I apologise if you feel I was being evasive. The requests on the doorstep and those submitted online are similar in that neither are the direct response to a question about parking; both require the resident to independently identify parking as an issue for them and to then decide to raise it. The Council does not routinely write to residents asking them to complete that form.
Regardless of the overall outcome of the consultation, I would be astonished if fewer than 100 people support the implementation of a CPZ. That's because fewer people indicate their support unprompted than do when directly asked.
Thatís interesting about your experience with a Labour activist a couple of years ago. Not my experience at all.
I take on board your points about the Council being clearly in favour of the CPZ being implemented. In a sense this is true - on a global level the Councilís policy is that CPZs are good because of their impact on air pollution and road safety. But at the same time our policy is also that they should only be implemented with majority support. So in a sense the consultation is in part an opportunity for the Council to persuade people that a CPZ is a good thing, whilst also recognising that it is down to the people to decide. I donít think that this is undemocratic. However, I do agree that - regardless of your overall view on whether or no to implement - there will clearly be some people who will lose out from it, and perhaps these downsides should have been properly outlined. For me, it is a question of finding the right balance.
1) I do not think that there is a hard threshold because the consultations need to be consistent with officersí work plans. If lots of areas reached a threshold at the same time it would not be possible to run a consultation in all of them. So it is rather a question of balancing the number of requests with other demands on officersí time.
2) I am afraid I do not have any direct figures for this, but I assure you that there are plenty of people calling for this consultation. I receive countless emails from them.
3) It would break data protection rules to show exactly where they lived but your suspicion is indeed correct that the bulk of them live around the station.
Thanks for this, very interesting and helpful.
Yes you are correct, I made this point in my initial post on the subject further up the thread.
ď*Why is there a consultation*
The council has a policy of consulting on the introduction of a CPZ if residents call for one. There have been sections of the Goose Green area which have been very active in calling for this for some time. During the election campaign last year parking was the most commonly-raised local issue. Clearly, with no CPZ in place and no consultation ongoing the people raising it were almost universally those who supported the implentation of one. Although I am reltaively new to this post, I am told that this is the standard pattern: we councillors hear mostly from those who support a CPZ until a consultation happens, at which point we hear more from its opponents. This makes sense to me and it's why it's important to have a meaningful consultation.Ē
Molly/The Nappy Lady
One of the key points of the proposed CPZs is to have fewer parked cars on the roads, and to make it easier for residents to find parking spaces. This means balancing the needs of different road users: residents, customers of local businesses, and employees of local businesses. The calculation that has been made is that access to parking should come at a lower cost to local residents than the other groups. This is, in my view, totally reasonable given the alternatives that each group faces if they cannot park. If the latter two groups do not have a permit, or either will not or cannot pay for the hourly rate, then they can make the journey by another means of transport and leave their car at home. Whereas if a resident has no permit then they simply cannot have a car at all. So the consequences of not having a permit are much greater for residents than for employees and therefore it is right that their access to a permit is prioritised over that of other groups.
James McAsh - Labour Councillor for Goose Green ward
Surgeries: 2nd and 4th Thursdays of the month at 7pm, East Dulwich Community Centre on Darrell Road
Sign up to the Goose Green councillor newsletter: [www.jamesmcash.com