Jump to content

CPZ: Proposed Controlled Parking in East Dulwich


Recommended Posts

It's recently come to our attention that the council are yet again proposing controlled parking on all the side streets off Lordship Lane.


Whilst fewer cars would be welcome, I have grave concerns for our lovely and unique high street which makes East Dulwich what it is today. Surely this will massively disrupt the trade of all our lovely shops and in turn kill the high street? Imagine Lordship Lane without all it's indpendents...


I for one love the Lane and would hate to see it affected in this way.


(Title changed as there are lots of CPZ discussions going on and we don't need separate ones - Admin)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jakido Wrote:

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

> Is it possible to limit the time period to

> discourage commuters leaving vehicles e.g 9am to

> 10am, but allowing people to still drive and park

> at other times?


At the risk of making it look like all I do is post about CPZs - the problem (it seems to me) is that Southwark do implement a 2 hour window only for the CPZ but then allow people to pay by telephone - so no bar to commuter parking if they are willing to pay for the 2 hour window. At least that has been the experience of some roads in the Denmark Hill CPZ. I've said elsewhere I think the time has come where a CPZ feels inevitable as everywhere else around us is controlled parking but if we have one, it needs to work for residents, allow people to visit our local shops and restaurants and not just be a revenue raising exercise or an ideological one in that Southwark think CPZs are the way to discourage car ownership in the borough.


http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1989466,1992981#msg-1992981

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Businesses need not fear parking restrictions - they currently exist along a lot of Lordship Lane where customers can park for free for upto 30 mins. Recent evidence shows shoppers who travel by more active methods (eg walk or cycle) actually spend more.


?The study found that people walking, cycling and using public transport spend the most in their local shops, spending 40 per cent more each month than car drivers.? https://road.cc/content/news/251992-more-shoppers-more-shops-tfl-stats-show-benefits-designing-streets-around


In Southwark?s 2015 high street study on Lordship Lane 22% travelled by car (with the exception of the Walworth Rd the highest % across the borough) yet 90% considered themselves to be local. ?The picture is one of a local population using the centre because it is convenient and easy to access, but with rather more than expected choosing to use a car to get there and back.?


With the illegal levels of air pollution in the area I?m pleased the council is taking action which will encourage people to consider walking instead of driving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That?s all OK if people want to buy a few items that they can carry, anything more won?t be possible. In turn making the ease of large supermarkets like Sainsbury?s far more appealing. I also don?t see how a 30 minute window is helpful for anyone wanting to do their shopping...it would definitely stop them from using one of the local cafes or restaurants.


This is very concerning and has been the death of many high streets...let?s not let ours be next!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What evidence is there that commuters are using the side streets off Lordship Lane? I can't believe that people drive to ED from outside the area in order to park up and then get on our 'amazing' public transport services into central London. It is much more likely that those parking here are either working in the area or visiting friends, family or the shops. This idea that only residents should legitimately park in the area is nonsense. The idea that the streets are full of people shunning fast commuter services into the Capital from further out in order to drive part of the way and then take over an hour on a bus from ED, is even more fanciful imo.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that there isn't enough room for everyone in a block of flats to have a car, or for many households to have two cars and for people who work in the local shops, schools or other businesses to travel here by car. The answer is better public transport, not putting higher and higher costs on car use. People have little choice but to absorb the extra costs unless we provide adequate alternatives.*


If we had a reliable, tube frequency train service, I suspect many people would give up their cars. If we had better 'last mile' transport such as hire bikes or electric scooters, people would be less likely to keep a car. If we had secure, covered bike parking at Brixton, then people would be less likely to have a car.


If public transport deteriorates and at the same time car use becomes more expensive, people just get poorer.


*cue peeps saying everyone should get on their bike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> What evidence is there that commuters are using

> the side streets off Lordship Lane? I can't

> believe that people drive to ED from outside the

> area in order to park up and then get on our

> 'amazing' public transport services into central

> London.


I don't know about around Lordship Lane but I can definitely say that in Copleston Road - about equidistant from ED station from the bottom of Lordship Lane where we are - large numbers of commuters come and park up and walk down to the station every morning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Consultation opens tomorrow, but well worth reading all the documentation first before making up your minds


Feels like a money making exercise when you see the costs per permit, especially as each household can apply for three


https://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/parking-projects/east-dulwich-parking-study-and-healthier-streets-consultation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a persistent issue with commuters driving in to access London stations - when the Toastrack got its CPZ, the parking uptake dropped overnight. There was a lot of evidence of people driving in from Kent or beyond (source - Council published comments received on consultation by people confirming they did this) to use the streets to park, prior to taking train/bus.


ED is likely to be similar - its hard to imagine though that the shops on Lordship Lane will collapse if a CPZ is put in. How much of their trade is really reliant on people who come solely by car to shop? I suspect probably not much at all. Even if a CPZ goes in, there will still be plenty of 'pay to park' spaces available (as per all other CPZ too).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

rendelharris Wrote:

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

> rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> -----

> > What evidence is there that commuters are using

> > the side streets off Lordship Lane? I can't

> > believe that people drive to ED from outside

> the

> > area in order to park up and then get on our

> > 'amazing' public transport services into

> central

> > London.

>

> I don't know about around Lordship Lane but I can

> definitely say that in Copleston Road - about

> equidistant from ED station from the bottom of

> Lordship Lane where we are - large numbers of

> commuters come and park up and walk down to the

> station every morning.


"Large numbers" would imply that there are lots of empty places for them to park in !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ed_pete Wrote:

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


> "Large numbers" would imply that there are lots of

> empty places for them to park in !


Yes there are, because they tend to pitch up, I assume deliberately, about the time those who drive to work have left and parents are on the school run and take the vacated spaces. What's your point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always been resistant to CPZ because of its knock-on impact on non-CPZ areas, and also on people who work locally (eg retail and the primary schools) who may not have easy public transport commutes.


Regarding the proposed cost however, since the charge only applies to car-owners who are generally not among the most deprived members of the community, ?125/year, ?2.50 a week, doesn't seem extortionate in the grand scheme of things. It costs that much just to park on the street for one hour up on Champion Hill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've met* two people recently who drive in from Kent to the Underhill Road area, park and then get trains from FH or ED which really surprised me.



*met in the sense that they both parked across our drive in the hope that no-one was in the house all day...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Southwark have to pay those 44 fat cats on 100k+ a year somehow!


Money from controlled parking spent on transport doesn't then have to come from general budget.


Renting our own streets for profit without returning money to us via council tax should be illegal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mrwb Wrote:

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

> Southwark have to pay those 44 fat cats on 100k+ a

> year somehow!


Urban myth territory: the forty-four employees on ?100,000+ figure was put around by the ever-reliable-and-never-cherrypicking Taxpayers' Alliance, extrapolating from the 2014-16 figures. Twenty-five of those ?100k "salaries" in fact represented redundancy payments - the "fatcats" were, in fact, being laid off. At the time of that report (don't know the figure now) Southwark in fact had nineteen employees on over ?100k. You may well think that's too many, but let's keep to the facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@RH, I guess my point is that those that wish to have a CPZ on Copleston Road are asking all car owners on that street to pay for a permit when there are adequate parking spaces at certain times of day.

CPZ's are emotive subject and IMO I think that most people will have already made up their minds based on the impact on themselves. Most people will not be swayed by air quality arguments or care about the knock-on to the neighbouring non-CPZ areas or the affordability for other car owners.

If you regularly experience problems parking near your own property, believe a CPZ will solve this issue and are happy to pay for the permit then I guess you'll be in favour. If, like my household, you don't use your car much during the week (in my case there are usually more spaces at the weekend) then I guess you won't.

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

    • 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!
    • You know when you are wrong but think you're right because the internet etc? Read it and twist it how you want if it makes you feel better. I use a card as well as cash. You are pro jumping the gun and pro cynical. Yeah,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Pro cash 🙃Who isn't? Is being pro card some kind of middle class virtue signaling thing? Like jumping to conclusions seems to be. Oooh the uncouth commoner uses that dirty cash stuff. Orf with his head.
    • Using cash is a good way of budgeting for some, if they don't have the cash in their pocket they can't buy things they may not need.  Financial institutions are keen to get us to all use plastic and credit because its harder to spot when you are at your limit and debit equates to interest which is how they make money. So dear Sephiroth, before you slam people for being pro cash, maybe think about why they are and not just view the world from your limited perspective 🤔 
    • The card machine in the dry cleaner's wasn't working, so the guy asked my husband to go to the cash till and withdraw some money....
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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