Jump to content

Do you want Controlled Parking YES or NO


Recommended Posts

Many people have contacted my colleagues and I asking for controlled parking so we want to take a temperature check of what all local residents views on this are - for and against.


We have created an online survey to capture the views of those for and against a controlled parking on their street - https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/KGT2WZR


Controlled parking has recently been installed in North Dulwich. And it will be also be installed on the northern side of the East Dulwich railway line this summer.


Parking spaces are coming under increasing pressure with the installation of significant extra double yellow lines, along with local developments such as The Charter School East Dulwich and new health centre, which even while being built are adding to the problems with contractors parking in the limited spaces.

Controlled Parking permits costs ?125 per vehicle and any zone is likely to operate for one or two hours per day - this could vary by street. Local businesses are likely to oppose controlled parking as a minority of around 22% of shoppers visit by car and any loss in trade in the current economic climate would be really painful for them during the hour or two of controlled parking operating.


Please let us know what you think by completing this short survey - https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/KGT2WZR


NB. What we have found historically many want state they want controlled parking. The council then runs a public consultation at great cost. At that point people have come out against a CPZ and it has not proceeded. The most recent experience was at the northern end of Crystal Palace Road.


So this is a genuine attempt to take temperature check on views for and against - [www.surveymonkey.co.uk]


Your name and address and views on controlled parking are mandatory questions the remaining questions are optional. We will check every response is from a local resident against the electoral roll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never mind optionality. Cut out the question about voting intentions. I don't see its relevance to the content of people's views on CPZs. It's also very likely to lead people to suspect that, DPA notwithstanding, the answer is going to be used for canvassing purposes.


I'd also like to see a really large or representative selection, through a well-designed survey or otherwise, of the before-and-after views of people who've experienced the introduction of a CPZ. That would be valuable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please note that this is not either a Market or a Social Research exercise. Both of these absolutely require that personal identifiers are NEVER associated with individual responses and the identity of those taking part (with some very special exceptions) is NEVER divulged to the principal commissioning the research.


This is a list building exercise designed to allow Lib Dem messages to be sent to those supporting CPZs (I would guess) suggesting that the Lib Dems support such a move, whilst making sure that antis don't get that message.


By all means participate in this exercise, but do not think it has anything to do with legitimate market or social research practices. It breaches the MRS code big time.


Neither will it provide figures which are in any way representative of the ED population. The ED forum is a self selecting population the representativeness of which is unknown. Neither is it known (I would guess) how many forumites are now resident in the set of wards which cover ED. So it would be impossible to make any statistical interpretation of results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This survey asks questions of no relevance to the topic and will not process the response unless they are provided: they are NOT optional. It appears to me to be a cynical ploy to garner data for political use. Here are the examples:


?8. If there was an election tomorrow, which way would you vote (please tick more than one if you're unsure)

Conservative

Labour

Liberal Democrat

Green Party

UKIP?

How is my voting preference relevant to CPZ introduction? I had to ignore this several times before I could get past it.


?7. In what year were you born? (enter 4-digit birth year; for example, 1976?

How has this to do with CPZ introduction? I?m voting/driving age, which can be ascertained by a cross-reference with my name and address on the voting register (the form asks for this information in order to check that the responses are from affected individuals, which is reasonable)


And finally,

?If you return this survey the Liberal Democrats and their elected representative may use the information you've given to contact you. Some contacts may be automated.?


I feel that this fundamentally impairs the validity of this survey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

?125 each year for a permit..........and doubtless rising!


?49 for 10 vouchers for visitors @ c?5 a throw ...........do pop over to see us!


More permits issued than available parking spaces ...........don't imagine that you're guaranteed a space!


It feels very much like a form of additional local taxation.


So....... NO to a CPZ!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Just had a carpets cleaned by Steve Nourse and his colleague at short notice. They are lovely guys and the cleaning was quick and carpets look great. Good value. 
    • Looking for tickets for 2 adults one child under 2 and one child over 2. However, please let me know if you have any combination of tickets you are no longer able to use.  Thanks 07756110500
    • all I said was "take a pro cash stance too far" - what twisting have I done?   plenty of good arguments for retention of cash - but let's not get too detached from reality either lest we go back to trading livestock   But to go back to your post DD:   "Or don't stop using cash" Yep plenty of people will agree with this - nothing controversial here   "Stop using your phone or even your watch as a banknote" - getting a bit weird now - why not - it's super convenient for both users and businesses. And far easier to keep a track of your balance using your electronic wallet than old systems of cheques taking days to clear, how much did I take from cashpoint 2 days ago etc. But people will differ so whatever works   "God only knows how much damage we're doing to the planet because all the above must require a hell of a lot of resources and juice from the grid" - big straw man argument here. Why bring this in? Unless you are also suggesting we don't buy any goods not made from within a 5 mile radius and nothing transported by air or sea? "a big lump of plastic with a screen and full of personal information that can be easily gleamed." I've had my phone stolen but nothing was lost because it was secure.I've been mugged and lost cash and valuable. It's not a binary thing   "your sky rocket with a phone in your hand. It's become a source of dopamine for many. It's an addiction for many."  Proper overreaching now There is a reason people like their modern phones - and it isn't just replacing cash. Replacing all of these functions in a tiny device is a magnificent achievement and to just boil  it down to "big lump with a screen" is reductive in the extreme  
    • I agree with the posts that housing is an urgent need in Peckham and throughout Southwark. But as Alice says, it’s the percentage of social / affordable housing that matters. In October last year, there were over 4,200 households on the Council’s waiting list for housing in Peckham alone (over 17 thousand across Southwark). But the developer is only offering 35% affordable housing (which means that 65% will be unaffordable). Both Southwark Council and the GLA say that a big development like this should provide 50% affordable housing.   Re-development of the site is a great opportunity to make the town centre “cleaner, safer and more sustainable and welcoming” (borrowing Nigello’s great words). Is this dense development going to do that, when it provides no real green and open space where people can spend time outside and nature can help us tackle the growing problems of climate change like absorbing flood water, cooling the air on baking summer days? Are 7-storey buildings along Rye Lane (where the average buildings are 2-3 storeys) going to be welcoming to users of the town centre? How will the development impact on Peckham’s economy? Currently there is busy daytime commercial activity of shops providing for different demographics and needs including a rich offering of international groceries and other products, alongside a thriving night-time economy. I can’t see anything in the proposal that suggests how it will enhance and empower the local economy. Yes please, let’s have a great development on this site that enhances the town centre. This means not letting the developer get away with packing people into dense blocks that turn their back on the town centre and which will be a recipe for urban decay in the long run. Peckham deserves better than this!
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...