Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just a reminder that tomorrow is the deadline for submitting comments/objections in respect of the proposed Peckham West CPZ.


Probably the simplest way to do it, is by email to [email protected]


But remember you must:

* quote the reference no. ?TMO1920-026 Peckham W parking zone?

* give your name and full address, and say if you are resident, business or visitor &

* state the reasons for any objections you have.


You will receive an automated acknowledgement


The deadline is Thursday 17th October 2019.

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

If it goes like the ED one, what you collectively say you want, and what the powers that be in their infinite wisdom will give you will have little overlap. Unless, collectively, you want CPZs imposed on every street in the survey. 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. If so, your prayers will be answered.

I've always been against the CPZ as a matter of principle. It seems like a sledgehammer to crack a nut, and will simply create unnecessary costs and bureaucracy.


But if it reduces the amount of people reserving four car-lengths with their bins for days on end, or having unlicenced skips and toilets in the road for months, or mossy, rusty "car projects" for years, then maybe this cloud has a silver lining.

MJRealDavies Wrote:

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

> I'm all for it. Sick to death of driving around

> for 20 minutes looking for a space everytime i

> come home.


Careful, given the ratio of car owners to spaces in streets, the whole driving around finding somewhere to park adventure won't go away. Just means you'll have further to go and the neighbouring streets not with CPZ wont be happy either.

MJRealDavies Wrote:

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

> I'm all for it. Sick to death of driving around

> for 20 minutes looking for a space everytime i

> come home.


There are more cars than spaces on most streets, especially on those where houses have been split into flats, or there are blocks of flats. A CPZ may make it a little easier to park, but not much and you'll be paying for the privilege of driving around looking for a space. It will also make it a lot more inconvenient to visit others, or have then visit you in the car / deliveries/ builders etc.

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> MJRealDavies Wrote:

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

> -----

> > I'm all for it. Sick to death of driving around

> > for 20 minutes looking for a space everytime i

> > come home.

>

> There are more cars than spaces on most streets,

> especially on those where houses have been split

> into flats, or there are blocks of flats. A CPZ

> may make it a little easier to park, but not much

> and you'll be paying for the privilege of driving

> around looking for a space. It will also make it a

> lot more inconvenient to visit others, or have

> then visit you in the car / deliveries/ builders

> etc.


only time will tell! Worth hundred quid to find out...

Parking never works out as expected, but it's all fun and games.


1. When they resurfaced our road, the entire street had to be emptied, but the neighbouring streets didn't seem any busier than usual, and even still had spaces.


2. When I lived out of town in a street with garages, it was a nightmare to park in our street, but as soon as there was a heavy frost, the street was empty.


3. And a while back, I parked in Hampstead in a space that was CPZ/Pay & Display from 8am-10am, and got called a c**t by a posh man in a Bentley, who was clearly waiting to park in the space as soon as 10am passed. Made my day.


Any one of these could happen to you. Apart from #2 as there aren't many garages around here.


But anyway, I agree with rah - even though the skips, project cars and toilets will be gone, cars will appear out of nowhere and fill up the spaces.


Having said that, we're deep into the proposed CPZ and our street is definitely busier with parking in the day than the evening (no idea why) so it might just work out better.


And I'll be less cross about cars with CPZ permits taking up the spaces than skips and toilets. Unless they don't police it. Then I'll be even more cross - what am I paying my CPZ charge for? Grrrr.

I would still like to know what the aim of the CPZ is. If it's to encourage more 'active travel' and to reduce car usage, then perhaps pedestrianisation and segregated cycle lanes would be a more appropriate response. If it's just about making it easier / more convenient to own a car, then the council should probably be honest about it.

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...