Dulwich Hill CPZ Meeting 17th July 6-8 pm.

[Pugwash]

The Dulwich Hill CPZ meeting will be held at Christ Church Barry Road 6 - 8 pm Monday 17th July.   Very conveniently only a few Dulwich Hill residents have received leaflets giving details.  No need to pre book as church can hold a large number of people.

[march46]

Booking is required via Eventbrite https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/dulwich-hill-streets-for-people-consultation-event-tickets-673617617427?aff=oddtdtcreator

[CPR Dave]

I think this is a done deal tbh, 

It's a shame because it will push up house prices even more and squeeze poor people out of the area, further consolidating East Dulwich as an enclave for the rich upper classes.

Hope for the sake of the people behind this policy that those kind of residents believe in the "equality" mission and keep on voting Labour.,

[Moovart]

The Dulwich village zone meeting at the library was a bit of a shambles.  These are question and answer sessions with about six tables with a Councillor at each table and local residents squeezing around a table wherever they can and then talking to the one councillor you happen to have on your table who then will feed back to the council panel in charge. It's not an open council meeting by way of consultation.

Feedback from that session is that the CPZ is coming borough wide. That is decided.  The councillors say these sessions and the survey are about giving residents some input into the final design in each zone, so days of operation.. weekdays only or 7/7 etc, hours of operation.  Those living on zone boundary roads like lordship lane will get a permit for their side of the road but would have to pay to park on the other side!

Go along and speak to the councillors and see more detail for your zone but be aware it seems to be a done deal.

[Mrs Y]

Perhaps that should be the first question to ask at the meeting, "is this a done deal"?

[Moovart]

Yes that my first question.

Answer was - yes borough wide CPZ is going to happen 

[CPR Dave]

I just feel like they've been lying about this for years. They always intended to do it, with or without public support 

[first mate]

One of my greatest concerns is there is no mandate, they are literally ignoring a majority of objectors in parts of the borough. I feel uncomfortable with a local government that overrides the wishes of the electorate.

James McAsh came up with a bizarre rationale that because somewhere like Nunhead has cleaner air and is more well off they must pay permits because they will be polluting other parts of the borough that have fewer car owners that do pay for permits but have less clean air!? He disregards PTAL scores.  So he is arguing that a part of the borough with more car owners has cleaner air than a part that doesn't? He is also assuming that Nunhead car owners make the bulk of their car journeys into the North of the borough. In terms of the rationale in favour of CPZ, I have never seen the goal posts change so quickly.

[CPR Dave]

It's such a bum argument. Where is the equality for people in Southwark paying for parking when, two hours a day aside, there is no charge at all for residents from outside the Borough.

 

And no charge whatsoever if they just drive through polluting our streets, using our roads and they don't stop amd park.

Theres no equity in that.

[Penguin68]

1 hour ago, first mate said:

is also assuming that Nunhead car owners make the bulk of their car journeys into the North of the borough. In

Which is of course madness. North to South and vice versa is the only way public transport here works, those are the one journey type I'm guessing the majority would choose public transport for! 

[Pugwash]

On the publicity out in the area - there is no mention of 'booking' and even on the eventebrite site it talks of  being a drop in session.

[modernMajorGeneral]

On 14/07/2023 at 01:23, CPR Dave said:

I think this is a done deal tbh, 

It's a shame because it will push up house prices even more and squeeze poor people out of the area, further consolidating East Dulwich as an enclave for the rich upper classes.

Hope for the sake of the people behind this policy that those kind of residents believe in the "equality" mission and keep on voting Labour.,

You are correct; in the council's eyes, they are doing this. That is not a reason to lie down and accept this position. The council is wrong and behaving undemocratically. We must tell them.

Hi everyone, we formed a group in Nunhead and Queens Road to oppose the council's introduction of a CPZ. We now want to expand our remit to push back on the whole ridiculous policy across the whole borough. If we can get the whole borough to demand that the council revert to its 2018 position, where CPZs were put in on when local residents requested it in response to parochial parking challenges, then we may have a chance to win.

They can ignore the protestations from each group. Can they really ignore the whole borough? Please come and join us on https://opposethecpz.org, and anyone who is able to bring their time, effort and skills to the team, do get in touch.

Also, spread the word. Tell everyone. 

Thanks,

Richard.

[CPR Dave]

Agreed Richard. Good work, thank you.

[Pugwash]

A friend attended the Dulwich Library meeting thinking it was related to all of ED - he did not book and just went in. Said he could understand why they asked for bookings due to limited space. Christ Church will not have that problem so I would just turn up. Cannot be called a consultation if they effectively ban those who wish to attend. 

[Ivvan]

I went to the meeting at Christ Church on Monday 17 July for the so called 'consultation' about the introduction of a CPZ area for Dulwich Hill. It was a complete whitewash because the Council has already decided to introduce it. Most people in the meeting were totally opposed to the idea. It is yet another attack on people in a cost of living crisis. It is another way for the Council to raise money. We need to organise our opposition across the borough. Where is the mandate for this decision? I thought the Council/politicians are voted in to work on our behalf, not just impose their will. How will those on a state pension be able to afford the £240 pa to park their car? The Councillor who led the meeting made a gob stopping comment when he said that Dulwich Hill residents were not exactly poor, a sweeping comment if ever there was one.

2 minutes ago, Ivvan said:

I went to the meeting at Christ Church on Monday 17 July for the so called 'consultation' about the introduction of a CPZ area for Dulwich Hill. It was a complete whitewash because the Council has already decided to introduce it. Most people in the meeting were totally opposed to the idea. It is yet another attack on people in a cost of living crisis. It is another way for the Council to raise money. We need to organise our opposition across the borough. Where is the mandate for this decision? I thought the Council/politicians are voted in to work on our behalf, not just impose their will. How will those on a state pension be able to afford the £240 pa to park their car? The Councillor who led the meeting made a gob stopping comment when he said that Dulwich Hill residents were not exactly poor, a sweeping comment if ever there was one.

 

On 16/07/2023 at 00:16, modernMajorGeneral said:

You are correct; in the council's eyes, they are doing this. That is not a reason to lie down and accept this position. The council is wrong and behaving undemocratically. We must tell them.

Hi everyone, we formed a group in Nunhead and Queens Road to oppose the council's introduction of a CPZ. We now want to expand our remit to push back on the whole ridiculous policy across the whole borough. If we can get the whole borough to demand that the council revert to its 2018 position, where CPZs were put in on when local residents requested it in response to parochial parking challenges, then we may have a chance to win.

They can ignore the protestations from each group. Can they really ignore the whole borough? Please come and join us on https://opposethecpz.org, and anyone who is able to bring their time, effort and skills to the team, do get in touch.

Also, spread the word. Tell everyone. 

Thanks,

Richard.

We need a borough wide campaign otherwise they will pick us off ward by ward. Is there a cross borough petition to oppose these CPZ's? We need one urgently.

[tiddles]

 

I have already posted this on the other thread about this. 

How can we find out the names of our local councillors (think there is an info page somewhere on the EDF)

 

 

James

thank you for attending this evening’s meeting regarding the above and trying to answer the many residents questions and concerns. You were put in a very difficult situation and I sympathise. However, you must understand that people genuinely feel that they have been dumped on from high above. There is no problem with pollution and parking in the many residential areas that the proposed CPZ is going to be installed. 

 

Rather than claim we all responded to a questionnaire in 2019, just say, - "after 12 years of underfunding, we cannot balance the books and we think people with cars can contribute", it might be accepted as a reality. 

 

HOWEVER you are going to kill the golden goose. Dulwich Village businesses have seen a clear 15% downturn in trade since the introduction of the LTNs, coupled with with a 30% increase in overheads — it looks grim. 

 

 

If you start to make it difficult for all the independent businesses on Lordship Lane/Forest hill road and elsewhere, to have passing trade, then you are going to destroy what is so special about this south london enclave. 

 

I am also very concerned about how the teachers who work in the many local schools are going to manage. I am hoping you are aware that the average Teacher Salary will not cover buying a house in East Dulwich - how are these essential workers going to manage? - I hope they will get in an exemption? 

 

Ditto health professionals making house calls to patients needing home health visits - please assure us that these will be assured free parking. I am sure that given the massive machinery put in place to manage this additional bureacracy this will be appropriately managed. 

 

I look forward to a response. 

[CPR Dave]

Your local councillors are here 

They are all labour and will all be backing this to the hilt.

https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx?bcr=1

[paco]

I have just returned from a consultation meeting on the Streets For People' at the Church in Barry Road.

When I arrived, people were queuing outside the Church - the reason was that they had to wait their turn to sit in small groups to chat with a Councillor.

It is clear that this was designed to avoid an open discussion on the imposition of a controlled parking zone (CPZ) in East Dulwich.

It was also clear that the majority of people attending the meeting were not in favour of such 'divide and rule' tactics - and we ended up having an open meeting.

I am shocked that a Labour Council could stoop so low as to treat the people they represent with such contempt and shocked that Labour Councillors would participate in such an exercise.

We were told that it had been made clear on the website/eventbrite that this was how the meeting would be held - I have just looked, to see this is patently not the case - see screenshots.

One Councillor stated there has not been any consultation on whether people want a CPZ - the views of the people they represent aren't courted - the  Council knows best.

This is at odds with the website that says:

"Why your views matter

We want your views on the Streets for People proposal in your area. In particular we want your input on what days and hours you would prefer the controlled parking to operate - it is important to answer these questions even if your own preference is not to have controlled parking."

Why tell us our views matter and the pretence of consultation if this has already been decided?

Only one person at the meeting said they were in favour of the CPZ- by a show of hands.

Others had left by this point - in disgust.

I had hoped to be convinced that this would be a beneficial thing for East Dulwich, but the Councillor failed to make the case for imposing a CPZ.

This amounts to meddling by the Council.

If the majority of people are in favour (or don't care), so be it.

There is no guarantee that this can be stopped, but the only way there is any chance of stopping this is if enough people object to this.
Perhaps those of us who feel the same way could get together and consider what action we can take.

Shall we roll over or kick off?

[Rockets]

Paco, how many people were there?

 

The only thing the council will listen to is a concerted barrage of noise telling them how wrong they are and how this is not a consultation, nor do they have a mandate to impose this. The last consultation was equivocal, Dulwich residents did not want CPZs and until such time as they run a consultation that allows you to oppose it then the last consultation results should carry over.

 

What they are doing is utterly undemocratic and very un-Labour and could have serious ramifications for their political careers - if enough people rally against them and make them realise that the people are against them.

Power to the People and all that!

[alice]

Error

Edited July 17, 2023 by alice
Error

[paco]

9 hours ago, Rockets said:

Paco, how many people were there?

 

The only thing the council will listen to is a concerted barrage of noise telling them how wrong they are and how this is not a consultation, nor do they have a mandate to impose this. The last consultation was equivocal, Dulwich residents did not want CPZs and until such time as they run a consultation that allows you to oppose it then the last consultation results should carry over.

 

What they are doing is utterly undemocratic and very un-Labour and could have serious ramifications for their political careers - if enough people rally against them and make them realise that the people are against them.

Power to the People and all that!

I would guess around 100 - 120 people.

In other boroughs there have been court cases.

This is only a done deal if we all roll over.

I agree - their legacy will be a loss of trust in the Labour Party.

I saw the look of shame on one Councillor's face as he left the building. 

On 14/07/2023 at 01:23, CPR Dave said:

I think this is a done deal tbh, 

It's a shame because it will push up house prices even more and squeeze poor people out of the area, further consolidating East Dulwich as an enclave for the rich upper classes.

Hope for the sake of the people behind this policy that those kind of residents believe in the "equality" mission and keep on voting Labour.,

It is only a done deal if people roll over and accept it.

Other boroughs have taken court action 

On 16/07/2023 at 00:16, modernMajorGeneral said:

You are correct; in the council's eyes, they are doing this. That is not a reason to lie down and accept this position. The council is wrong and behaving undemocratically. We must tell them.

Hi everyone, we formed a group in Nunhead and Queens Road to oppose the council's introduction of a CPZ. We now want to expand our remit to push back on the whole ridiculous policy across the whole borough. If we can get the whole borough to demand that the council revert to its 2018 position, where CPZs were put in on when local residents requested it in response to parochial parking challenges, then we may have a chance to win.

They can ignore the protestations from each group. Can they really ignore the whole borough? Please come and join us on https://opposethecpz.org, and anyone who is able to bring their time, effort and skills to the team, do get in touch.

Also, spread the word. Tell everyone. 

Thanks,

Richard.

Thanks for this information Richard.

I hope others get involved - I will.

[nell79]

15 hours ago, Ivvan said:

I went to the meeting at Christ Church on Monday 17 July for the so called 'consultation' about the introduction of a CPZ area for Dulwich Hill. It was a complete whitewash because the Council has already decided to introduce it. Most people in the meeting were totally opposed to the idea. It is yet another attack on people in a cost of living crisis. It is another way for the Council to raise money. We need to organise our opposition across the borough. Where is the mandate for this decision? I thought the Council/politicians are voted in to work on our behalf, not just impose their will. How will those on a state pension be able to afford the £240 pa to park their car? The Councillor who led the meeting made a gob stopping comment when he said that Dulwich Hill residents were not exactly poor, a sweeping comment if ever there was one.

 

We need a borough wide campaign otherwise they will pick us off ward by ward. Is there a cross borough petition to oppose these CPZ's? We need one urgently.

I didn't hear it that way.  I felt he was just making a comment about this area generally being an affluent one, which is undeniably true - he clearly knows that everyone in this area isn't well-off, but policy has to be made on a somewhat general basis.  It simply wouldn't be possible otherwise.  

[march46]

He said that the cost of living crisis affects everyone in the borough, not just car owners in Dulwich.

[eastdulwichproperty]

Well done Councillor McAsh for standing up in front of this angry mob, he was one of the few sensible people in the room. His calm and reasoned responses were well presented in very hostile circumstances. Several people asked 'why this was happening?' and clearly hadn't understood the problem that was trying to be solved. The attached document 'Foreword' section summarises the overall problem clearly and concisely. I'm sure that there are many more people that would have spoken up in favour of the plans if the meeting hadn't degenerated into an angry shouting match (I say match but of course all the shouting was in one direction), it would take a brave person to stand up to that. Through all the shouting I didn't actually hear anything sensible or constructive from the opposition, what is their solution to the problem?

Streets for People Strategy 2023-2030.pdfStreets for People Strategy 2023-2030.pdfStreets for People Strategy 2023-2030.pdfStreets for People Strategy 2023-2030.pdfStreets for People Strategy 2023-2030.pdfStreets for People Strategy 2023-2030.pdf

Edited July 18, 2023 by eastdulwichproperty

[Rockets]

Did Cllr McAsh provide anything to suggest how CPZs deliver against any of those aims because there seems to be little to suggest they do anything other than raise £ for the council?