if they voted against it is the realisation that the parking pressure on those areas would soon become intolerable. In the toastrack consultation it was noted that a couple of streets had said no, but the judgement was they would quickly request to be added to the CPZ once the wider zone was activated.

The manner that commuters shift to new areas is fascinating, and they do displace when a CPZ comes in. There is a chain reaction and you would be surprised how far some walk to ensure they can drive/park for commuting -the cost of driving in is always cheaper than trains in from Kent or elsewhere.

[MarkT]

"In the toastrack consultation it was noted that a couple of streets had said no, but the judgement was they would quickly request to be added to the CPZ once the wider zone was activated."

jimlad, that's outrageous.

[jimlad48]

MarkT Wrote:

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

> "In the toastrack consultation it was noted that a

> couple of streets had said no, but the judgement

> was they would quickly request to be added to the

> CPZ once the wider zone was activated."

>

> jimlad, that's outrageous.

Not really - more based on long established evidence that where small number of streets, particularly those which in this case were then surrounded by CPZ remained free parking, the pressure became overwhelming and residents would lose the ability to park - hence repeated petitions after the event for another go.

[Sally Eva]

There's a question in the current consultations as to whether people who don't want CPZs would change their mind if streets around them had one.

[MarkT]

Sally Eva,

to ask people to record a provisional alternative choice is totally reasonable, with the option to say 'no, I will not change my mind'

That is not what jimlad has reported and is justifying.

Jimlad, can you provide the actual quote, to support your statement?

[Sally Eva]

It seems a bit mean to knowingly allow a small number of streets who vote against a CPZ to have all the outflow of commuters from streets around them that vote to have one. That is after all what a great deal of this thread is about -- complaint that one CPZ moves the parking pressure onto neighbouring streets who then need one.

This is a community decision which means some people are always going to either have a CPZ who didn't want one or not have a CPZ who did.