Solutions to high density parking around East Dulwich Station.

[fazer71]

How about a Park and Ride on Peckham Rye using methane powered or horse drawn carts to ferry the parkers back and forth to Lordship Lane and East Dulwich Station?

Environmentally great only we'd need to get Southwark to section off an area for the parking.

[Fenton]

The biggest problem for the whole of SE London is the lack of local jobs.

Why do people have to get the train into Central London?, cos that is where the work is

Now if there where some incentive to get big business to open offices around here less people

would have to commute.

Likewise why do big companies always have to come to London which is already over populated

There is not real solution and like smoking/drinking, etc people will keep paying for their cars

and sacrifise everything else in life to keep them.

Now if public transport were far cheaper than running a car, especially for long journeys those of us

who do long journey regularly may starting thinking different.

i.e. an open return for work to Birmingham at short notice cost ?360. For the same price I could get a driver and car for the day.

[mikeb]

Better / more cycle parking. From most of the more scattered parts of ED, it's quicker to cycle to the station than get the bus or drive.

[henryb]

I know how about a new tram line from Peckham Rye to central London via Elephant and Waterloo.. oh wait.

[James Barber]

Hi Fenton,

The turn up and go train fare to Birmingham isn't ?360. It's ?158 standard class return and ?254 first class return London Euston to Birmingham. With a modicum of planning you can get fares for tomorrow at ?85.50 return.

You then need to balance parking costs, ability to work while travelling, etc.

Why do businesses base themselves in London. Reports of higher productivity staff and a huge pool of labour.

[gm99]

Is the idea of some kind of on-street parking controls dead in the water?

As I understand it, there are a number of main points of contention with the CPZ proposal, including: cost, impact on businesses, displacement, and more generally the consultation and decision making process.

What if there was an alternative to conventional CPZ that nevertheless used permits to regulate parking but had fewer negative consequences, and a much more transparent approval process?

What I have in mind is something along the lines of the following:

A dual system of (i) annual permits for residents and businesses, available for a notional admin fee - say ?50/100 (residents/businesses) - and limited to max 2 per household, and (ii) clock dial type badge for others (something like this) available for a one-off fee of something like 'cost plus ?1' from local shops, libraries and the Council (the small profit would provide a modest incentive for retailers etc to stock them). The clock badge could apply to a single calendar year if ongoing shop turnover was desirable to maintain supply for new visitors etc.

Holders of the residents/businesses permits could park wherever and for as long as they want on roads covered by the scheme (non-A-roads / side roads only; some zoning would be required). Everyone else parking on a road covered by the scheme would have to put a clock badge in their windscreen showing the time that they parked.* Free non-residents' parking could be limited to 2 or 3 hours at a time, with no return within 2 hours. Residents could be given a number of all-day temporary residents permits for longer-staying visitors/trades, or perhaps these could be sold at cost plus e.g. ?1 per day (scratch card type).

[* - in practice there could be something like a 15-min grace period, e.g. to allow new visitors to get a clock badge]

The scheme could operate something like Mon-Fri 0800 ? 1900 (ideally this would be fixed and uniform across all roads covered by the scheme).

Ideally there would be no need for lines on the roads to mark out parking bays, just signs on the entry to the area (i.e. at road junctions) showing something like 'Timed/permit parking in operation', with periodic roadside signs showing basic information on how the scheme operates. Maybe curbs could be marked with something like white dots.

Parking controls would need to be enforced, but that could probably be funded from tickets issued for overstaying etc. and any small surplus revenue generated by issuing permits (and potentially the savings made on the current consultation/implementation process). A phone number could allow residents to anonymously report over-staying cars outside their houses to parking enforcement.

Any (non-A) roads could request inclusion in (or removal from) the scheme as long as 50.1% of addresses on that road signed up and statutory bodies (fire, ambulance etc) did not object (they would have a veto). Anyone could organise such a referendum, but the Council would offer an on-line toolkit/format to ensure it was watertight - e.g. with respect to documenting full name and address details of signatories, completing within an appropriate timescale, and consulting as required by law. Implementation of new roads (or removal of existing ones) could happen every 6 months to minimise disruption and streamline the statutory consultation process, but also to allow emerging problems to be addressed in a timely manner if residents so wished.

This approach could potentially achieve a number of things:

- reduce the impact of all-day non-residents parking for those living close to the station

- reduce the impact of displacement (only all-day commuter parking would be displaced, but affected roads could quickly respond if the need arose)

- ensure virtually no-cost but reasonably time-limited parking for shoppers etc (to allay the concerns of businesses)

- keep some turnover of visitor parking so that spaces get freed up

- keep implementation costs and street clutter to a minimum

- make the scheme adoption process completely transparent and responsive to local need

I'm sure this is riddled with holes (the economics might not work, for one thing). Any thoughts?