2020 Update on Parking zones in ED and West Peckham.

[trinidad]

I know there has been a number of threads regarding this subject, but does anyone have the most up to date information regarding these zones?

[Penguin68]

The council has just written to those who commented on the ED proposals (Amended to note this is a cross post with another thread reporting the same - Admin do you want to take this thread down?)

In accordance with Regulation 13 of The Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 the council has considered your representation and a decision has been taken by the relevant decision maker as set out in the Southwark Council?s constitution.

Consideration of the representation

Your representation was considered by The Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport and the Climate Emergency on 23 December 2019.

Summary of decision

In consideration of any objections received, the council has:

Determined each of the objections included in the correspondence, in line with the reasoning in Appendix 1 of the report

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s86236/Appendix%201%20Responses%20to%20objections.pdf

Decided to make the traffic management order as originally proposed.

Reasons for decision

The reasons for the decision can be found here. http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50021413&Opt=0

Traffic Orders:

In view of the above, the council will make the following orders and a notice of making will be published:

The London Borough of Southwark (Parking places) (Parking zone 'ED') (No. *) Order 202*

The London Borough of Southwark (Free parking places) (No. *) Order 202*

The London Borough of Southwark (Free parking places) (Solo motor cycles) (No. *) Order 202*

The London Borough of Southwark (Waiting and loading restrictions) (Amendment No. *) Order 202*

Further information

For further details on the project including the latest programme information, please see the project webpage https://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/parking-projects/east-dulwich-parking-study-and-healthier-streets-consultation. Should you require any further information, please contact us via email at [email protected].

[trinidad]

Thank you, so whats the time line and what happons next?

[bananaman]

"Project process

We have a thorough process to follow when deciding whether to implement a new parking zone. The key processes, past, present and future, and predicted timescales are summarised as follows:

Late 2018 - Consultation methods and boundaries agreed by the Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport Management and Air Quality

January - February 2019 - Informal consultation including drop-in session as well as a presentation at Empowering Communities meetings

Spring 2019 - Interim headline results communicated to Community Council (pdf, 733kb)

Summer 2019 - Consultation findings and recommendations reported to cabinet member for decision making; the decision report, final consultation report (pdf, 766kb) and the amended design, will be made available online at Moderngov

Summer/Autumn 2019 - statutory consultation, subject to outcome of decision making; objections must relate only to the elements of the scheme that are subject to the statutory consultation

Autumn 2019 - Determination of objections

Winter 2019/20 - Objection report published online at Moderngov

>> *** Spring 2020 - Implementation of the parking zone, subject to outcome of determination; residents notified by mail one month prior to zone going live *** <<

Autumn 2020 - Review of the parking zone (informal consultation)

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/parking-projects/peckham-west-parking-study-and-healthier-streets-consultation

[bananaman]

East Dulwich parking study and healthier streets consultation

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/parking-projects/east-dulwich-parking-study-and-healthier-streets-consultation

Peckham West parking study and healthier streets consultation

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/parking-projects/peckham-west-parking-study-and-healthier-streets-consultation

East Dulwich shops under threat from a CPZ - Jim Wheble reports

[Lovesuccess]

Hello

[bananaman]

"Chaotic scenes at Dulwich CommunityCouncil about EDulwich & Peckham West CPZs- part of agenda abandoned & second sitting for CPZ convened. Many came back, but process no good for horizontal neighbourhood discussion. That needs a different way, which can?t be run by the Council."

[bananaman]

DESPITE 93% OF BUSINESSES AGAINST, EAST DULWICH CPZ WILL GO AHEAD

https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/despite-93-of-businesses-against-east-dulwich-cpz-will-go-ahead

[Spartacus]

If you put in an objection or feel grieved by the councils decision to ignore virtually all the objections to implement the CPZ then I can suggest the following

1. Write a letter to the council to raise your complaint of the handling of the situation highlighting the fact that they have unfairly ignored all objections to the initial and follow up consultations.

2. Wait till they respond and keep a copy of their response.

3. If they are still insisting on implementing the scheme with the longer parking restriction times then go to https://www.lgo.org.uk/ to raise a complaint about your dispute with the council and attach their response letter to your submission

It may not change the decision by the council, but the more people and businesses who do it, then the more chance that the scheme may have the hours amended before implementation.

On the other hand is you are happy that the consultation was fair then ignore this idea.

I am aware that some people want the scheme and the longer hours but equally some people don't (and based on the initially consultation that was a lot of people) so the more that complain, the better.

[trinidad]

I think for me, when we were consulted, most residents objected to the idea of a CPZ, but from what i read, as their was a question added which said would you be in favor of a cpz if one was close by, thew council is ignoring the first question, and acted on the second, how is that right?

[first mate]

The Council never intended to listen, they were determined to have CPZ everywhere- they need the money. However, they have to maintain the illusion of legality, consultation and a democratic process. Scrutiny of what they say and what has been done reveals a string of contradictions.

[mrwb]

first mate Wrote:

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

> The Council never intended to listen, they were

> determined to have CPZ everywhere- they need the

> money. However, they have to maintain the illusion

> of legality, consultation and a democratic

> process. Scrutiny of what they say and what has

> been done reveals a string of contradictions.

Exactly this...

All about generating revenue, the annual parking fee (and fines) from car owning residents, instead of increasing general council tax.

Southwark will be 100% CPZ soon.

[roywj]

I live within the incoming CPZ area and I am in support of its implementation as were the majority of my neighbours living within its boundaries.

It seems like posters on here against the scheme are worried about the knock on effect on parking in their own roads following implementation of the CPZ, which I can fully understand as I have experienced it first hand.

[first mate]

Yes, the Council have counted on the knock effect to get full CPZ. It started with the few streets around the train station where S'wark were incredibly keen to respond to resident's concerns about commuter parking, stopping residents from parking in their street, though presumably they were able to park soemwhere near or would have ceased to be car owners and CPZ no longer a relevant concern. That was the beginning and S'wark knew that if they could just get those few streets in the CPZ noose the rest would surely follow, in time. The council also implemented all day CPZ rather than a few hours- which surely would have dealt with the commuter issue but not placed the desired parking pressure on nearby streets. At the same time S'wark ramped up parking pressure elsewhere in every way possible.

[Penguin68]

In response to numbers of the posts above, can I remind people of the thread I initiated 9 or so months ago

https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,2015611,2015611#msg-2015611

I would still suggest that Tooley St is not to be trusted.

[Abe_froeman]

The silence form our local councillors on this is also quite deafening.

[Penguin68]

In so many ways, 'our' is the wrong possessive here; they are 'their' (meaning Tooley St's) local councillors. Part of the one-party state we live in, they have no need to listen to us, and I'm sure will soon stop even bothering to go through the pretence that that are. We already see things happening around us with no semblance or nod towards 'consultation'. Which in many ways is a good thing, at least insult isn't now being piled onto injury.

[Earl Aelfheah]

roywj Wrote:

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

> I live within the incoming CPZ area and I am in

> support of its implementation as were the majority

> of my neighbours living within its boundaries.

>

> It seems like posters on here against the scheme

> are worried about the knock on effect on parking

> in their own roads following implementation of the

> CPZ, which I can fully understand as I have

> experienced it first hand

I'm alright jack

[roywj]

Lol! Not yet but I am now looking forward to implementation.

I do sympathise as we are currently suffering now due to implementation of parking controls in neighbouring areas. Unfortunately it's inevitable as more are introduced but residents are usually very happy once they get a cpz.

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> roywj Wrote:

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

> -----

> > I live within the incoming CPZ area and I am in

> > support of its implementation as were the

> majority

> > of my neighbours living within its boundaries.

> >

> > It seems like posters on here against the

> scheme

> > are worried about the knock on effect on

> parking

> > in their own roads following implementation of

> the

> > CPZ, which I can fully understand as I have

> > experienced it first hand

>

> I'm alright jack

[jimlad48]

I'll disagree here. Having spent years campaiging for one, our experience was that the Council was only interested in consulting when we could provide proof of local support to reopen the consultation. We spent a lot of time talking to the parking team and understanding how complex these matters are.

I find the sort of 'one party state' nonsense a bit silly really, a consultation was held and the decision was taken on evidence and feedback. It was also based on experience - namely that when a CPZ comes in, other local areas quickly ask for one, and this leads to demands to do the whole thing again shortly after (several areas have had consultations quickly after based on local feedback). Where it is close run thing and a CPZ is coming in, council experience is long that they will only end up doing this again, so why not save public money and run it once.

As for the allegations about cash - often spouted here without any evidence. I have said before, if you have concrete evidence that CPZ revenue is being used to do anything other than CPZs, then go to the police because it is a crime. Don't sit here typing, take proactive action and get the law involved if you have evidence to support your assertions.

[trinidad]

But jimlad48, the council did consult with the residents of the area and overwhelmingly the residents did vote against a CPZ, yet the local authority is still introducing one, does this not seem wrong to you?

Does anyone know, when the CPZ is introduced, what is the charging tariff? a friend of mine lives on an estate in the borough, and there is no charge for the first car, but another friend lives else where and is charged ?125.00 a year to park within his zone - anyone have any more information????

[edc]

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/parking-permits/on-street-permits/resident-parking-permits

That gives you prices for the permits, it mentions different permits for those on estates, so probably has different rules.

[Abe_froeman]

Jim you completely understand what people are saying about the cash. The monies raised from a CPZ by far outweigh the cost of implementing and enforcing it. That raises revenue for the council. The council has to spend that revenue on roads. That means the money it is currently spending on roads that does not come from CPZ revenue can be reallocated to council wages, bonuses new BMW limos to drive councillors around in, or whatever else takes their fancy.

In the meantime they do have to send the CPZ revenue on things like consulting for new CPZs, putting in double yellow lines in areas where there are not currently CPZs, putting in buuild outs to around roads that are not in CPZs to stop people parking, putting in speed bymps and islands (which need omre double yellows obviously) in non-CPZ areas etc.

[Rockets]

Abe - spot on. If memory serves me rightly the last council accounts showed a ?6m+ surplus from CPZs, car parks and parking fines which was re-invested in roads.

Those who campaigned hard for the CPZ got their wish - very much at the expense of everyone else - the numbers for and against in the consultation speak for themselves and we are all smart enough to see how the council "adapted" the consultation to fit their objectives.

Hurrah for the "winners". Unfortunately, we will all have to live with the consequences and I am sure those who thought they won will be amongst the first to bemoan the boarding up of shops along Lordship Lane and the loss of a unique local community.

[jimlad48]

I'm afraid I switch off when I hear hyperbolic tales of Tooley street abuses - lots of rumour, no hard evidence. Like I said, if you have evidence, take it to the police.

As for 'death of Lordship lane', we heard lots of people saying the same about shops in our area when our CPZ came in. Strangely they're all still in business - funny that.