CPZ: Proposed Controlled Parking in East Dulwich

[jimlad48]

first mate Wrote:

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

> The introduction of 'commuter stalkers' as another

> reason to proselytise for CPZ just seemed odd.

>

> Hemingway Wrote:

>

I'm pointing out that in some areas, multiple women told us how disturbed they were to discover that random commuters were intentionally seeking out their car to parallel park next too, often in the early dark hours and wait for them to drive away. I'm sure you can see how this may make people uncomfortable, and how a CPZ promptly stops it and agree that this is a definite advantage of a CPZ.

[intexasatthe moment]

I guess we ( including myself ) need to take note of how S'wark have titled this consultation

East Dulwich parking and healthier streets consultation .

Guessing the reduction in parking spaces and attempt to reduce the amount of parking by non residents feeds into the "healthier streets" .

It's not going to feed into improving my mental helth/mood ,that's for sure .

[Hemingway]

jimlad48 Wrote:

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

> first mate Wrote:

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

> -----

> > The introduction of 'commuter stalkers' as

> another

> > reason to proselytise for CPZ just seemed odd.

> >

> > Hemingway Wrote:

> >

>

> I'm pointing out that in some areas, multiple

> women told us how disturbed they were to discover

> that random commuters were intentionally seeking

> out their car to parallel park next too, often in

> the early dark hours and wait for them to drive

> away. I'm sure you can see how this may make

> people uncomfortable, and how a CPZ promptly stops

> it and agree that this is a definite advantage of

> a CPZ.

'Multiple women told us' - who is this 'us'? Are you a Southwark Council employee or a councillor?

[fbwick]

I live inside the proposed CPZ and near to Alleyn?s. Parking is a nightmare during the day due to parents parking and leaving their cars while they commute to the city and also due to builders and tradesmen from the medical centre / school. In my mind this situation is only going to get worse once the school is at full capacity and the medical centre is up and running. I often struggle to find s space on our roads and there aren?t many other places to park near us. I appreciate that many other areas of East Dulwich don?t have these parking pressures but some areas do need to find a solution.

[jimlad48]

Hemingway Wrote:

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

> jimlad48 Wrote:

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

> -----

> > first mate Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > The introduction of 'commuter stalkers' as

> > another

> > > reason to proselytise for CPZ just seemed

> odd.

> > >

> > > Hemingway Wrote:

> > >

> >

> > I'm pointing out that in some areas, multiple

> > women told us how disturbed they were to

> discover

> > that random commuters were intentionally

> seeking

> > out their car to parallel park next too, often

> in

> > the early dark hours and wait for them to drive

> > away. I'm sure you can see how this may make

> > people uncomfortable, and how a CPZ promptly

> stops

> > it and agree that this is a definite advantage

> of

> > a CPZ.

>

> 'Multiple women told us' - who is this 'us'? Are

> you a Southwark Council employee or a councillor?

Us - a group of local residents who got together to start the campaign for a CPZ and who spent roughly 2 years building local support for one. Part of our campaign involved contacting local residents to seek their views and ask them to sign a petition. We (roughly 25 active campaigners at its peak) went door to door on several hundred houses engaging with local residents, and hearing their stories. We also then presented to local councillors by effective use of local democracy.

Overall we found multiple stories of concern from residents, ranging from child safety issues through to someone being delayed for their own funeral. The commuter stalking was a common complaint.

I do not work for, and have no ties to Southwark Council.

[Hemingway]

it's interesting, maybe even instructive, that nothing like that has happened in ED that I'm aware of.

I've never heard anyone ever stalk about commuter stalking in 40+ years in London, so remain a but cynical it's a big 'thing' , certainly not in my part of SE22.

By the way, being delayed for your own funeral sounds a mild inconvenince in the bigger picture.

[Johnjohn]

I have read the documentation provided by Southwark and attended the drop in session at Push Studios on Saturday 26th, and been a regular viewer of this thread.

Some of the points I gathered from the drop-in-session which are notable in my opinion :

(Sorry if I am repeating information which has already been discussed on this thread)

? I was informed the zone will operate for the same time for the whole zone (i.e. There cannot be areas of 12-2 and other areas of 10-12, or all day). Whichever time/timing is favoured, it will be that for the whole zone.

? The zone boundary may change following the consultation (i.e. If the Northern end of the zone is in favour and the southern tip isn?t, then they may re-draw the boundary)

? They also may end up splitting the zone (this is unlikely, and this could then produce split/different timings, but would also mean different permits for the different zones)

? All dropped kerbs will receive a double yellow line extending for 2 meters either side!

? Permit Holders will not get a ?window sticker? type ticket, rather it will be monitored by a Number Plate recognition system. (i.e. Only the wardens will know who has a permit)

I have a particular problem on my street with a trading estate creating huge parking pressure which the street cannot handle.

This proposed CPZ would appear to solve this issue, but at what cost?

I have a concerns with the implementation of so many double yellow lines where there isn?t currently a problem, it removes so, so many parking spaces, and will increase speed on certain roads (e.g. Crystal Palace Road)

There are two types of ?commuter vehicles? which people seem to refer to, and I think is worth differentiating.

1. Those that drive to park near the station to then catch the train, whether that be from the transport ?black holes? which exist (such as SE East Dulwich) or people driving in from Kent (which people anecdotally talk about but I find hard to believe!)

2. Those that travel in from out of the area to work in local businesses.

The former is a problem which surely must be addressed given the fact ED must be the last place in Zone 2 to not have a CPZ.

The latter I do have some sympathy for, but by the same token I, like many others, am unable to drive to work because of the parking restrictions at my journeys end (not that I would want to!)

Clearly other disagree, but I do personally have some doubts as to how much a Mon-Fri, 10-12 restriction would really effect the trade of businesses on Lordship Lane?

The parking restrictions on Lordship Lane itself would be the same, correct (i.e. timings and bus lane etc) ? Just the side streets which are currently unrestricted which would change

Herne Hill seems to thrive under a Mon-Fri, 10-12?

I really am on the fence on this. My fear is if a CPZ is not implemented then the area will become a huge dumping ground for vehicles of all sorts (more than it already is) being what must be the closest are to Central London without a CPZ.

The issues regarding station commuters would remain, but that would remain specific to this streets surround the area, but possible get worse, this would be amplified by the ?West Peckham? CPZ which is I would imagine is likely to go ahead.

I used to live near Bellenden for many years, and there was a Parking review undertaken not long after we moved in (approx. 2004). Our small street voted for no CPZ?.and we then became the last, closest street to Peckham Rye Station without a CPZ and parking soon became a nightmare.

I would be amazed if an all day restriction has support.

If a CPZ is to go ahead then surely it can only be 2 hours per day, Mon-Fri to deal with the issues that supposedly need fixing?

Anything further would be overkill. If the CPZ is inevitable, then it is worth getting right.

[TheArtfulDogger]

jimlad48 Wrote:

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

> Hemingway Wrote:

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

> -----

> > jimlad48 Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > first mate Wrote:

> > >

> >

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

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > The introduction of 'commuter stalkers' as

> > > another

> > > > reason to proselytise for CPZ just seemed

> > odd.

> > > >

> > > > Hemingway Wrote:

> > > >

> > >

> > > I'm pointing out that in some areas, multiple

> > > women told us how disturbed they were to

> > discover

> > > that random commuters were intentionally

> > seeking

> > > out their car to parallel park next too,

> often

> > in

> > > the early dark hours and wait for them to

> drive

> > > away. I'm sure you can see how this may make

> > > people uncomfortable, and how a CPZ promptly

> > stops

> > > it and agree that this is a definite

> advantage

> > of

> > > a CPZ.

> >

> > 'Multiple women told us' - who is this 'us'?

> Are

> > you a Southwark Council employee or a

> councillor?

>

>

>

> Us - a group of local residents who got together

> to start the campaign for a CPZ and who spent

> roughly 2 years building local support for one.

> Part of our campaign involved contacting local

> residents to seek their views and ask them to sign

> a petition. We (roughly 25 active campaigners at

> its peak) went door to door on several hundred

> houses engaging with local residents, and hearing

> their stories. We also then presented to local

> councillors by effective use of local democracy.

>

> Overall we found multiple stories of concern from

> residents, ranging from child safety issues

> through to someone being delayed for their own

> funeral. The commuter stalking was a common

> complaint.

>

> I do not work for, and have no ties to Southwark

> Council.

Jimlad

From what I'm reading, you are in favour of a CPZ and campaigned for one in your area as a cost neutral resident (no car so no cost to you)

East Dulwich is a place you visit but don't reside in, but you seem to want to muddy the waters with your own brand of project fear!

A CPZ may work where you live, but residents and businesses here should be allowed to make an informed decision based on locally researched fact and not fiction (council variety) especially in areas where parking is not a problem.

I did laugh at your description of "commuter stalking", were the people involved going to work by car themselves, in which case fair game, or taking their kids to school, in which case should they be looking at public transport or walking as an option to assist with removing the "child safety" issues you also mentioned.

Happy to hear your opinion on the subject, but you do seem to be too vocal to not have a vested interest imho

[stephen509]

In favour of CPZ in Frogley Road.

Would rather pay to guarantee parking, whereas at the moment consistently park 4/5 roads away.

Also happy to pay for guest passes.

[Penguin68]

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.

[jimlad48]

TheArtfulDogger Wrote:

>

> Jimlad

>

> From what I'm reading, you are in favour of a CPZ

> and campaigned for one in your area as a cost

> neutral resident (no car so no cost to you)

>

> East Dulwich is a place you visit but don't reside

> in, but you seem to want to muddy the waters with

> your own brand of project fear!

>

> A CPZ may work where you live, but residents and

> businesses here should be allowed to make an

> informed decision based on locally researched fact

> and not fiction (council variety) especially in

> areas where parking is not a problem.

>

> I did laugh at your description of "commuter

> stalking", were the people involved going to work

> by car themselves, in which case fair game, or

> taking their kids to school, in which case should

> they be looking at public transport or walking as

> an option to assist with removing the "child

> safety" issues you also mentioned.

>

> Happy to hear your opinion on the subject, but you

> do seem to be too vocal to not have a vested

> interest imho

You know when 'project fear' is rolled out, its usual a chance to dismiss evidence.

My purpose here is to inform based on our experience, because this area had a long chat about Toastrack parking some years ago. I have no agenda, it makes not one jot of difference to my life if you vote for a CPZ or not. I am merely offering an alternative viewpoint based on my factual experiences. I'm sorry if you don't like evidence based information, but thats the reality of the experience.

And yes, they were single females travelling very early in the morning on their own and being subject to abuse from commuters when they hadnt moved on time. This is the reality of living in a displacement zone - some people may not have it now. I will mererly say again though, if half of Dulwich gets a CPZ and other half doesnt, then expect to experience displacement very quickly.

[Galileo]

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.

[first mate]

How many women? Did men never complain or were only women targeted? How many different 'commuter stalkers' were identified.

[colville09]

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.

[Galileo]

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.

[jimlad48]

Agree - and when the Toastrack discussion happened here, there were plenty of non Toastrack residents participating in it too. If EDF doesnt want non ED residents participating then perhaps it needs to update the forum rules?

Galileo Wrote:

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

> 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.

[Eileen]

Galileo Wrote:

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

> 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.

Hi Galileo - do you mean that if it is still very difficult to park in the evenings and into the night that a CPZ during the day isn?t much help?

That is the problem in my street (Nutbrook in Bellenden). I was told by Joanne the Council project manager for this that they are probably mostly residents in streets nearby in Peckham town centre CPZ parking in our street rather than getting a permit as we are the closest without controls at the moment. We just won?t know until a CPZ is implemented if that is true since no one seems to have any evidence for who it is parks in our streets all day and all evening and all night...

[Jim1234]

Does anyone know if the 'are you in favour...' question represents a referendum-style yes or no to the scheme that will be respected?

[Galileo]

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?

[Rockets]

The sooner everyone realises that the council only cares for two things: 1) ?125 a year from every car in the CPZ and 2) reduced car usage - the better. The council gives not one jot whether you can park outside your house - they don?t want you to have a car, they don?t care for the impact a CPZ will have on a local area or the local amenities that serve the community - all they care for is the cash this CPZ generates and they are doing everything they can to justify implementing it. And once they get their foot in the door it will be a disaster for the area as they will play the CPZ domino game. And remember they deliberately made the parking challenges worse in the CPZ area (and only within the CPZ area) with the extension of the double yellows so people would ?vote? for the CPZ. It?s blatant interference and manipulation.

Talk to any of the traders on Lordship Lane (perhaps some of those in favour should do this) and the council isn?t listening to their concerns - they want and need the cash and they are doing everything in their power to get it and they will fudge and bluff their way to justify it. As someone said from a CPZ area nearby - be careful what you wish for.

[roywj]

Eileen Wrote:

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

> Galileo Wrote:

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

> -----

> > 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.

>

> Hi Galileo - do you mean that if it is still very

> difficult to park in the evenings and into the

> night that a CPZ during the day isn?t much help?

>

> That is the problem in my street (Nutbrook in

> Bellenden). I was told by Joanne the Council

> project manager for this that they are probably

> mostly residents in streets nearby in Peckham town

> centre CPZ parking in our street rather than

> getting a permit as we are the closest without

> controls at the moment. We just won?t know until a

> CPZ is implemented if that is true since no one

> seems to have any evidence for who it is parks in

> our streets all day and all evening and all

> night...

A good indication will be if the cars ever move. I've noticed a few arrive on our road which were parked long term in another road which now has a CPZ. They havent really moved since arriving but if they do it's usually on a Friday evening returning back onto our road on Sunday ready for the new week ahead.

[MarkT]

Eileen wrote

"Hi Galileo - do you mean that if it is still very difficult to park in the evenings and into the night that a CPZ during the day isn?t much help?

That is the problem in my street (Nutbrook in Bellenden). I was told by Joanne the Council project manager for this that they are probably mostly residents in streets nearby in Peckham town centre CPZ parking in our street rather than getting a permit as we are the closest without controls at the moment. We just won?t know until a CPZ is implemented if that is true since no one seems to have any evidence for who it is parks in our streets all day and all evening and all night..."

So the Council CPZ team are promising a 40% gain in available parking spaces and telling us to look at the CPZ's already in place for proof of that promise. But now, the project manager is telling you, Eileen, that they have, at least in part, created that benefit within the existing CPZ by temporarily dumping on you. If you vote yes to a CPZ, you will magically get the 40% increase in vacant spaces, because all your problem parkers will go back home, a couple of streets away.

So you lucky people currently enjoying empty steets in existing CPZs, once the next CPZ is in place, your neighbours will be back, paying for their permits and parking in front of your door like they always did.

[singalto]

I still cannot understand why Joanna who is the official who wants us to have a CPZ thinksthere will be 40% more space to park! It defies any kind of logic.

[intexasatthe moment]

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?

[Galileo]

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.