Any info on how to challenge controlled parking proposal in Nunhead?

[Kip59]

I live in Nunhead and am not happy that the council are proposing cpz in the area. Any ideas how to challenge this?

[beck]

they should do a consultation beforehand and if you live on the affected street or close by you will be sent a consultation form.

[first mate]

Be warned, the council have a special way of doing CPZ consultations, using a  street by street approach because they know that they can better get CPZ started that way. What they are unlikely to do is a whole area consultation. 

So you'll find some streets say yes and others say no. But streets that say no and that are inevitably affected by displaced parking from the streets that said yes, then start to want CPZ. This way CPZ 'creep' is primed and ready to go. 

Look out too for sudden imposition of loads of double yellow lines, to further reduce parking spaces, thereby artificially creating parking pressure and the need for CPZ.

Oh and you'll find lots of people outside your area get involved in and have a say, for instance Southwark Cyclists and its members from all around the borough will probably be able to get involved in the consultation and they will be very pro CPZ.

 

 

 

[Ashlar]

Here is a link to a petition shared on another thread

 

https://chng.it/pQZzR97G

[Kip59]

They did a 'consultation' last night, but it was anything but a 'consultation'. It was to tell us they are going ahead whether the majority of residents in Nunhead like it or not. Now what do we do?

East Dulwich obviously successfully challenged the cpz proposal in the Lordship Lane area. Can anyone from this campaign help us?

[first mate]

ED did not successfully challenge CPZ, instead a fair number of streets voted against. Because the council had promised to honour the majority verdict of each street it meant that a fair few streets are still CPZ free, which has stemmed CPZ rollout for now.

In fact, this created a bit of a problem for the council as one key street had a majority against CPZ and had the council honoured its promise to allow the majority view, it would have reduced parking pressure in an area they wanted to be all CPZ. So in this case the council reneged on their own process and split the road in two, treating it as two distinct roads.

Currently, many roads in ED are still CPZ free, however, I am sure the council will find ways to artificially create more parking pressure soon. They are pretty creative at this sort of thing.

 

[rollflick]

The petition is hilarious, it states

"Active travel should of course be encouraged but again the CPZ proposal does not appear to have any relevance to active travel.  Congestion charge and ULEZ already means that people use vehicles sparingly and considerately so again the proposed CPZ will not impact on this."

Great that it doesn't want to be seen to oppose active travel but both these assertions are nonsense.

C charge doesn't apply south of New Kent Road while almost all vehicles here already comply with ULEZ and there's still lots of traffic: by contrast a CPZ does discourage both driving and ownership.

Also as shown on so many other Southwark streets once a CPZ goes in there are fewer cars parked, dramatically so in many cases. That makes streets far nicer to walk and cycle on, even before space is then reused for bike parking, benches and parklets.

Anyway it's too late to challenge as Southwark has committed to a whole borough CPZ by 2025 in its (transport) local implementation plan and it is now legally required to deliver this: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1999/29/section/151

The consultation is an important opportunity to consider the location of restrictions and hours of operation of the CPZ to help meet the borough's climate and air quality targets.

[first mate]

Well for those residents in need of home adaptations, maintenance work etc.., get it done soon. Cannot imagine what the costs will be after 2025. Looking forward to plumbers, electricians and builders on cargo bikes services.

 

[rollflick]

4 hours ago, first mate said:

Well for those residents in need of home adaptations, maintenance work etc.., get it done soon. Cannot imagine what the costs will be after 2025. Looking forward to plumbers, electricians and builders on cargo bikes services.

 

It's about £5 a day or just £2.50 for 5 hour visits, once you've used up the initial 10 reduced price visitor permits. https://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/parking-permits/on-street-permits/visitor-s-parking-permits

Yes I find it difficult to believe the costs of plumbers etc. these days, but this works out as a tiny amount like 1 or 2 per cent extra for a boiler service, while helping reduce congestion etc. through modal shift.

That said there are already plumbers on bikes: https://www.treehugger.com/uk-plumber-conducts-business-by-cargo-bike-5188214

And, as the roll out of low traffic and parking zones continues across Southwark, we'll see ever more bike-based businesses in our borough appear in directories like this: https://broughtbybike.com/

[first mate]

Thanks, it's interesting to hear about the two plumbers and one electrician who work using e-bikes in London... but doesn't really help the bulk of us who are going to have to fork out even more for basic house maintenance in addition to what will be regular parking permits. Just cannot see this mode of transport taking off en masse among general building trades any time soon. Happy to be proved wrong though.

If I have understood,  all day permits are £33.80 for the first ten days, rising to £60.80 per ten days thereafter? Given the recent massive hike in residents parking permits I wonder how long it will be before all day visitor permits also get hiked? 

 

 

[first mate]

Some interesting stuff from Council Scrutiny session on Environment and Leisure. It gives detail on Council ambitions for CPZ, LTNs, hire bikes and stated mission to have hire bike hangars on the roads, necessary storage for when we all give up our cars, including e-cars.

Cllr King raises an interesting question as to whether emissions measured are sometimes mixing woodburner with vehicle emissions.

 

[Spartacus]

I've just seen a post on nextdoor from the meeting which makes interesting reading. 

See the following screenshot 

I've removed the posters name.

[Marguerita98]

Hi. I think it's important to remember that some people do want CPZ and that there are very strong reasons for this. Some streets have an impossible parking situation for residents for a number of reasons but often because of the rapid increase in 2 car ownership in Nunhead and East Dulwich. A lot of people with 2 cars are very vocal against the scheme for obvious reasons! The displacement from other streets is also a factor and there is an environmental concern for residents when street becomes an unofficial car-park for those who want free parking and can't find it elsewhere.  I know that lots of people are against it but a lot of people are also for it but feeling too frightened to speak because of the strength of feeling this debate generates......

[first mate]

5 hours ago, Spartacus said:

I've just seen a post on nextdoor from the meeting which makes interesting reading. 

See the following screenshot 

I've removed the posters name.

Interesting. 
What is the thinking around Cllr Rose? Why might she not be a Cllr in October?

[Rockets]

I think Cllr Rose’s “mansplaining” outburst was a sign all was not well, she looked so stressed and wound-up - she has been thrown to the wolves by the council and her fellow councillors have been more than happy to push her into the firing line whilst they cower.

[first mate]

In response to the OP, I think that you need to carefully scrutinise all and any reasons given for the need to impose CPZ on Nunhead. You'll probably be given data on emissions which, if the ED experience is anything to go by, are dodgy ( see Heartblock's posts).

I saw an assertion on this thread that there has been a massive rise in two car ownership in Nunhead, and this has led to parking pressure on some streets. No idea if this is true or source for that info. 

You may find Cllrs spending a lot of time speaking to any residents that do want CPZ. Ensure your voices are heard too. Hold your Cllrs to account.

If the subject is under discussion on the Nunhead Forum, look for a sudden influx of new posters who are pro CPZ. They may well not be local residents but part of organisations who want CPZ. 

[Ashlar]

On 14/05/2023 at 19:18, Marguerita98 said:

Some streets have an impossible parking situation for residents for a number of reasons but often because of the rapid increase in 2 car ownership in Nunhead and East Dulwich

The problem here is that having a CPZ will make no difference to your parking problems. I live opposite East Dulwich train station and we had a CPZ added years ago. It is enforced from 11-2 Mon-Fri and you can phone a number to pay for parking. This means that after 2pm, parking is free again and if you pay by phone you can leave your car there all day. 
 

We do not have restrictions inside the estate, so commuters just park inside at no cost and we residents now pay £225 a year to maybe get a space in the street

Definitely be careful what you wish for

[first mate]

Can anyone reveal the data source for the assertion that there has been a "rapid increase in 2 car ownership in Nunhead and East Dulwich"?

[TIJNAR]

On 11/05/2023 at 17:52, Kip59 said:

I live in Nunhead and am not happy that the council are proposing cpz in the area. Any ideas how to challenge this?

 ‘One Voice One Nunhead’ 

1. Get Involved/Action: 
2. Please see below, clear instructions on how you can get involved in the  ‘One Voice One Nunhead’ campaign and take action to support the campaign. Includes options such as signing petitions, making donations, volunteering, attending events, or contacting local representatives.

https://opposenhdcpz.wordpress.com/

Who to write to

[email protected]
[email protected] 
[email protected] 
[email protected] 
[email protected] 
[email protected] 
[email protected] 
[email protected]

Here is a list of some national newspapers in the UK and their submission guidelines, along with some local ones in London:

National Newspapers:

1. The Guardian: 
Submit a news tip or pitch by email to [email protected] or find specific sections and editors on their contact page. More information can be found on their website: https://www.theguardian.com/help/ng-interactive/2013/jan/29/guardian-contacts-journalists

2. The Times: 
Submit a news tip or pitch by email to [email protected] or find specific sections and editors on their contact page. More information can be found on their website: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/static/contact-us/

3. The Telegraph: 
Submit a news tip or pitch by email to [email protected] or find specific sections and editors on their contact page. More information can be found on their website: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/contact-us/

4. The Independent: 
Submit a news tip or pitch by email to [email protected] or find specific sections and editors on their contact page. More information can be found on their website: https://www.independent.co.uk/service/contact-us

5. The Daily Mail: 
Submit a news tip or pitch by email to [email protected] or find specific sections and editors on their contact page. More information can be found on their website: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article-3569817/Contact-Us.html

Local Newspapers in London:

1. The Evening Standard: 
Submit a news tip or pitch by email to [email protected] or find specific sections and editors on their contact page. More information can be found on their website: https://www.standard.co.uk/topic/contact-us

2. The Londonist: 
Submit a news tip or pitch by email to [email protected] or find specific sections and editors on their contact page. More information can be found on their website: https://londonist.com/contact

3. The Hackney Gazette: 
Submit a news tip or pitch by email to [email protected] or find specific sections and editors on their contact page. More information can be found on their website: https://www.hackneygazette.co.uk/contact-us

4. The Richmond and Twickenham Times: 
Submit a news tip or pitch by email to [email protected] or find specific sections and editors on their contact page. More information can be found on their website: https://www.richmondandtwickenhamtimes.co.uk/contactus/

5. The West End Extra: 
Submit a news tip or pitch by email to [email protected] or find specific sections and editors on their contact page. More information can be found on their website: https://westendextra.com/contact-us/

Share your voice with all your friends & family and on every social media channels you’re on or can find too.

"Unite and Empower: Together for a Transparent Nunhead" 

Community Websites 2 Join, 2 Voice

NextDoor
https://nextdoor.co.uk

East Dulwich Forum
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/search/?&q=Parking&search_and_or=and

Fundraiser Platforms 
https://www.gofundme.com/en-gb

Sign our petition:

https://www.change.org/p/oppose-controlled-parking-zone-in-nunhead

"Unite and Empower: Together for a Transparent Nunhead" 

[Spartacus]

@TIJNAR you forgot our local publications including Southwark News , Peckham Perculiar / Dulwich Diverter and local magazines like the SE group 🤔

The bigger the noise, the better chance there is that the consultation will be amended to actually listen to local views.

[TIJNAR]

On 11/05/2023 at 20:44, first mate said:

Be warned, the council have a special way of doing CPZ consultations, using a  street by street approach because they know that they can better get CPZ started that way. What they are unlikely to do is a whole area consultation. 

So you'll find some streets say yes and others say no. But streets that say no and that are inevitably affected by displaced parking from the streets that said yes, then start to want CPZ. This way CPZ 'creep' is primed and ready to go. 

Look out too for sudden imposition of loads of double yellow lines, to further reduce parking spaces, thereby artificially creating parking pressure and the need for CPZ.

Oh and you'll find lots of people outside your area get involved in and have a say, for instance Southwark Cyclists and its members from all around the borough will probably be able to get involved in the consultation and they will be very pro CPZ.

 

 

 

Kindly note, we’ve changed the domain https://opposethecpz.wordpress.com/

[CPR Dave]

The second dirtiest trick the Council played in the ED consultation was to ask something like "If your street voted against a CPZ but the neighbouring roads had a CPZ put in, would you then like a CPZ in your road?"  

Answering yes to that question is treated as "Yes I'd like a CPZ in any circumstance".

You have to say no to that question and hold the line! 

[Spartacus]

Southwark news are carrying the story 

https://southwarknews.co.uk/area/southwark/nunhead-residents-slam-council-over-consultation-on-cpzs/

 

[Charles Martel]

In 2019 the council proposed two CPZ areas at the same time, East Dulwich and Peckham West. Peckham West was successfully imposed, East Dulwich only partially. One key factor in the success of the resistance in East Dulwich was the grass roots campaign by the shop keepers along Lordship Lane. They had posters in their windows and collected signatures for a petition against the CPZ extending beyond the area around East Dulwich station. As the proposed CPZ area was very much larger than needed to deter commuters parking near the station the argument against it was easy to make and could be understood by most residents. Thanks to the shop keepers campaign the public meetings about the CPZ were well attended and the arguments against the CPZ were well made by articulate people.

 

There is an obvious argument for a CPZ in areas where there are problems caused by people coming from outside the area wanting to park, however this was obviously not the case in most of East Dulwich. Is it likely that people will think it is in Nunhead? As residents will just buy permits the CPZ will do nothing to reduce resident parking. Despite the fact that 70% of Southwark is supposedly covered by CPZs already that 70% has not become the car free utopia that some seem ideologically fixated on creating. It is therefore important not to fall into the trap of car owners vs. the rest of society that the council wants to lay. All of my neighbours who cycle to work also own cars, as do most of the ones who use public transport or walk.

 

Whereas the stated rationale given by the council for the Nunhead CPZ is to “prioritize parking for residents and their visitors” elsewhere the council publicly states that

“The parking fees and charges have been set to encourage a reduction in overall vehicle numbers and a reduction in polluting vehicles.” This is despite the obvious fact that most vehicles in Southwark are through traffic which the council has no control over.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12027415/Labour-council-wages-war-drivers-increasing-cost-permits-368.html

 

A Southwark News journo is looking to speak to Nunhead residents about the Controlled Parking Zone proposals.

https://twitter.com/isabelreporter/status/1658412129790177282

[CPR Dave]

.

Edited May 18, 2023 by CPR Dave