CPZ: Proposed Controlled Parking in East Dulwich

[singalto]

Yesterday, during the day, there were several free spaces n my road in spite of a number of cars taking up one and a half spaces each. By 6.30pm, there wasn?t space for a Smart car. A CPZ would not solve the parking.

[intexasatthe moment]

IME car parking on Southwark estates is usually in car parking bays .I imagine roads etc on council estates would be part of the estate and owned by Southwark .

[rendelharris]

singalto Wrote:

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

> Why do council tenants get free parking permits?

They don't (as far as I'm aware), they get free permits to park in the estate carparks, e.g. if you lived on Pytchley Road you could get a free permit to park in the carpark round the back of the flats, but you'd still need a paid-for permit like anyone else if you wanted to park on the road itself.

[d.b]

> When I exit from either East Dulwich or Peckham rye, it seems to me that most people are walking home and not just getting into a car.

This is the point really. I come out of ED station every day and cannot for the life of me recall seeing people immediately get into cars parked nearby.

And isn't it really obvious that they wouldn't? If someone wants to "park and ride", why on earth do it in ED? Not only is the actual train service pretty shoddy, but the traffic getting to/from ED is awful, there must be many better places to drive to with more space to park, better road routes into the area, and a better train service to board when you get there.

Just like the double yellow line fiasco, this proposed CPZ is a reaction to a problem that doesn't exist...

[rendelharris]

d.b Wrote:

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

> This is the point really. I come out of ED station

> every day and cannot for the life of me recall

> seeing people immediately get into cars parked

> nearby.

>

> And isn't it really obvious that they wouldn't? If

> someone wants to "park and ride", why on earth do

> it in ED? Not only is the actual train service

> pretty shoddy, but the traffic getting to/from ED

> is awful, there must be many better places to

> drive to with more space to park, better road

> routes into the area, and a better train service

> to board when you get there.

>

> Just like the double yellow line fiasco, this

> proposed CPZ is a reaction to a problem that

> doesn't exist...

I can't speak for the areas around Lordship Lane, but I can assure you that on Copleston Road this happens a fair bit (which accounts for the fact that during the working day, it is very rare to see a free parking space between Grove Vale and Avondale Rise), see them all the time. The problem is, in fact, getting worse now they can't park on Quorn or Pytchley, and we frequently have selfishly dangerous parking on the corners of Soames Street etc. I don't know why they do it or what the benefit is to them, but in this street at least it is definitely not an imaginary issue.

[jimlad48]

Its worth noting that its not just the station, but also bus routes that see a lot of park/ride commuters - there used to be a lot who would drive in as far as they could to park for free, then take the bus the rest of the way.

[singalto]

There are currently three 4x4 taking up 5 car spaces across the road from my house. Why can?t people Park more thoughtfully?

[Galileo]

rendelharris Wrote:

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

> d.b Wrote:

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

> -----

>

> > This is the point really. I come out of ED

> station

> > every day and cannot for the life of me recall

> > seeing people immediately get into cars parked

> > nearby.

> >

> > And isn't it really obvious that they wouldn't?

> If

> > someone wants to "park and ride", why on earth

> do

> > it in ED? Not only is the actual train service

> > pretty shoddy, but the traffic getting to/from

> ED

> > is awful, there must be many better places to

> > drive to with more space to park, better road

> > routes into the area, and a better train

> service

> > to board when you get there.

> >

> > Just like the double yellow line fiasco, this

> > proposed CPZ is a reaction to a problem that

> > doesn't exist...

>

> I can't speak for the areas around Lordship Lane,

> but I can assure you that on Copleston Road this

> happens a fair bit (which accounts for the fact

> that during the working day, it is very rare to

> see a free parking space between Grove Vale and

> Avondale Rise), see them all the time. The

> problem is, in fact, getting worse now they can't

> park on Quorn or Pytchley, and we frequently have

> selfishly dangerous parking on the corners of

> Soames Street etc. I don't know why they do it or

> what the benefit is to them, but in this street at

> least it is definitely not an imaginary issue.

It?s the same on the north end of Melbourne Grove by the station. If you live on a street where commuters park then you will see them getting into their cars, I do every morning and evening. If you think of the number of people coming off one single train then you?d have to be pretty lucky to be behind the person going to their car - most do walk or use the bus but it doesn?t take many of the thousands of commuters that use the station every day to fill up the parking spaces around the station - if they all drove then I doubt they?d be a space for miles around!

[Penguin68]

Do you follow these 'commuters' to the station? There are many schools, hospitals etc. locally, which rely on incomers to service them. How many of these 'commuters' are here to serve our local ED needs - their timings of e.g. arrival and departure would be the same as through commuters using ED station?

[Galileo]

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> Do you follow these 'commuters' to the station?

> There are many schools, hospitals etc. locally,

> which rely on incomers to service them. How many

> of these 'commuters' are here to serve our local

> ED needs - their timings of e.g. arrival and

> departure would be the same as through commuters

> using ED

To start with, I don?t ?follow? anyone with the intent of finding out where they are going (apart from the time I sawKevin McCloud in Chandelier and wanted to know where the Grand Design was!). I rarely see them in the morning - by the time I leave on the nursery/school run at 8am there are no parking spaces left despite there being spaces overnight every night. When I do see them is on my way home from the station. I must admit I don?t actually see them getting off the exact same train and follow them down the street to their car so it could be complete coincidence that they just got mixed up in the flood of commuters coming off the train - or we could opt for the more common sense interpretation of the situation.

I do appreciate that we need local workers but I am not sure the answer is to allow everyone to drive. Adding to the statio pressure and those that park to get the bus to kings, they are just building the health centre behind us which at its maximum capacity will have 467 people in it and 46 parking spaces - then there?s the school with 183 staff when full - I know people have got to get to work, so do I, but we are right by a train station and about 6 bus routes, the council have restricted on-site parking to encourage public transport use, if there isn?t a CPZ as well then the parking lot that we currently live in will soon extend much further as people see online that there is free parking and they chance it for their visit. They?ll circle our roads already full by 8am and then they?ll have to head outwards - with all the congestion and pollution that comes from circling cars. We already have this, the parking can?t get worse for us, the congestion and pollution can, but the parking will get worse for someone if people expect to be able to park by these facilities and arrive here to find that they?re not getting in on our road.

[Penguin68]

I do appreciate that we need local workers but I am not sure the answer is to allow everyone to drive.

The 'answer' would be good and effective public transport, including bus services which operate effectively East: West as well as North: South. Most of the (few) East: West routes are amazingly tortuous, take an age and often require changes. I used to work in Greenwich - it took me 15-20 minutes by car and 90 minutes by public transport. Guess which I used?

Amended to add - the 90 minutes wasn't just travel time but included waits for changes. Which rarely matched any published timetable. I had to set off much earlier than the journey should have required because of this uncertainty.

[rendelharris]

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> Do you follow these 'commuters' to the station?

> There are many schools, hospitals etc. locally,

> which rely on incomers to service them. How many

> of these 'commuters' are here to serve our local

> ED needs - their timings of e.g. arrival and

> departure would be the same as through commuters

> using ED station?

At the rare times I get the train in the morning rush hour, yes I have frequently seen people park up on Copleston and walk to the station, and the same coming t'other way in the evening. I have every sympathy with hospital workers who need to get to work, but given the fact that Denmark Hill is very well serviced by trains from all points of the compass from both within London and beyond, I can't really see why people working at King's would need to drive.

Schools - I wonder how many teachers in local schools really live so far away that they absolutely have to drive (as opposed to it just being more convenient)? Certainly when I taught near this area I'd say 95% of my colleagues lived within easy public transport reach of the school - though about 50% of them drove. Yes, I know teachers have to carry resources etc, though my wife, who teaches in a resource-heavy subject, manages to commute to teach in Fulham every day by train without difficulty.

London is choking to death on traffic fumes. 9,000 premature deaths a year - and not just old folks who would have died a year later anyway, children, people of all ages. Children are growing up with physical and brain deformities as a result of insanely high pollution levels. If CPZs and other measures stop people using their cars so much, even if it does make life a bit more inconvenient, sorry, I'm not going to regard that as a bad thing.

[Galileo]

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> I do appreciate that we need local workers but I

> am not sure the answer is to allow everyone to

> drive.

>

> The 'answer' would be good and effective public

> transport, including bus services which operate

> effectively East: West as well as North: South.

> Most of the (few) East: West routes are amazingly

> tortuous, take an age and often require changes. I

> used to work in Greenwich - it took me 15-20

> minutes by car and 90 minutes by public transport.

> Guess which I used?

>

> Amended to add - the 90 minutes wasn't just travel

> time but included waits for changes. Which rarely

> matched any published timetable. I had to set off

> much earlier than the journey should have required

> because of this uncertainty.

That is exactly right (and the disconnect between here and Greenwich is a particularly baffling one - why there is no direct public transport option across south London is beyond me.) But everybody driving these commutes can?t be the answer - for one, the congestion caused contributes to those busses not turning up on time which make your commute so much more arduous and uncertain. Public transport won?t get better in the places it is needed without the public calling for it - and if they can just jump in their cars then they?re going to. Southwark planning have placed huge public facilities behind our back gardens with the stated aim of encouraging people to use public transport to use them. It?s now on the Council to deliver on that aim by ensuring the public transport gets people there efficiently.

[jimlad48]

We used to have a problem with 'stalker' commuters. They'd work out what time local residents left in the morning who used their cars, and pull up alongside and parallel park until said resident left. Some even had the cheek to get grumpy with residents who didnt leave on time.

I met several female residents who travelled solo in the morning who, frankly, were more than a little perturbed by the idea of commuters knowing their movements in this way.

[Hemingway]

Oh that sounds likley - stick 'commuter stalking' as a reason for CPZ in the consultation document. jimLad for someone who doesn't live in the area, and if i recall doesn't have a car, you seem to be a very vocal presecence on this thread....

[jimlad48]

Hemingway Wrote:

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

> Oh that sounds likley - stick 'commuter stalking'

> as a reason for CPZ in the consultation document.

> jimLad for someone who doesn't live in the area,

> and if i recall doesn't have a car, you seem to be

> a very vocal presecence on this thread....

Sorry, could you point me to the rules on the website that bar non 'local' people from commenting please?

I am offering factual practical advice on our experience to help inform peoples decision making. I am very open about the fact that I actively campaigned for a CPZ, and I am very clear on the benefits we have accrued from it. I am offering a different perspective based on the experience of what actually has happened when it was implemented. I appreciate not everyone supports CPZs, but surely good debate is about offering both perspectives, not an echo chamber?

I wasn't aware this was a crime. I also joined EDF many years ago as a good source of local advice, and have posted on a variety of topics. Heaven forbid me for trying to participate in a discussion forum with views you don't agree with...

[Penguin68]

Actually, for something as controversial as a CPZ I think it does matter if you have a dog in the fight, or not.

[jimlad48]

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> Actually, for something as controversial as a CPZ

> I think it does matter if you have a dog in the

> fight, or not.

I will keep on posting my positive experience of a CPZ. If you dont like it, then please don't feel obliged to read it.

[Galileo]

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> Actually, for something as controversial as a CPZ

> I think it does matter if you have a dog in the

> fight, or not.

In that case, should everyone state if they are within the proposed CPZ area or not? Many are, but there are certainly some voices on here who are from just outside the area, not currently suffering parking stress where they are and perhaps motivated by their own convenience of parking within the CPZ whilst downplaying the problems faced by those of us affected daily by no parking, congested roads, polluted air and constant beeping as people try to pass each other.

Edited to add: I do feel everyone affected should have a voice in this. It?s about working out if there is a problem, if so what is the best way of balancing everyone?s needs. If part of that discussion is someone saying it?s worked for them then I welcome that voice alongside that of someone who does need to drive to the area ... although I would query whether that is in all instances a need and not simply a prefer.

[Hemingway]

jimlad48 Wrote:

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

> Hemingway Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Oh that sounds likley - stick 'commuter

> stalking'

> > as a reason for CPZ in the consultation

> document.

> > jimLad for someone who doesn't live in the

> area,

> > and if i recall doesn't have a car, you seem to

> be

> > a very vocal presecence on this thread....

>

> Sorry, could you point me to the rules on the

> website that bar non 'local' people from

> commenting please?

>

> I am offering factual practical advice on our

> experience to help inform peoples decision making.

> I am very open about the fact that I actively

> campaigned for a CPZ, and I am very clear on the

> benefits we have accrued from it. I am offering a

> different perspective based on the experience of

> what actually has happened when it was

> implemented. I appreciate not everyone supports

> CPZs, but surely good debate is about offering

> both perspectives, not an echo chamber?

>

> I wasn't aware this was a crime. I also joined EDF

> many years ago as a good source of local advice,

> and have posted on a variety of topics. Heaven

> forbid me for trying to participate in a

> discussion forum with views you don't agree

> with...

I didn't say you couldn't post, anyone can, just pointing out that you don't live in the proposed area, live in an area where CPZ was imposed but there wasn't a strong and vibrant high street that will be effected , and you don't have a car. Feels like you do have an agenda though.......

[mrwb]

I don't mind people posting in favour of the CPZ.

As long as they're not council stooges, or others who somehow have a vested interest, or who somehow stand to benefit from it going ahead.

I would find it surprising that anyone would support this idea from the part of ED I live in.

Everyone in the area with a car is going to have to pay ?125 extra at least to park.

It looks like it will also reduce the amount of parking space quite considerably around Barry road, due to all the extra double yellow lines around the dropped curbs?

I guess in some parts of the CPZ area it might make sense if there is nowhere to park due to commuter parking or whatever. I guess if thousands of people paying ?125 a year to park is the only way to solve that issue so be it?

[first mate]

The introduction of 'commuter stalkers' as another reason to proselytise for CPZ just seemed odd.

Hemingway Wrote:

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

> jimlad48 Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Hemingway Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > Oh that sounds likley - stick 'commuter

> > stalking'

> > > as a reason for CPZ in the consultation

> > document.

> > > jimLad for someone who doesn't live in the

> > area,

> > > and if i recall doesn't have a car, you seem

> to

> > be

> > > a very vocal presecence on this thread....

> >

> > Sorry, could you point me to the rules on the

> > website that bar non 'local' people from

> > commenting please?

> >

> > I am offering factual practical advice on our

> > experience to help inform peoples decision

> making.

> > I am very open about the fact that I actively

> > campaigned for a CPZ, and I am very clear on

> the

> > benefits we have accrued from it. I am offering

> a

> > different perspective based on the experience

> of

> > what actually has happened when it was

> > implemented. I appreciate not everyone supports

> > CPZs, but surely good debate is about offering

> > both perspectives, not an echo chamber?

> >

> > I wasn't aware this was a crime. I also joined

> EDF

> > many years ago as a good source of local

> advice,

> > and have posted on a variety of topics. Heaven

> > forbid me for trying to participate in a

> > discussion forum with views you don't agree

> > with...

>

>

> I didn't say you couldn't post, anyone can, just

> pointing out that you don't live in the proposed

> area, live in an area where CPZ was imposed but

> there wasn't a strong and vibrant high street that

> will be effected , and you don't have a car. Feels

> like you do have an agenda though.......

[Abe_froeman]

I'm not even sure that they have included all the double yellow lines they will need to put in around the dropped curbs.

For instance, there seem to be several new dropped curbs on Crystal Palace Road tat aren't included in their proposed scheme, but if it is going to work they will need to put double yellows in all the way up from the leisure centre to the actress on the east side of that road.

On the map in the consultation they have put parking bays in where there are now dropped curbs.

[intexasatthe moment]

"I guess in some parts of the CPZ area it might make sense if there is nowhere to park due to commuter parking or whatever. I guess if thousands of people paying ?125 a year to park is the only way to solve that issue so be it?"

I mind the fact that it would be a lot harder for us to park our car (due to yellow lines round dropped curbs )much much more than forking out ?2.50 a week .

Having to pay that for increased parking problems in my area so that ppl who have chosen to live in a street v near a railway station stretches my goodwill .

[Jennys]

We live on a road which borders the CPZ so we will have all the displacement parking, much of it, I am guessing, staff and students of Alleyn?s and Jags. I am at a loss to understand why the CPZ needs to stretch so far from East Dulwich Station, I don?t think we need a CPZ at all.