East Dulwich parking survey just hit.

[macroban]

Increasing revenue from charges is part of Southwark Council's Strategic Plan. It's on the web-site if anyone wants to read it.

[*Bob*]

I can accept that such a scheme may make money for the council and I can accept that setting-up CPZs may be incentivised to a certain degree.

But my real interest is in how the consultation gets interpreted..

If the majority of residents who reply to the consultation say no, is that the end of it?

[Siduhe]

If the majority of residents who reply to the consultation say no, is that the end of it?

Interesting question. There's no requirement for majority approval before a CPZ is introduced that I'm aware of. A number of councils (such as Lewisham) make clear that if there isn't a majority, a CPZ won't be introduced.

Southwark simply say, "there will be a consultation where you can express your views" and then "if a CPZ is approved"...with no detail about the approval process. However, the reality is, I suspect that any Council would be mad to bring in a CPZ against the wishes of the majority. The overall number of responses/pro/against to the consultation would be made available under FOIA and discussed at the various meetings where the CPZ was approved. And the decision is potentially subject to judicial review in theory. Just did a quick google and can see that some people/companies have actually threatened to judicially review the introduction of CPZs, so I guess it does happen.

[karter]

Its been 2-3 weeks since the parking survey hit ED and the councillors say they are still delivering, has anyone else here received a survey recently????

[kittenheels]

Not a sausage on Dunstans Road. Or a survey.

[Wino]

Still waiting at Lacon Road.

Did find a chorizo though.

[Asset]

I've not had one - off ED Grove

[Bobby P]

Still not received here on Melbourne, where they claim to have delivered already (though I did PM the Councillor with my responses, FWIW!).

[kford]

Waiting for one on Hansler.

[????]

Politicians consulting with public = obscure notice in Dulwich Temperance Hall, survey sent to key party workers, focus group of meeeja people at Ed Balls' pad in Islington

[Mark]

I got one by Goose Green

[bluemoon]

In the interests of road safety I'm sure that most would agree that zig zags for zebra crossings or schools need to be painted on the street.

If people are to know where to catch their bus (and board it safely) there need to be bus stops.

Those making essential journies (and that's more difficult to catagorise but in my mind...) disabled people getting to the shops/services and those contributing to the economic success of an area (vehicles unloading goods into shops or customers collecting heavy goods. Well, they probably need to park nearby. If they're going to have a fair chance to park closeby it probably needs some signs to say that it is for loading or disabled people.

So now the kerb parking space is reduced even more.

So what to do with the remaining space? Do we just leave it as a free for all? Personally, I dont think that is in anyone's interests; the resident who circles for ages trying to find a space, the shopkeeper who cant get his deliveries (except when the lorry parks on the corner or blocks the bus lane) or the car driving customer who cant find a space and thinks "s*d it, I'm off to sainsburys car park." Whilst I'm never going to like being told what I can/cannot do, to me, a bit of rationalising isnt a bad thing.

Talking to friends who lived in Hackney when they had a CPZ consultation: they didnt like the idea to start with but once it came in, that changed. They (and their visitors) genuinely could park easier, traffic went down, the road became quieter and safer (and not totally dominated by the car) and shops didnt close down. (BTW: I understand that the "unsaid reason" that the shopkeepers were anti- was cos they didnt like the thought of not being able to drive to work anymore and not because they had any real concern about business viability!) Also the presence of a traffic warden wasnt a menace but a figure of authority and safety (yes! imagine that!) esp. when they had kids. Their CPZ was put in on a trial basis so it could be evaluated over a year or so. Sounds fair enough to me!

[She'llsurvive]

i appreciate the work that has gone into the survey that has now been posted as a way of getting some detailed views - but a survey that has 24 questions isn't going to be answered by anyone unless they really care (esp. since the main question isn't question number 1 but question number 15) so i don't see this being representative either

[Huguenot]

Good points SS, but I hope I can reassure everyone that the 24 questions can be completed in just a couple of minutes and it's great to get everybody's point of view! In the end this survey will only be representative of those people who respond to EDF surveys about CPZs ;-).

Amazingly, in the first couple of hourse we've had over 50 respondents, so quite a lot of people do care!

We felt that whether people were affected by parking problems, and whether people were well informed would probably have a bearing on how they felt about a CPZ but apologies if it's a bit lengthy.

As with the best bar votes, it's a bit of fun - you never know, everyone might agree with your view!

[SeanMacGabhann]

if someone "doesn't really care" then why is their opinion important?

[karter]

Thanks Mark for organising the survey (didnt get a reply from you after my email request for it) and Hugue for setting it up. Nice surprise. Hopefully the councillors will incorporate the results into their survey that has hit a *part* of ED only.

[????]

Bit of a joke survey....eg loaded questions about "parking problems", assumptions mainly negative, open ended questions all relate to assuming there is a problem, only asks once for an opposing opinion to a charge, weird question about changing your mind which assumes you have and no space for any other comments, I suspect its just because its done by amateurs rather than anything more sinister but seriously it's not a decent survey

[Mark]

Apologies that it's not decent survey ????, shall endeavour to get the world's finest survey writers that money can buy for the next one.

[Huguenot]

Sorry for any confusion Quids.

Judging by submissions so far, it seems that few others have had too many difficulties. Responses have been sufficiently wide-ranging to suggest that the questions are't as loaded as you feel.

Q18 gives you the option to say that your opinion hasn't changed. If it hasn't then Q19 and Q20 should be ignored as they say 'If your opinion has changed, what....'

I've clarified this in the question for you, so hopefully it will address some of your concerns?

[SeanMacGabhann]

Life Survey © Quids

1) Does life have any redeeming features (choose one answer only)

a) no

[She'llsurvive]

i appreciate not everyone is as lazy as me but i don't see what's wrong with a simple survey that says do you agree with a cpz with options "yes" / "yes if free, otherwise no thank you" / "no" / "whatever"

[Mark]

There's nothing wrong with a simple survey like that She'llsurvive but it's more of a vote than a survey and that opens it up to more criticism. We're just trying to get a few opinions about the CPZ in general and sorry you have to scroll down to number 15 but if we had it at number one more people would just fill in that question then bugger off. People who feel strongly about will make the effort to fill it in.

Anyway please can we move this discussion back onto the merits/pitfalls of a CPZ and not how the survey has been set up, thanks.

[mockney piers]

On the results so far I notice that 60% say there should be no parking restrictions, yet 89% think there should be restrictions for estate agents' vehicles.

How does that work? Clearly those Foxtons' minis have an effect that transcends normal rational thought.

[Siduhe]

mockney piers Wrote:

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

> On the results so far I notice that 60% say there

> should be no parking restrictions, yet 89% think

> there should be restrictions for estate agents'

> vehicles.

> How does that work?

I think it's the use of the words "special restrictions" at Qu16. I interpret that as most people don't want general parking restrictions on residential and business users, but do want special restrictions on estate agents, taxi firms and car salesmen (but not on tradesmen). Clearly the Foxtons effect at work, but see also Felicity J Lord, Wates (is it them with the Beetles?) and so on...

[lozzyloz]

Is there such a think as automotive nimbyism? nimps?

How can it be OK for a local car owner to park without restriction but not a local car owner who needs their vehicle to make a living? If local businesses can't generate revenue then the local economy will decline unless perhaps this is preferable method of generating parking spaces?