Council parks to charge ?2ph parking fee from 1 April

[cella]

Very uninformed rant and very untrue. I speak as someone who has worked in the public sector for decades.

ncleglen Wrote:

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

> rendelharris Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > DulwichFox Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> >

> > > Time to get rid of Taxing Labour Southwark

> > > council

> >

> > Or time to get rid of austerity Tory government

> > that has slashed budgets so badly that all

> > councils (including Tory ones) are forced to

> try

> > and raise revenue wherever they can to try and

> > avoid cuts in essential services?

>

> Anyone who knows ANYTHING about local government

> knows that if the Tories are in Central Government

> then the Labour Councils will cut FRONT LINE

> services and make life VERY uncomfortable for the

> general public...but they will NEVER cut the admin

> and backroom staff- EVER.....it is obscene the way

> that Labour councils, especially in poor areas,

> make life VERY uncomfortable for the people and

> then blame central government...that is how they

> get their votes- as far as I can see, having been

> brought up in a very poor borough, all that Labour

> ever do is cr*p on the working class and since

> they failed to educate anyone, brainwash them into

> thinking it is the Tories' fault...they even sink

> so low as to leaflet schools- they are worse than

> the clergy.....

[Abe_froeman]

Government grants to South have been cut from ?514m in 2010 to only ?618m in 2018.

You can read all about it here: https://www.southwark.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/key-documents/statement-of-accounts

Of the total ?1.2bn the council received in the last financial year it spent 365,000,000 on employee expenses (salaries etc).

[Earl Aelfheah]

I'm pretty sure that Southwark Council don't make any money from parking charges. I believe it's outsourced in order to remove the cost of operation from the council. Private companies then get to charge and make profit in return for removing the burden of maintenance from the council. Unfortunately, private companies often end up being additionally subsidised through clever contract negotiation, are largely unaccountable and generally extract as much profit as possible to the detriment of service provision. This is the modern way of governance. I'm sure there will be jobs for relevant ex-councillors at some future point, acting for the parking provider on a 'consultancy' basis (at least that's how it works with sell off of council homes).

[Jules-and-Boo]

I strongly disagree in that it would mean some families and some walkers are not able to get to the parks.

It's just a money making scheme.

We see too much car use anyway but if people are driving to the park for a walk, it's not really that they're being lazy, is it.

[James Barber]

Hi rahrahrah,

Southwark Council, as indeed do other councils, make a surplus on parking enforcement. That surplus has to be used by law on transport but can be use in the widest sense. The surplus or profit can be large.

Note. Half of Southwark homes have no access to a motor vehicle.

This policy change will have serious impacts on nearby streets. Equally it does seem odd that quite so many drive to a park. especially when quite so many bus routes pass so close to Dulwich and Peckham Rye parks giving many real public transport options in addition to walking and cycling.

?2 ph seems steep but I suspect the intention is to implement something thy won't change for a number of years to take one political hit.

It would also be more palatable if the large profits were used to return these park maintenance back to previous spend levels.

[spider69]

James Barber wrote.

"Equally it does seem odd that quite so many drive to a park. especially when quite so many bus routes pass so close to Dulwich and Peckham Rye parks giving many real public transport options in addition to walking and cycling"

Have you or Southwark made any investigation why this might be the case?

Or is it a case of that fits what we all think round this table. Lets do it.

TMO job done.

[Rockets]

Ah this probably explains why the council removed the recycling bins at Belair - putting revenue before the environment as they managed to free up 10 more soon to be paid-for parking spaces by removing it.

This council is out of control - all parts of Labour have been infected by the dangerous hard-left and they are taxing car owners/middle classes aggressively - be that the CPZ, parking charges or the myriad of hair-brained ideas designed to make driving around the borough impossible based on the flawed logic that people will stop using cars.

And they will bleat on about Tory austerity but that?s their go-to weak excuse/justification for everything. I did laugh a few years ago when I saw a huge billboard advert in Lambeth apologising to residents for having to reduce services due to central government cuts.......the irony of spending council money on such a thing in a time of austerity......

Thank goodness Chuka is trying to rally a more centrist option, one that isn?t either hard-left or hard-right because both sides of the political spectrum at the moment are pretty unpalatable - one with rabid anti-semitism the other rabid xenophobia.

[roywj]

I think the bins were probably removed as they were being abused and it was creating an eye sore up there. Same reason Sainsbury's removed their bins.

[SJK]

Deleted

[Sue]

DulwichFox Wrote:

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

> Sue Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > DulwichFox Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> >

> > >

> > > Time to get rid of Taxing Labour Southwark

> > > council

> >

> >

> > And you think a non-Labour Southwark council

> would

> > have made money how?

> >

> > It is the Tory so-called government who has cut

> > council funding to the bone, as I understand

> it.

> >

> > How do you understand it?

>

> I understand that under its current leadership

> Labour is unelectable.

> But that's a different story.

> You cannot use the motorist for every shortfall in

> Council Funding.

> Southwark Council wasting Millions on unnecessary

> road schemes that do nothing to improve traffic

> flow.

> There should be no need to charge people to park

> their cars in our Parks.

> I would like to know who came up with that little

> Nugget.

So you can't actually answer my question, then?

[VerryBerry]

I'm past fed up with this lot and the anti driving lobby. Peckham Rye Park is well ised and loved. The place was heaving this week in the children's play area after school due to the good weather. Many travelled locally but drove in beacuse quite frankly, with more than one child it's easier. This proposed charge will now deter the parents on the school run from quickly detoring to the play area and force them inside.

Poor idea.

It's like these guys are signing off on crazy ideas beacuse they expect to be voted out and want to destroy local residents quality of life and enjoyment of local free amenities. They've already sold off part of the park for the festival preventing people from relaxing on the bank holiday. At a pittance if what I hear it correct.

[tiddles]

.

[bels123]

VerryBerry Wrote:

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

> I'm past fed up with this lot and the anti driving

> lobby. Peckham Rye Park is well ised and loved.

> The place was heaving this week in the children's

> play area after school due to the good weather.

> Many travelled locally brut drove in beacuse quite

> frankly, with more than one child it's easier.

> This proposed charge will now deter the parents on

> the school run from quickly detoring to the play

> area and force them inside.

>

> Poor idea.

Guess you have to weigh up the convenience v?s the consequence

?...exposure depends on the exhaust of the vehicle in front, and the air pollution that drivers breathe in is often worse than that of a pedestrian. We are fooling ourselves if we think we can hide in our cars - and by hiding in our cars we are making the pollution problem worse.? Dr Gary Fuller, The Invisible Killer (the rising global threat of air pollution - and how we can fight back) 2018

[goldilocks]

If you are local, your children are school age and have no disabilities, then driving to the park really shouldn't be something you'd consider. We really all need to be trying to use our cars less. There are occasions where the benefits of using the car will be greater, but driving children to a playground doesn't seem to be one of them - even just when you take account of the pollution your own children are exposed to in car journeys in congested areas, and before you take account of the impact on others as a result of that journey.

I know that no one wants to hear that their behaviours aren't sustainable but trying to claim that not allowing driving to parks will 'trap families indoors' is just alarmist. The options available to you will be to travel there in different ways, or carry on as you were, for which the cost will now be ?2 per hour to park.

[KidKruger]

wow, people really believe Southwark has done this because their priority is the environment ?

[Penguin68]

If you are local, your children are school age and have no disabilities

If you have to walk more than 20-25 minutes, particularly if one child is in a push chair (even if another is school age) then you will not feel that much like 'enjoying' the park when you get there, particularly with the walk back ahead of you. Neither will your children. Mind you, as a policy it will keep out those awful extended families, people with dogs, the elderly, all those ghastly people who cannot afford to live nice and close (within easy walking distance from a park). Effectively keeping out the hoi polloi (anyone who can't readily afford the parking fee, even) is a wonderful policy for the council to pursue. It will be Dulwich parks for Dulwich people. It will make the parks so much more private for those with adjacent houses. And once the parks are unused enough, well we can get rid of them.

[goldilocks]

Nope, not in the slightest. I think that having and maintaining carparks comes with a cost and the council have decided to charge for this. My point was more about the alarmist 'local people will be locked in their houses' response to this. Yes, its a charge for something that was previously free which is annoying, but its not something people 'have' to pay - there are other alternatives.

[Sally Eva]

People are saying that they approve of the decision because their own priority is the environment.

Southwark's reasons are set out in the decision. If you believe that the council is being misleading the remedy is judicial review.

[fishbiscuits]

VerryBerry Wrote:

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

> This proposed charge will now deter the parents on

> the school run from quickly detoring to the play

> area and force them inside.

I drive (and am unashamed to say I quite like cars and driving) but parents driving kids to/from school is something we need to cut down on. Especially round here where there are so many decent primaries. I'm sure there are some exceptional circumstances, but it shouldn't be the norm.

But even if you are in your car, spending ?2 to park so your kids can go to the playground doesn't sound like a big deal to me. A couple of times a week... ?100 a year. If you can afford to run a car...

[spider69]

I have circulation problem with my feet whereby I need to walk a lot. My dog and I use Dulwich Park once a day and sometimes twice as it is flat and pleasant and does not put to much pressure on my metatarsal bones due to fat loss. It gives us both the exercise that Doctors recommend.

Prior to Champion Hill closing it took me 10/12 minutes by car to reach the park. Now I am looking at 25minutes sometimes more to get there.

Now that this charge is being brought in I will have to consider if I can afford to go for 2/3 hours a day combined with other factors.

Before the normal comments are made if I have to take public transport, which involves 2 buses and walking the journey will take a min of 40 minutes or longer each way. That time depends if the bus/s turns up on time or at all. My house is situated in the middle of a hill away from public transport. So it is already difficult to reach a starting point.

Combine that with having a dog and the prospect does not really appeal after testing it. Getting a bus with a dog presents problems as mothers with prams that look like tanks take up most of the limited space parking space and space between the seats is very limited.

So looking to use my local park which I have done for almost 73 years a return journey will now take me around 90 minutes without the time spent in the park.

Factor into that being tired after walking, and it rains having a wet dog on a bus which will not please some the park is really getting out of reach.

6 days a week for me will cost ?36 a week extra for something that I already pay towards with my Council tax, which if the talk is correct will be over ?2000+ for this year. I cannot afford to pay to use my local park

Some families will also have to make this decision.

Locals in the Dulwich Park area can walk with no problem but other that are not and have have to travel with children, toddler bikes, scooters, toys and the family dog will have to consider if they can afford the park which is crazy. Getting on a bus is most of the time not an option.

It might appear to some that the park and it surrounds is turning into a middle class ghetto which might just be used by only close residents. This is wrong.

It is strange that Southwark keep pushing fitness but continue to make it difficult for many.

Again another decision whilst looking at in a meeting has just not been thought through before putting it into operation.

[MarkT]

The first draft of the Dulwich SPD (special Planning Document?) put out for consultation stated "Dulwich is leafy and green." There were protests, so the 2nd version was "Dulwich is mostly leafy and green".

When the Council produced plans to build flats on the playground of the East Dulwich Community Centre, The "Save" campaign used a Council map, from the draft Southwark Plan, of "Open Space Deprivation" which showed circles of 5 minute walking distance from the nearest open space. The Community Centre lay in the space between Dulwich Park, Peckham Rye and Goose Green - the largest area of such open space deprivation in the Borough.

In the final Southwark Plan, the circles had been redrawn to 10 minute walking distance. Suddenly East Dulwich was well served by 3 parks.

[B+]

I have mixed feelings on charging to park in our beautiful Parks

Many people that use the car parks can easily afford to pay ?2 per Hour and would not be put off by these charges, but there are many who can?t pay and some that simply would

not be prepared to pay.

Public transport may not be an option for families who have planed a picnic

and have bikes and pushchairs to transport and then there are people who need

a car to bring an elderly or infirm person.

So we end up with a park where the wealthy (who need to bring a car) will still enjoy all the pleasures of a day in the park, and the poor (who need to bring a car) will be denied, in this is a socialist borough!

[mrwb]

B+ Wrote:

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

> I have mixed feelings on charging to park in our

> beautiful Parks

> Many people that use the car parks can easily

> afford to pay ?2 per Hour and would not be put off

> by these charges, but there are many who can?t pay

> and some that simply would

> not be prepared to pay.

>

> Public transport may not be an option for families

> who have planed a picnic

> and have bikes and pushchairs to transport and

> then there are people who need

> a car to bring an elderly or infirm person.

>

> So we end up with a park where the wealthy (who

> need to bring a car) will still enjoy all the

> pleasures of a day in the park, and the poor (who

> need to bring a car) will be denied, in this is a

> socialist borough!

Yes, pretty much. These kinds of parking charges are highly regressive, as are the CPZ charges.

[first mate]

While some local parks are being hired out for private use

Https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/aug/31/londons-parks-accused-of-creeping-privatisation-of-public-spaces

I wonder how the parks parking will be 'policed'? By phone ticket machines...? Will there be private wardens on patrol? The parks now have PSPOs in place. These could easily be extended to cover other areas that could also become revenue raising opportunities.

[Abe_froeman]

And the wealthy people will be the ones driving big gas guzzling 4 x 4s! Great for the environment....