Melbourne Grove South CPZ consultation

[Spartacus]

2 hours ago, malumbu said:

Melbourne Road was a rat run.  I've used it in the past.  It would not have taken that many vehicles, which would all have to have returned to the main road.  I'm pleased that many rat runs have been closed.  Many were closed or restrictions were bought on long before LTNs.  London roads have always suffered from congestion.  Certainly in the last 50 years or so.  

This in a discussion about a CPZ, in an area you don't even  live in !! 

[first mate]

4 hours ago, fredricketts said:

over the years that I have been in East Dulwich the Council has slowly tried to bring in CPZ

This is very true, they have tried and tried and now they are trying again. The suddenly 'necessary' proposed installation of paid parking bays for visiting shoppers in cars (something they were very against up until now) is just another way of turning up the heat.

 

[fredricketts]

On 24/02/2025 at 22:50, Moovart said:

I just tried to do that and it said I had already participated so if my first survey attempt is discarded as incomplete then my input will not be counted at all.  Seems unfair if true.

I found this paragraph interesting in the "options to consider" section :

Nearby CPZ schemes operate Monday to Friday, 8.30am to 6.30pm (zone ED) or Monday to Friday, 9am to 11am (zone PW). If similar parking times to neighbouring CPZs are implemented for the proposed zone, this may help prevent vehicles from other CPZs parking in your zone.

 

 

Basically it's encouraging people to vote for 8.30-6.30 restrictions because that's what the parking restriction times are in the adjacent Melbourne Grove North.  Seems like trying to influence the survey result in the instructions!!!

So residents would need visitors' permits all day if anyone comes to visit. What a pain.

So Southwark is concerned about people in adjacent parking zones parking in your new zone if you don't opt for all day restrictions but they're not concerned about displacement to the east side of lordship lane and are not even seeking the views of the rest of us in east East Dulwich even though we will all be affected.  All feels a bit 1984, pick us off one section at a time.

 

 

 

 

The pollution in Dulwich is quite high, and its because Southwark Council has forced thousands of cars from minor main roads onto all our main roads, trebling the pollution and traffic, increasing Ambulance, Police and  and fire services response times. (facts) Why because some big wigs in other countries say we need to get to net Zero so put in LTNs as they will make our streets safer. So far I have filmed about 20 over ten ton lorries backing down my road out onto the main road Lordship Lane. They don't care a monkeys for the people who, pedestrians, people who live above the shops, the schools that are on the main road, of which some, they have not long built to do away with a police station. They have allowed more flats above what used to be Somerfield's, let them build on their customer car parks and the same was with the site M&S,

 

[malumbu]

Pollution is mainly due to road vehicles.  If drivers made smarter choices there would be less pollution.

[first mate]

Thurs 6 March 6-8pm
Last CPZ consultation meeting at Dulwich Grove United Reformed Church

To send your response online go to:

https://southwark.gov.uk/melbourne-grove-south-cpz

 

Most in this area live in old Victorian terrace housing, maintenance costs can be frequent and high. Consider that if Southwark council steamroller through their CPZ agenda, the costs for necessary work on your property will be much higher every year as you will pay for contractors parking. You will also pay for any visitors who use a car.

The council aim to stop you owning a car altogether if they can, so expect CPZ costs to go up year on year. Don't forget, they want the cost of owning a car to become a huge burden.

 

[malumbu]

And?  To live in this area you have to be reasonably well off unless you are in a position to be in social housing with labour costs for builders and other professionals in the 100s of pounds a day what is a few more quid?  There are huge swathers of London with controlled parking, and the central London congestion charge.  You still see loads of Pimlico Plumbing vans though.

[first mate]

I hope others see that you have an agenda, since you do not live locally but have extremely strong views on what you believe should be the priorities of those that do live here, to the extent that you have said you are prepared to attend local meetings out of your area.

We do not need CPZ. Currently, most people are able to park, including visitors and contractors in cars. Parking may not be directly outside the home and sometimes it may involve parking a street away, but for the most part everyone manages, including shoppers in cars. Demand for CPZ is wholly a council led agenda with the help of activists, like you.

 

Thurs 6 March 6-8pm
Last CPZ consultation meeting at Dulwich Grove United Reformed Church

To send your response online go to:

https://southwark.gov.uk/melbourne-grove-south-cpz

[malumbu]

I do live locally.  But not on Melbourne Road.  My local shops are in SE22, pub and bus stops.  I've been travelling through SE22 for decades.  I know a fair amount about local transport, the national picture, and the need to take action against emissions of pollutants and climate change gases to meet national legal requirements and international commitments.  With the rise in populist politicians and anti-science, against the backdrop of geopolitical tensions and poor national finances - Tories, COVID, Ukraine and a shaky start by the new government, as citizens there is even more we need to do.  In the  absence of personal responsibility and looking at issues from our own self interest, I understand why local authorities have to consider firmer actions.

And I could do more too before I am criticised of being holier than thou 

[first mate]

You live in Lewisham, don't you? You do not live in the area up for consultation in East Dulwich, or on streets adjacent to or contiguous with the consultation area, do you?

I travel through Forest Hill a lot and use shops there but would not claim to be a local.

There is no evidence CPZ directly reduce pollution or help climate change, unless you are one of those that sees CPZ as a way to tax people out of car use altogether ( I think we know the answer to that).  

Since you feel so strongly about all this, to the extent you will instruct others on car use, I cannot imagine you would use a car for any reason, even less that you would own one.

Thurs 6 March 6-8pm
Last CPZ consultation meeting at Dulwich Grove United Reformed Church

To send your response online go to:

https://southwark.gov.uk/melbourne-grove-south-cpz

 

 

[first mate]

Has anyone successfully managed to reply to the East Dulwich CPZ consultation online? I have tried to submit a number of times and it does not complete; it gets stuck on a green icon going round and round?

 

[Sue]

On 01/03/2025 at 16:37, fredricketts said:

Its one big Con caused by the non existent CLIMATE CHANGE

Eh?

You think climate change doesn't exist?

On 01/03/2025 at 20:16, Spartacus said:

This in a discussion about a CPZ, in an area you don't even  live in !! 

I expect there are many people contributing to this forum who don't live exactly within the SE22 or Southwark borough boundaries.

What on earth does it matter, if they have an interest in the subject under discussion and frequently come  to or through SE22 (or even if they don't)?

Do you think people should be required to prove where they live before they are allowed to post on the forum?

This constant griping is so tedious.

[first mate]

Can anyone say if they have managed to successfully respond online; I cannot seem to make it work?

[Sue]

On 02/03/2025 at 10:36, first mate said:

You live in Lewisham, don't you? You do not live in the area up for consultation in East Dulwich, or on streets adjacent to or contiguous with the consultation area, do you?

I travel through Forest Hill a lot and use shops there but would not claim to be a local.

Where has Malumbu "claimed to be a local"?

Are you saying anyone not "living in the area up for consultation in East Dulwich or on streets adjacent to or contiguous with the consultation area" should not post on this thread?

How ridiculous. Probably most of the people using the forum, and possibly many of the people posting on this thread, don't conform to your requirements. I don't, for a start. I live on the other side of Lordship Lane to the area in question.

You and a few others on here just have bees in your bonnet because someone living just outside the SE22 boundary posts on the ED Forum and makes valid points  which you don't agree with.

It's childish.

Edited Tuesday at 08:43 by Sue
Clarity

[first mate]

22 hours ago, malumbu said:

I do live locally. 

He also 'thanked' me in an earlier post for reminding him about the consultation and signalled an intention to get involved. 

Of course, no-one is objecting to Malumbu posting his views on this forum and he posts plenty; the objection is to those living well outside the current CPZ weighting the results by responding to the process for idealogical reasons, and it is the case that various pro CPZ organisations do get involved. Surely those living inside the consultation area or adjacent to it are best placed to judge if CPZ is required or not? It is easy for anyone outside the area to decide for idealogical reasons that everyone should have CPZ. However, as I said, there is no evidence CPZ directly reduces pollution or mitigates climate change. For what it is worth, I am not a climate change denier.

 

 

Edited Monday at 08:36 by first mate

[first mate]

Just wondering if anyone has had success filling out the consultation online? There is only a week left to do it.

[rch]

Hi first mate,

I also had three failed attempts to submit the survey, so I spent approx three hours yesterday tracking down the correct council dept and cc’d James McAsh.

i eventually got through to Highways who suggested that I should use this direct link:-

https://engage.southwark.gov.uk/en-GB/projects/melbourne-grove-south-parking-survey

It took me to the same page, but my response actually went through the fourth time. I’m not sure if the direct link made the difference or if they quietly reset the server… but it’s interesting that you still can’t get through today.

The other option they suggested was to post the paper copy or drop it in to the Session on Thursday… but I went to the session on Saturday and I didn’t want to fill out the paper version because there are too many technical errors on the diagram of my end of Melbourne, which would take too long to write out… so I was more comfortable typing.

But even when I tried the final on-line version, the questions kept jumping around on the screen, which made it difficult to fill in my answers.

They seemed to think that the problem was just me, but I told them that I’d seen your post on the EDF and suspected that there were more people who had given up.

You can contact Highways directly by email at [email protected]

 

[Penguin68]

I'm expecting that either their chosen respondents (including staffers whether resident locally or not, it wouldn't surprise me to discover) will be getting the access url that works or they'll declare that nobody much was interested.

What they should do, of course, hearing their system was broken (which of course can happen wholly accidentally) is to re-set and re-start the process with a new deadline.

Anyone think they will? 

[first mate]

Thanks rch and Penguin, well, well, well how very interesting. I have been trying and still had no success. I would not be surprised if others have tried then given up. How convenient. It is interesting how often these consultations seem to suffer 'technical' glitches.

If anyone has succeeded then please let us know the magic solution. Better still perhaps the man in charge can sort it out.

 

[rch]

Interesting, first mate. It would be useful to put down a marker by emailing Highways directly and copy James McAsh in… as I’ve now been told by several council officers that the problem is just with me and they’ve had a significant number of replies already.

[first mate]

I guess their contention would be that someone saying they cannot complete online is lying. That is the problem with these consultations and the way they are operated. I really do think responses should be limited to the streets directly involved as well as those immediately adjacent/ contiguous, otherwise the whole thing is open to abuse. Pro CPZ groups are highly coordinated and motivated. Of course, you may be in favour, so apologies if I seem to be making assumptions.

Hand on heart, I feel this is a done deal and the example of Dulwich Village CPZ shows that they will push it through, whatever the result. Cllr McAsh has said he would like to rid the streets of all cars so I think we know what is coming.

One thing I understand is that the leaflet gives options of times for parking controls and you have to fill one of the options out or your response is voided. The online consultation did not seem to have these? Is it legal to have two 'varieties' of consultation format operating at the same time, if indeed that is the case?

[Northern Star]

I can’t submit online. I keep getting the circle of doom. Will email highways.

[rch]

Thanks, Northern Star… the more people that email Highways, the more say that the residents will get, as the council will have to acknowledge the technical issues.

first mate, in the online version that I have, you can indicate how many days a week and how many hours a day you want. I noticed that the survey questions were flicking around the screen, so you may have to scroll back and forth/up and down a few times to read them all properly.

fyi, I haven’t owned or driven a car since the mid 90s (long story), so this won’t affect me personally. In fact several residents at my end of Melbourne (close to Lordship) don’t have cars… most of the cars parked around here are the teachers at both nearby schools and some doctors from Tessa Jowell, whereupon at school holidays and weekends the road is fairly empty down here.

Plus, a significant number of Lordship shopkeepers and workers drive in from out of town, so if they can’t park nearby then we may begin to lose even more shops on Lordship… William Rose the Butcher has a sign in their window asking residents to help them fight for staff parking spaces.

I attended the drop in session on Saturday because I have a lot of solutions to some of these issues… some of which I tried to implement when I was a councillor… plus there are several technical errors on the diagram that need addressing.

So, from my perspective, I’m neutral… but my observation is that whoever designed this proposal has done it really badly. The council officers I spoke to at the drop in session weren’t very knowledgeable.

I’ll post more specifics if I can find time to type properly…

 

[malumbu]

If I drove to work when I was in central London I'd have to pay.  Why should other commuters/workers be treated specially?  It took me a couple of minutes to fill in the consultation form on line and send it in, I didn't have that much to say.

[first mate]

That is simply amazing that you managed first time. I have been trying again today, on various devices and with no luck. Just from this forum alone, that is three of us that have had issues. i wonder why....?

Speaking to neighbours; they are also having issues and cannot get beyond the green circle going round and round.

One aspect of the questionnaire that puzzles me is how someone like Malumbu, who has managed to fill it in online and submit, answers the question about "Do you want permit controls on your road"- online most of the questions are optional, but that one is not. If you do not actually live in the consultation area how do you answer that question?

Edited Tuesday at 16:38 by first mate

[march46]

3 people having difficulties with the online form does not equal a  conspiracy theory. 

Edited Tuesday at 16:36 by march46