Galileo

eastdulwichhenry Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > goldilocks Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > No - it would be a separate zone. > > So that's a serious worry for people living in St > Francis Rd and areas near the station. It's not as > if buying a resident or visitor permit will even > be an option then. They'll no longer be able to > drive to events in ED and park in the streets. > Legitimate measures to combat outsiders filling up > our spaces should not have the effect of making > life impossible for locals. We can?t drive to events in ED as it stands - because we can?t then park anywhere near home again.

singalto Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > TaVa, the two hour CPZ won?t keep commuters at > bay. All they have to do is phone to pay for the > two hours from wherever they are. It would only > work if they had to pay at a machine. It will if it?s a resident?s only bay (the dark blue sections on the map) as only the resident or a visitor to that resident will be able to park during the 2 hours. The ring and pay will only apply to the shared bays or pay only bays (which are green and teal on the map - but that?s from memory, best check the legend rather than rely on my memory).

alex_b Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Galileo Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > It?s rather ironic that you have chosen that > > consultation to highlight the Council not > > listening to the responses to consultations. > > Rather than just go on the figures alone I have > > read the decision notice and recommendation > that > > accompanied it ... the reason the Council > decided > > to continue with the proposed changes despite > the > > objections was that the objections were because > > the proposal was to remove parking spaces by > the > > introduction of double yellow lines to improve > > sight lines and hopefully reduce road deaths. > Why > > were people objecting? Parking pressure!!! > > Actually that was the council's spin on the reason > for many of us objecting. I objected to the > additional double yellows on Adys Rd opposite > Nutbrook and Amott as they will better allow HGVs > and coaches to navigate those corners and increase > the use of the road as a rat run for commercial > vehicles. My anecdotal evidence is that since the > double yellows at the corners were introduced we > have had an increase in speeding and an increased > number of collisions with the bollard at the > corner of Nutbrook/Adys. > > My (and many of my neighbours) were clear that our > priority was stopping the use of Adys and > surrounding streets as a rat run and that the > proposed quietway looked likely to make the > problem worse and not better. Aren?t there better ways to achieve that than allowing parking on the corners? I cross there with a pram and three kids to take my kids to nursery so I?m one of the ones who benefits from better sight lines! Pushing a pram out from behind a large vehicle on a parked up corner is horrid, especially with two other kids in tow. (I do appreciate that problem tho, the roads are small and the corners tight for large commercial vehicles. I wonder if your local councillor could assist in putting this issue before the Council?)

Abe_froeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No, people were objecting on the basis of the > future parking pressure likely to result from the > proposal which might in itself enable the council > to justify imposing a CPZ on the area... I just checked the consultation response document and it doesn?t say this at all. Any quoted response (although it didn?t replicate every response, just a selection to give an overciew of responses) that mentioned parking said parking pressure was already a problem. There were three mentions of parking restrictions - all of which were asking for them to be put in place.

It?s rather ironic that you have chosen that consultation to highlight the Council not listening to the responses to consultations. Rather than just go on the figures alone I have read the decision notice and recommendation that accompanied it ... the reason the Council decided to continue with the proposed changes despite the objections was that the objections were because the proposal was to remove parking spaces by the introduction of double yellow lines to improve sight lines and hopefully reduce road deaths. Why were people objecting? Parking pressure!!!

Jacqui5254 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > nxjen, goldilocks wrote "but generally they just > add the cost of the parking to the job" > > apologies, my post should have read.." are you > going to be happy to pay for someone to come and > give a quote?", highlighting that even short > visits from people will end up costing us money. > > My concern is that the residents will be paying > out for all sorts of extras that are currently > free, I would be happy for people to be able to come and quote. Currently they can?t park anywhere nearby to be able to do so!

Do you unlock your car with a button (as opposed to putting the key in the local? There is such a thing as relay theft - thieves have special pieces of equipment that pick up the signal being emitted by your keyfob by standing near your front door, and then ?relay? it on to their mate by the car that has another piece of equipment that emulates the signal and unlocks the car. Assuming the actual key is required to start the car then they can?t drive off with it but they can have a rummage for anything of interest. It happened to my neighbour recently. If this is what?s happening then you can store your car keys in a metal box to block the signal, or buy special cases for the keys online (which is what my neighbour did). It?s pretty much the only benefit I can think of of not being able to park near my house, the relay theives don?t know which car to relay the signal to (got to find the positives where you can!) My neighbour has a dropped kerb so it?s clear her car belongs to her house.

tiddles Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I do not trust the council one jot. They will > spend goodness knows what on > A consultation but will go ahead and do whatever > they plan to do. End of > They dont give a fig for the genuine cocerns of > people who work here - including teachers > Who are frequently lugging books and resourse > materials to and fro. > Just wait and see... If they are just going to ?do what they plan to do?, why didn?t they implement a CPZ following the last consultation?

Rockets, will the CPZ really make no difference in your area, or is it not needed? The streets I see in the area seem really packed to me, so I?m interested: how do you manage to park down at LL and then repark reasonably close to your home?

Rockets, it?s a turn of phrase that complete belittles the very real issues many people have in this area, although evidently differently on different streets. Parking has got worse and worse up by the station over the past few years, and the problems will only be exacerbated when the new health centre and school are fully operational taking a predicted further 64 parking spaces on street in the area. Hopefully where you?ve moved to the parking pressures are less and you feel this CPZ won?t be necessary ion your street.

Rockets, I have not read anyone saying they want to park outside of their house. Can you point to a post that says that? I have read about people wanting to park reasonably near their house, without having to circle for 20 minutes before finding such a spot. Have you considered that some may have mobility issues of their own? Other reasons this would make a big difference to them? A CPZ is to help share out the limited resource of road parking where demand outstrips supply. The examples given of a Chiropractic clinic or rehabilitation centre are great examples of where hopefully input into this consultation could help build something that could balance these many competing demands on those roads where required, which won?t necessarily be every road in the consultation, and won?t necessarily require the same approach for every road..

spinesrus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dulwich Chiropractic Clinic has been treating > patients in the area for over 20 years. We are > situated at 277 Crystal Palace Road, near the > junctions of Goodrich and Heber Road. It is highly > unlikely that this area of East Dulwich is > affected much, if at all, by commuter parking as > it is a good 20 minute walk to the closest station > from here. If the proposed parking restrictions > are implemented (the current proposal is 8.30am - > 6.30pm Monday to Saturday) patients will be forced > to park a minimum of 10 - 15 minutes walk away. > Many of our patients are in such pain they can > barely walk across the forecourt of the clinic. > The council have given very little time for public > consultation and will close on it 31st January > 2019. They have had to extend it by 3 weeks > because so many people have not received their > consultation packs. We only received ours > yesterday. The proposed parking scheme will have a > significant negative impact of the majority of our > patients as well as potentially being catastrophic > for the clinic. We would be grateful to any > patients if they could go online at > www.southwark.gov.uk/parkingprojects and click on > the link to "East Dulwich Parking Study and > Healthier Streets Consultation" and register their > views on how it would affect them as a patient. > Many thanks, Daniel and Sue Harvey Just to clarify there are different time proposals ranging from a 2 hour period, to all day, and part of the consultation is to ask which of these the respondent thinks is appropriate (if at all). Also, the consultation has been extended by one week due to late delivery of mail. Should the CPZ go ahead in your street, could you ask for some times bays outside of your premises to asssit with this? It does seem a compelling argument that some of the people you treat have mobility issues. Is it all residents permits down your street or are there any paid (first half hour free) bays?

We used them for our cat until she passed away just before Christmas. Health issues meant we saw them a lot in her final year. They were great, especially at the end. They?re pricey, but I suspect that applies to vet services generally.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Complaints are also often overblown. I have heard > people complaining that it's impossible to park on > our street, when the truth is that they mean > "impossible to park directly outside my house". > It's something which you can see in many of the > responses on here. People who live on the same > street with apparently, different experiences of > reality. I would hope that the council doesn't > make such huge investments based on such a small > number of anecdotal accounts. Yes, what they should do is a proper consultation rather than rely on anecdotal evidence ... oh hang on, wait ... that?s what they?re doing!

Sorry I should have clarified that we both don?t work on Fridays so she arrives late morning on a Friday for the weekend, having travelled over her youngest?s naptime. For those who say a CPZ won?t make a difference. I can park on my road if I arrive after 8pm at night or on a Saturday or Sunday, I can?t park if I arrive anytime 8am to 8pm Monday to Friday. If this traffic were going to shop in lordship lane then surely it would be there on sat and Sunday too? Those traders I have spoken to on Melbourne Grove/Grove Vale (I haven?t spoken to all of them, just the 3 I know) all have problems that their customers can?t park to visit their shops, or they are having to keep an eye out for their customers not getting tickets in the 30minute no return bays, I know one lady who moves her curstomers cars for her when the traffic wardens approach. The consultation is, from my reading of it, on a road by road basis: this seems correct to me as the problems that beset one area do not necessarily beset another. It is worth noting that the new Charter School and Health Centre both have limited on-site parking. The Transport Statements for them predicted 64 parking spaces would be used on street when both are fully operational - but it argued that these are readily available within a 300m zone of the site.

If you live by the station like me, then you?re paying to ENABLE people to visit. The number of times my sister-in-law has driven over for the weekend from Potters Bar only to have to park streets away and lug the kids and all the related paraphernalia they come with for ages along with having two small kids with her who keep diving for the road and running off, it?s really frustrating. Then come 7pm/8pm the road clears out when the commuters go home.

bilksy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Totally against the CPZ to East Dulwich. It?s a > joke how much it costs and even to have a friend > or family member over to stay. ?25 per day. What a > joke! > It?s ?2.50 a day if you buy a pack of 10 x 1 day stays (?25 for all ten)

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- >? ... > > For example, has anyone looked at the plan around > the leisure centre - from what I can see from the > proposals I cannot see how that will work as many > people, especially those with small families, > drive to the leisure centre and these restrictions > will make it impossible to do so. ...? The irony of driving to the leisure centre! I have a 5 year old, 3 year old and 1 year old. We use scooters and use the buggy to get to swimming lessons for the kids. It?s just lovely breathing in the exhaust fumes of those who drive to the leisure centre and then circle a few times trying to find a space as it?s always heavily parked up round there.

dulwichresident01 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The problem is that they?re saying ?125.00 > ?initially?! We all know that once it?s in the > price will keep on going up! Just google other > neighbourhoods and you?ll see. It was only on the > news and in the papers yesterday about the death > of local high streets caused by local councils... It?s been ?125 for years and years. It?s hardly risen. I paid a similar amount in Brixton over a decade ago. As for the poor families with 3 cars ... they Cana ford to own and run 3 cars! I?d prefer my 3 kids weren?t breathing in all the particulates from their 3 cars personally.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A CPZ will not magically free up the space in > front of your house. It won't address the fact > that there are more residents with cars than there > are spaces. You'll simply be paying to park a > street away. Whilst it may not be unreasonable to > want to park in front of your house, it may be > unrealistic. > > What might start to make a difference is improved > public transport, cycling provision and some 'last > mile' options. I can park outside my house on a Sunday, mostly on a Saturday, and late in the evening/overnight. I can?t park anywhere near my house during the working day. How come I these spaces do magically appear overnight and at the weekend?

kford Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Herne Hill is Lambeth. Southwark's LL's 'could' be > a full-day system. Your Melbourne Grove driver > will still be able to pop to the Lane and park, > BTW, as their permit will be for the whole area. > As will everyone. When I lived in Brixton we were CPZ (I was 4 minutes walk from the tube station and we never had parking problems like those in East Dulwich). The zones were a group of streets at a time so, for example, up Brixton Hill was a separate zone preventing them from driving down the hill to park closer to the station. It worked very well. There were pay and display bays for those visiting local businesses. I miss that CPZ!

Well I?ve lived here almost 6 years and I?ve never been asked whether I?d like a CPZ - residents do change, as do the conditions on the relevant streets. I don?t understand how the posters here know that the people who don?t respond to a consultation are against a CPZ - the point is that if they don?t engage then no one knows how they feel about it. All we know is that they didn?t respond. I?m glad there?s a CPZ consultation going ahead as a result of residents requesting one. We live by the station and parking is a joke. Until you?ve spent half an hour circling to find a space whilst your 3 month old in the back of the car is screaming for his feed, or dragged 3 small children across numerous busy roads to get home from the only parking space you could find which is a 10 minute walk from your house, then you just haven?t had enough of the parking fun that we put up with daily! Not to mention the constant arguments between drivers trying to pass each other on our road that is too narrow because it?s parked up on either side. An no, we can?t just use a bike - I can?t get 3 small children and related paraphernalia on a bike (tho we do use public transport where we can). And no we can?t use zip car, the car seats won?t all fit in the car - and where would I put my mum who often comes on trips with us since dad died? And no, we can?t take the train to the in-laws because we wouldn?t be able to get the kids around once we were there. There are so many reasons why, for a family, a car really does make a massive difference to what we are able to do. Please don?t assume that just because you don?t have a problem other people must be making one up. first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think people cope poorly with being asked the > same question over and over and possibly feel that > their response may well be ignored anyhow in > favour of the prevailing agenda. I really don't > think the lack of response means all those > non-responders are in favour of CPZ, it more > likely means CPZ is going to be pushed through > come what may and so people have lost faith in the > consultation process full stop. > > rollflick Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Surely it's the people not responding to > > consultations who are lazy? And many people who > > want a CPZ - so space can be given over to > wider > > pavements, safer junctions, cycling, greenery > etc. > > - don't have any cars at all. > > > > Anyway a journalist who lives locally has just > > made a film about parking. It's only six > minutes > > long, really worth watching and very timely! > > > https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2018/oct/3 > > > > 0/why-we-should-be-paying-more-for-parking-video-e > > > xplainer

Bobby P Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Again, why don't those who say they are having > difficulty parking on roads near the station > simply park on roads just south of ED Grove? > Plenty of space on Melbourne, Tell Groves etc. at > all times of day. There always have been. > > The suggestion that a CPZ should be put in place > for anyone within 10 minutes walk of the station > (as mentioned by one poster above) would be an > enormous swathe of roads, and is clearly not > warranted. > > Down Melbourne South here, still just 5 minutes > walk from station - no parking issue on this road. I do the school run along this road twice a day and have been counting spaces. Mornings around 9am there are around 5-6 spaces on the whole stretch, by 3pm there are generally a couple, but fewer. I often try to park on Tell Grove and find it full. I?m not sure we live in the same place at all Bobby P. Regardless of our differing views, once the medical centre (capacity up to 500 people on site at once - 22 parking spaces) and school (can?t remmebr but from memmory around 11 parking spaces) go live, then it would seem likely that any spare spaces will be used.

Orange owl Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Having lived in a small road very near east > dulwich station for nearly 20 years. I really > don't think many of the cars do belong to > commuters , first come the teachers then the > people who run the shops on grove vale then all > the guys from the timber yard the odd estate agent > from lordship lane add all the people living in > flats along east dulwich grove and the people who > live here on the road and yes it's full.When mr > Barber tried to push cpz last time,i was told that > they would paint white line boxes down the whole > street even if you have off street parking i said > that would lead people to think they could park > anywhere in that box with a permit even in front > of driveways . The answer to that was to double > yellow all the driveways which I think will lead > to even less space.Every area/street has different > pressures, but I do want the shops on grove vale > to survive and I think a cpz will hurt them > without making much of a difference If this is the case, apart from teachers wouldn?t all of those categories of people be parking on these streets at the weekend? Why then do we not have parking issues on a Saturday?

But isn?t there a point where the CPZ could be set to where most of the commuters no longer benefit from driving and then still walking, say, 10 minutes to the station which has the effect that they walk or use public transport. Those cars don?t necessarily just park on the periphery of the CPZ, it actually changes behaviour. Such a change would benefit us all with reduced car usage and thereby reduced pollution and congestion.