Jump to content

Recommended Posts

What I meant was that people who are not 'local' to their place of wordship, rarely see the inconvenience of their parking on residents. I have a small drive and have been blocked in by visitors who visit the church opposite, when I have requested that they move, they complain that there is no where to park and how did I expect them to travel to church.


On one occassion some years a go, a woman sat in the driving seat of her car ignoring the fact that I was trying to get out of the drive to pick up my disabled mother. I asked if she could move either forward or reverse to enable me to drive out. She refused as was waiting for someone to come out of the church, after 15 mins, she was asked again and still refused - hubby asked her - refusual, in the end I got angry and stated that I would call the police. Rang the police, who were very helpful and had an officer in the area, who came up to speak with her. She wound up her window fast and sped off alone. This was obviously an isolated incident but I have heard that some residents have almost come to blows with some congregations. Etherow Street residents frequently complained that their road was used by people attending Christ Church and St. Thomas More.

Most if not all of these churches must surely have been there when people moved to their homes.


It is obvious that many people are going to drive to them and will need to park somewhere when they are attending a service. Isn't it?


Obviously I'm not condoning anybody blocking somebody's drive, but that's a separate issue. Unless it's residents' parking only (a can of worms) parking in a road is not restricted to residents!


Whilst I understand the frustration, some of the comments above remind me of somebody moving next door to a pub which has live music and then complaining about the noise.

There are a lot of Churches springing up in old Warehouses, Shops and similar facilities. Church going is a growth industry. If you move into a house near an old disused warehouse you might be a bit surprised if suddenly its a popular church and there parking on Sundays suddenly become a nightmare. This is happening all over the Borough. I know that one solution is to encourage car sharing and for the Churches to use mini buses, but obviously in each case circumstances are different. There is a car park at upland road but I'm not sure if it is open for the Church. One of the Upland road church users has car with the numberplate MR Attitude or similar and often blocks driveways. I have left polite notes. The other problem there is that Dulwich Van Hire sold their land and now park on the Street. Apparently East Dulwich residents are against a CPZ. Me I'm in favour but I really don't mind the free for all there is at the moment but clearly for some it is inconvenient. I suggest the Local Councillors - Renata, Gavin and Victoria have a meeting with Church and look at car sharing Mini buses and perhaps parking a little further away.
  • 1 year later...
I suppose the question is was the church there before you moved in? I live in Bassano Street, there was a church already here when I moved in. Generally I can get a space in the road or in the next road service or no service. I think that's ok for London.

But I also think CityJules has a point about car sharing. Isn't it the same as schools asking parents to car pool or drop off on foot? It's not wrong to ask people to think about excessive car use in a big city, where we have perfectly adequate public transport.


London is a city yes, but it's overcrowded. So a little bit of common sense and civic awareness doesn't go amiss and keeps it pleasant for everyone. If you visit any area, you should respect the local residents, even from one street to the next. It's oversimplifying to say "they have a right" etc, we all have rights, we just have to find a way to balance them.


I know the church on Carden Rd in Nunhead creates the exact same problems. They actually employ people to help the churchgoers park and it causes resentment among the residents of that road. It should be addressed.


Maybe someone needs to start a "take the bus to church" campaign, or perhaps we need to start building churches with parking space in mind....

I live near a church. It was a church when I moved there, sometimes irritating when they have a special event but I knew what was happening and live with it. Having stewards to organise parking seems a very good idea and would reduce the chaos and dings that sometimes happen.

Surely as somebody has already suggested, the obvious thing to do is to speak to the people running the church and try to come up with a mutually acceptable solution.


Though I really don't see why people attending a church should have to car share or park many streets away just so that somebody doesn't have to walk to their house occasionally. I expect some of those people have disabilities - why should they have to walk instead of you?


But I stick with my posts made a year ago (goodness!). This is part and parcel of living in London in an area where there is no residents' parking (and thank goodness for that). You may think you have the right to park near your house, but actually you don't.


If it is essential to you that you can always park near your home, then check out the parking situation before you move. If a church or other building likely to attract a lot of people at certain times is nearby, then check out the times of the services and other events and see whether you can park at those times.


If you can't, and you are still determined to move there, then arrange your car use so that it doesn't coincide with church events.


Otherwise, well .... move elsewhere! The church was there first!


Or push for residents' parking (actually no - please don't :) )

Salsaboy Wrote:

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

> What Nigello said.

>

> In my experience (I was a regular church goer for

> about 10 years) christian folk are some of the

> most small minded, insular, nasty people you could

> ever meet.


xxxx


What, all of them?


In my experience, some people generalise from a very small sample .....


I am not a Christian, however I have relatives who are, and I have in the past lodged with a Christian family and also had devout Christians as neighbours.


I would say that some Cnristians are lovely, warm people who are a pleasure to be around and clearly follow whatever Jesus said.


I would also agree that some Christians are petty, small-minded, and divisive. It has made me laugh to see churches split themselves apart - very Life of Brian, in fact, though that wasn't about churches but about politics.


I have also seen a Buddhist centre split itself apart for similar reasons .... divisive factions developed.


Yes it's a joke but people are human .....


But please don't make these generalisations and apply them to everybody in a particular group. It really isn't helpful.

Why do people feel the need to drive everywhere all the time? Why don't they walk or cycle - surely they can't be coming from many miles away. I walk most Sundays and go past a lot of "churches" mostly surrounded by cars causing a good deal of local inconvenience.

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

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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