Bobby P

I can't believe there are 40+ people who have seriously asked for this self-destructive measure to be brought in. They much have lots of money, and plenty of free time for checking each day that bays haven't been suspended and their cars erroneously ticketed. They must also not ever have lived under a CPZ regime before, or they would certainly not be asking for one here.

Have filled out the online form - against of course. The questions thereupon are very much loaded to give you an option of a) a CPZ or b) a more restrictive CPZ. So you can see which way the Council is thinking. I do have the sinking feeling that they will put this in whatever the vote, which will really be a disaster and very much the thin end of the wedge. I don't have ?125 plus visitors plus inevitable attempted fines to spare in these straightened times, and the hassle factor (being a previous CPZ resident) is getting me stressed just thinking about it. Stiff drink needed!

Quick a check today, looking out of my window on Melbourne Grove on to Ashbourne Grove. 7.15pm. There are at least 7 free parking spaces I can see, within 15 yards of my front door. This is slightly more than average, I would say, but in general, I've never in 8 years of living here had a problem here with parking: at worst have had to park maybe 100 yards away, and then only on a very few occasions.

On the subject of turkeys voting for Christmas... Once again, no one has some God-given right to park directly outside their house, and a CPZ will not improve anyone's chances if my experience of living under them is anything to go by. Without a CPZ (in Camden) I could always find somewhere to park ultimately. When it was introduced, it led to endless bay suspensions, having to walk several roads away to check that our car was still "legally" parked and hadn't been ticketed or towed. Taking the risk of such towing every time we were away. And of course not being able to park in the neighbouring zone (next door road) as it was a different "number". A complete nightmare which massively reduced the quality of life. I was a legitimate parking permit-holding resident, and yet - like all the neighbours - had numerous Council/parking enforcement run-ins and legal battles - endless challenges to over-exuberant, really dumb enforcement, which the Council eventually had to overrule in our favour. But only after hours spent running off to pounds, and being massively out of pocket for months until reimbursed for erroneous enforcement fines etc. This is the norm if you live under a CPZ regime. Why on earth would anyone want to exchange free parking for this nightmare?

I believe there will still be a majority against if any consulation takes place, and of course it affects neighbouring roads. I can't believe the small-minded selfishness of some on here saying that if they were to get a CPZ in their road, then the problem would be pushed to the neighbouring roads and implying that's somehow a good thing. Several people have pointed out that there is ALWAYS parking on neighbouring roads when you can't park directly outside your own house, and there certainly is on Melbourne Grove, were you to cross Grove Vale. When living near a station or the like, parking directly outside your house is certainly not some kind of basic "right". Can't quite fathom the mentality of anyone who thinks it could be - seems they live in a dream world, and haven't cottoned onto the essential compromises of urban living. Having a CPZ does NOT help you with parking space, it actually REDUCES available parking as the road gets marked out by the Council. Coupled with all the costs (not everyone is made of money round here), anxieties and hassles, it really is a no go.

Totally agree with bmu. Living at Melbourne/Ashbourne corner, NEVER in 8 years had to search for parking space for more than a minute or two, and never had to park more than 300 yards away. Normally able to park right outside. So those residents saying they can't find spaces should check out this section of the road.

Agreed, jimmyjay. A 1 hour restriction soon also causes endless hassles to casual visitors (aged parents etc.) as well as the usual "has the bay been suspended while I'm away / have I gone out to check that I haven't been clamped/towed even though I'm a resident" problems. Wrong ticketing/car removal happened endlessly where I last lived under a parking zone, even if on appeal they had to refund (after months of argument). Anyone who seriously wants one of these clearly hasn't lived under one before. It doesn't help with parking spaces for residents either, as they always restrict (by bay markings) the actual amount of road available to park on when they bring one in.

Agreed with first mate re. parking. I live exactly where Poppy used to live, i.e. corner of Ashbourne and Melbourne, and have really not had a parking problem in 7 years. Yes, like Poppy, I sometimes have to park a bit further up the road (occasionally with shopping!), but personally I don't see that as an issue. Living close to the station has other benefits, and frankly one would expect some extra cars by virtue of doing so - like much in life, it's a trade-off. But controlled parking zones are a nightmare! Avoid at all costs. Free parking is one of Dulwich's many attractions as a "liveable" area, making it an oasis of civilisation in the over-regulated, bureaucratic, stressful quagmire a lot of London's streets have become. Basically, yay for ED!

Hi James. As you said a couple of posts back, a CPZ is not necessarily the solution. It seems to me from all the comments very unlikely that it WILL alleviate any parking issue on these roads, especially if the majority of cars are NOT commuters. I do feel, as has been stated a lot here, that for those of us who live near the station, there is just a commonsense trade-off between the convenience of proximity to public transport/shops and parking our cars. That we might have to hunt around a little for parking is really a much lesser problem than the inconvenience a CPZ would create. No one's actually said they've been completely unable to find a space, albeit on a neighbouring road in some instances (and again, as I left home at 10am today, I saw a good 4 spaces in Melbourne Grove/Tell Grove happily waiting to be used!). In other words, are we really talking about a problem or a minor inconvenience? A CPZ doesn't really solve said inconvenience, it just shifts the issue to neighbouring roads. Mission creep of zones, the temptation to expand them and increase revenue - I really haven't seen anyone answer these points convincingly, and logic dictates that these would be the consequence of an introduction. Car Clubs, perhaps actually removing some of the new restrictions that have been placed in these roads, something else as yet to be proposed, would in practice be much more likely to ease congestion.

As many have pointed out, even a 2 hour middle of day scheme doesn't really solve the perceived problem. I think, with respect to our Councillor here, that the 2 hours versus Full Day issue is a clever red herring. 2 hours SOUNDS nicer, a little less draconian, plausibly moderate - but if you think about it, it still has most of the undesired effects of a Full Day ban. Once a CPZ's geographical limits are established (say, to a couple of roads), what about the still free-parking roads right next to the newly created CPZ? If there ARE lots of commuters coming in as some say, they will simply use those adjacent roads. So then maybe those roads will need to become CPZ too.... And so it goes on. As the knock-on effect continues, soon ALL roads become CPZ's - which I suspect some friendly Councillors responsible for Transport (Revenue) know only too well. James, this is in no way aimed at you personally, but if I were a Councillor at a cash-strapped Local Authority who brought back a verified residents approval for a new CPZ, I think I might get a nice pat on the back from the Council's accountants...It's a complete win for the Local Authority if they can install one zone, as it inevitably leads to more zones and more revenue. I know this that gradual CPZ creep is the usual pattern as it happened at my previous address in Camden. I used to live on an unrestricted road very near the tube, and so (unsurprisingly) it was hard to find space outside my house, and I often had to park one or two roads away. Well, after the CPZ came in, it was exactly the same, just with the extra expense and the often stressful issue of having to get up early to move the car (if a resident's space in my zone wasn't free) or perhaps being ticketed for a bay suspension if I'd been away for a couple of weeks. My attitude in Camden was, by virtue of living very near a station, I would often need to park further away than I'd ideally like. Big shrug of shoulders. It was the trade off for a desirable property close to public transport. I lived with it, and the new CPZ did nothing to change that, merely adding cost and anxiety. I would point out that the problem in ED, even on roads near the station, is nothing like as bad as it was in Camden. Since this thread started, like others, I've started keenly noting how many spaces there are. Here on the stretch of Melbourne Grove just beyond East Dulwich Grove (i.e. near Tell Grove and Ashbourne - so three minutes walk to the station) there were at least 6 places this morning at 10.30 when I left the house. And in my experience there always are. So please, before we give our good Councillor the idea that we might be tempted to take the candy of a 2 hour weekday restriction, a) check out my neck of the woods if you must to park your vehicle, and b) be aware that it's a very small step from there to total restriction. And that, believe me, is just unpleasant.

I guess Christmas is coming, and it should be no surprise that some turkeys perennially consider voting for it. I wonder how many Melbourne Grove-ites have had the misfortune to actually live under a CPZ before, and to know the pointless pain (financial and otherwise) they would inflict upon themselves and their neighbours if one were implemented. The only people who benefit are Councillors trying to plug their budget deficits.

Calculus, I have no objection at all to you parking on Melbourne Grove, since I am sure there is room for you too. I do indeed use the car at all hours, and can only tell you the truth as I have experienced it, i.e. that parking close to my house is pretty easy. Others above have picked Melbourne Grove - with its proximity to the station - as prime CPZ territory, which I think would be disastrous for the reasons stated.

I live on Melbourne Grove, pretty near the station, and (in contrast to others' views) have never in 7 years' residency here had problems parking my car on the street. Occasionally I have to park a few yards up the road, rather than directly outside my house, but this is normal in any large town. So I find it hard to understand why some seem to have such a parking problem in this vicinity, unless it's because they are always expecting the available space to be outside their front door. Indeed, in contrast to other areas of London I have lived, I find that the lack of restricted parking is one of the joys of E.Dulwich - which adds greatly to its "liveability". As others have stated, CPZs do not usually help with parking congestion (it simply got worse in my old N.London neighbourhood after the CPZ was introduced) and only add to endless hassle and dubiously issued tickets for residents - not to mention their visitors. In my own experience in other CPZ's, while I was able to challenge and overturn wrongly issued tickets on appeal (given out for instance because of overnight bay suspensions), they greatly added to the stress of urban living. Thank goodness we don't have to put up with this in ED. Honestly, any form of CPZ - even if only for two hours in the middle of the day - would give rise to these unappealing side effects while doing nothing to relieve parking congestion.

Have never had a problem parking on Melbourne Grove (end of Ashbourne) in 6 years of living here. Usually right outside my house.

It's fine (as always) here on Melbourne Grove, end of Ashbourne. Come park here if you want, 1 minute's walk to "lower" ED and Lordship L.

Another definite NO. Credit crunched, not interested in paying the Council even more money for annual permits, hassle, and the inevitable wrongly levied fines that go with ResPark schemes.

Actual bakery is in West Dulwich. It's all made daily on site there and brought over to the stall/shop.

Just a comment on the "2 hours a day" idea that jan t mentions...it does indeed have its drawbacks. By and large the same ones as a whole day CPZ. You have the same problems: of visitor parking (if your visitors are staying more than a few hours, for instance in my case my aged parents coming to stay...), of tickets issued over-zealously for sudden bay suspensions, tickets for other minor "infringements" through forgetfulness, or often through no fault of the resident. And of course, you still have to pay for your permits/visitor permits, and pay in grief and time for challenging wrongly or dubiously issued tickets. They do indeed have this 2 hr system in areas of Herne Hill, where friends of mine live, and on their road, the wardens scoot around on motorbikes looking for potential cars to ticket, to such an extent that my friends invariably have to pay delivery guys the cost of the parking fine issued in the two minutes they walk up to the door to deliver a parcel. (I've also been caught and fined in the same way - having to park a long way from my friends' door while I delivered something to them, because - guess what - the CPZ hasn't really made any difference to the one thing it was supposed to: the number of cars parked up!).

Well, not sure why more journalists don't investigate such things. I think there's a great complacency and that once these things are introduced, we just come to accept them, even though in fact the quality of our life has been diminished by them. So we moan, but never really do anything to challenge the underlying assumptions. That's partly a British reaction (we quietly mutter to ourselves in restaurants, and post about them on here, but are too "polite" to make much more than a meek token fuss at the actual scene of bad service/food etc). But frankly there are so many pernicious, quality-of-life reducing things done to Londoners by both central and local government (many of which are brought up on thie forum), rarely to I ever see an effective movement to get any of them reversed. BTW, Huguenot, I didn't mean that most of the parking tickets issued in my CPZ were fraudulent, I said that most of the issued to me were fraudulent (as I was able to successfully challenge them). I would, however, imagine that if I received 10 tickets while living there and 8 were issued incorrectly (the other 2 being due to either my forgetfulness or simply not seeing a suspension sign that had been erected overnight), then other people in the road could report similar numbers. Given each ticket is a major headache to get lifted, whether incorrectly issued or not, you can see how the frustration factor, the fear factor (will my car parked down the road suddenly be towed when a bay is suspended unexpectedly? who is going to look out for my vehicle while I'm away on holiday? where can by aged parents park, now that I have no more day passes allowed?) as well as the actual fine factor, all contribute to making living under a CPZ a very unpleasant experience indeed.

Not true, Huguenot. Sidue posted on Page 7 of this thread quoting from the TFL guidelines. Clearly, TFL subsidise Council's introductions of CPZ's, because (as they say in their documentation) once installed CPZ's turn a profit, and suggest that the profits can then be used to generate more CPZ's (spreading like a cancer!). I am sure that a dedicated journalist could dig up plenty of figures showing how this works - I imagine none on this forum has that time or expertise, unfortunately. I had plenty in run-ins with wardens and towing fines wrongly levied up in Camden, but most of the tickets were simply fraudulently issued, so I managed to appeal successfully - though only after endless time and effort, and of course being out of pocket for months. However, with all those ?250 towing fines levied on innocent local residents for dubious infractions, it would be very hard for a Council NOT to turn a tidy profit on the basic costs of painting a few white lines and paying low wages (and commission on each ticket) to a few eager traffic wardens.

So very true, Owen. A common experience, unfortunately. CPZ's are merely a scam aimed at gullible, naive residents who see them as parking panaceas. Unfortunately, as there are many such folk in London, CPZ's have been able to take a foothold to such an extent that now they are thought of as the norm, and an inevitability in areas that have so far escaped. Despite most Councils driving them through (as has been discussed in this thread) for money-raising reasons, there is no logical reason to accept CPZ introductions as a fait accompli, and their efficacy needs to be challenged: the first step of which is strong resistance from the community, and a perhaps a degree of education for those inclined to believe that an extra little annual tax is going to make their parking problems disappear. On the contrary, post-CPZ, their parking hassles will only increase, alongside the expense. The words "turkeys", "voting" and "Christmas" are not far from mind.

Still not received here on Melbourne, where they claim to have delivered already (though I did PM the Councillor with my responses, FWIW!).

*Bob* Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There are never going to be more spaces than there > are now, but there are always going to be more and > more cars. > > So you lose 10% or spaces after a CPZ comes in? If > there are going to be 20% more cars in a years > time anyway then it hardly matters really, I don't > think. Exactly why a CPZ is a no-win prospect! Put all your money in the Council's pockets, not just your ?92, but also all the visitor permits and suspended bay fines. Anyone who seriously thinks paying out that ?92 will magically alleviate their parking woes is living in wish-fulfilment land, not following the dictates of reason. Basic common sense - and the basic numbers mentioned above - dictate against this outcome. No, a CPZ is purely a way of fleecing the weak-minded, and once it's there, it will never be removed. Just one extra tax.

Agreed with the above post. Anyone who has problems finding a parking space (on Melbourne/Ashbourne or elsewhere) should think logically for a second. If they do, they will realise that a CPZ doesn't solve the problem, it exacerbates it. Just the most obvious things: there is physically less space to park along your road, as the bays are marked out; the permit cost does not really discourage car ownership (it isn't significant) and so the number of cars does not decrease; local LL shoppers using their cars will most likely have the same permit as you, that still allows them to park on your road. Really all a CPZ brings is extra stress for the local residents with cars, the very people it's nominally supposed to help (attendants mis-ticketing your legally parked vehicle outside your own home, problems with visiting older relatives, suspended bays while you are away and resulting fines). Anyone who thinks otherwise really ought to listen to those of us who've had the misfortune of living in London with a CPZ. If I knew they really worked in the way we are sold the concept, that they really do ease parking, then I'd possibly vote for one. They don't, never will, and are indeed purely a way of extorting money from us - with the unfortunate side effect of reducing local residents' quality of life. The lack of CPZ in ED is one of its most attractive, community-enhancing features. A little enclave of sanity in an increasingly mean-spirited and unliveable city.

Well "NO" from me on Melbourne Grove.