Parking permit 100% cost increase

[Huggers]

Southwark vowed that any residence parking system was not a cynical money making exercise. Our residence parking-,which a majority of residents  voted against implementing,- has just doubled its annual fee out of the blue and without notice. 

[first mate]

They keep changing the narrative around all this stuff. 
The early rationale for CPZ was to help those living closest to the train station who were unable to park their cars and were being harassed every morning by evil commuters looking for spaces to park. CPZ, they said, was to help these poor residents get a space to park on their own street; now suddenly it is to stop people owning cars?

So first they introduced CPZ to empower and enable car ownership for those living closest to transport hubs. Now they claim to want to make CPZ spaces so expensive that car owners will relinquish their cars and this is their big contribution to saving the planet. At the same time, they are turning over swathes of green park for commercial environment polluting events and sections of green MOL for property development. Am I the only one to see a contradiction in all this?
The one thing both endeavours have in common is they are making more money for the Council.

 

[Spartacus]

2 hours ago, first mate said:

The one thing both endeavours have in common is they are making more money for the Council.

 

Shock horror 

Is that any surprise to anyone with an ounce of brains.

The council are short of money and rather than make their services run  efficiently and trim poor practices they raise funds to support their inadequacy.

Edited May 1, 2023 by Spartacus

[ken78]

3 hours ago, Spartacus said:

Shock horror 

Is that any surprise to anyone with an ounce of brains.

The council are short of money and rather than make their services run  efficiently and trim poor practices they raise funds to support their inadequacy.

And how much do the fat cats earn ???

[Froglander]

How much is the cost now?

[Huggers]

It’s gone up by £100 to £225

[malumbu]

Just what we need, another thread knocking Southwark Council.  Gets a bit tiresome.

[Guest]

And rightly so! ..tiresome? NO! just the angry majority paying their wages whilst ignoring the masses!

[Rockets]

Wow, how on earth can the council justify that increase? Honestly, this comes as no surprise, the council continues its war on car owners with stealth tax upon stealth tax.

And remember, their plan is for borough-wide CPZs as a matter of course.

Amazing how they offer soundbite after soundbite about the cost of living crisis yet turn a blind eye to it when it comes to their own grand plans and ideology....utter hypocrites...

But, some were smart enough to realise what the grand plan was when they floated the "commuters from Kent" blah blah blah to justify the first CPZ in the area. They did it again with the "socially distanced LTNs"!

They are just bare-faced liars and should not be trusted...but with their majority they can pretty much do as they please.

 

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Rockets said:

They are just bare-faced liars and should not be trusted...but with their majority they can pretty much do as they please.

 

Sad... but true!

[Ashlar]

The worst part for me is that they introduced street permits to stop commuters but did not set up permits in our estate. This means the commuters just park for free inside my estate! They added parking spaces and double yellow lines to cut down on the number of cars which are able to park and now have added this huge hike. It’s all very well saying that we have public transport but I do not feel safe travelling on my own at night.
 

I feel very sad that people are supporting this crack down on private cars, which will only ever affect the poorest of society. We are going backwards to a time when only the rich could drive and it’s being cheered on as some kind of win. 

[TIJNAR]

Help your neighbours 🤷‍♀️ 
 

Have you seen this petition yet https://chng.it/pQZzR97G

[Ashlar]

1 hour ago, TIJNAR said:

Help your neighbours 🤷‍♀️ 
 

Have you seen this petition yet https://chng.it/pQZzR97G

Done! Thanks for sharing

[Penguin68]

It seems clear that this is not (just) about a revenue grab in an area which is not restricted by law as to the allowable %age increases, although clearly it is about that, but also about the council's clear intention to attack private car (but actually any vehicle) ownership in Southwark, possibly at least arguably reasonable as regards leisure use vehicles in the north of the borough, very well served by public transport (at least at the moment, till TFL decides otherwise) and sufficiently flat for fit young cyclists to be able to manage easily - but not in the hilly south where what  public transport we have (including bus and train frequency) is swiftly evaporating.

It is also an attack (but why would 'they' care?) on the working man who needs a vehicle to get to work and transport stuff for work (as is the ULEZ extension) - but the Labour party in London is not now made up of working people but of a professional middle class apparat who have no need to use vehicles for work, and cannot therefore sympathise with those who do. 

[Earl Aelfheah]

We're one of very few areas in inner London which still gives over huge amounts of public land for car storage at the heavily subsidised rate of nothing. Even in the few areas where there is a charge, and even with an increase, 62p to store a 4.5 x 2m metal box on public land for 24 hours, seems pretty cheap. It costs significantly more if you want to park a skip on the street.

Edited May 2, 2023 by Earl Aelfheah

[mrwb]

Public land storage for the public to park their cars? Why do they have the right to charge people for parking? Unless there's some reason to restrict it, like people using the train station gumming the local streets up.

Sure they're legally allowed to because the government says they can... It's public land that has essentially been requisitioned for the benefit of the council. 

Costs are increasing for the council (and everyone else). £100 extra on parking means a £100 less to spend on other things for the residents. It's certainly going to be interesting how things play out economically over the next 12 months... Good luck to everyone.

 

[Joe]

20 hours ago, Froglander said:

How much is the cost now?

This is a full list of the changes, before and after: https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/4297157

Interesting to note that all other parking charges (e.g. virtual permits) seem to have had inflationary increases, but residents permits for non-EVs have nearly doubled.

[Earl Aelfheah]

"Unless there's some reason to restrict it"

There is a reason to restrict it. On-street parking reduces the space available for pedestrians and makes it difficult for vehicles to pass each other, causing congestion, increasing pollution and slowing buses.

Acres and acres of public land are given over to private car storage. Don't see much difference to temporarily storing a skip on the street, which no one would suggest should be free.

I note that on-street bike lockers also charge users.

Edited May 2, 2023 by Earl Aelfheah

[first mate]

Until recently there was little issue on the majority of residential streets for pedestrians, for cars to park or for vehicles to pass each other on streets. Problems have been artificially and systematically constructed and imposed by the council with a view to extending CPZ boundaries.

[monica]

10 hours ago, TIJNAR said:

Help your neighbours 🤷‍♀️ 
 

Have you seen this petition yet https://chng.it/pQZzR97G

Hi, yes I just signed it. My friends live and work in Nunhead,  its only going to get worse. I have spoken with customers who wanted the CPZ in East Dulwich and now are complaining of the hike in permit fee. 

[Penguin68]

Quote

On-street parking reduces the space available for pedestrians 

Well, I would certainly encourage those who agree with you to walk on the roads locally, unrestricted by parked vehicles slowing the traffic. Or are you suggesting increasing pavement widths by 5 ft or so on both sides of the road? If so I do hope you plan to charge pedestrians for occupying so much of the real estate? For comparatively so little time. 

[Earl Aelfheah]

Yes, I think in many places we could widen pavements (obviously not by 5 foot). They've just done exactly this on Bellenden road - removing some parking, widening pavements and putting in extra seating and some bike racks. It's made for a much nicer environment.

[Rockets]

Could it be, per chance, that there is lots of space for parking cars because, well, people have a need cars in this area? Let's not lose sight of the fact that Dulwich still has "poor" PTAL scores and public transport is getting worse not better and is one of the main reasons cited by the council for the higher car ownership levels in the south of the borough.

And the measures put in by the council to help create the need for CPZs (extending double-yellows etc years ago) is the sole, and single, biggest contributor to increasing parking congestion in the area - at a time when, don't forget, private car ownership is decreasing.

 

This is just another blatant attack on car drivers by the council because the council's narrative is that anyone who can afford a car must be some super-rich, million-pound bonus receiving fat-cat and deserves to pay more for the right to own a car or words to that effect! ;-). It's amazing how quickly they forget their mantra about the evils of the cost of living crisis and are happy to add to the misery if it supports their own ideology. 

As I said before hypocrites and just the tip of the iceberg and one-day those who support the council in these actions will see through the blah blah blah....the adage never let the truth get in the way of a good story comes to mind!

[RdeN]

We have seen, since the pandemic, a determination from the council to support any initiative that could reduce/ restrict the usage of cars in the streets. It is not only this increase but also the reduction of parking spots in areas where there is no parking permit, it is the inclusion of safe zones around schools, it is the reduction of pathways making some streets to be on constant traffic. All of this under some sort of climate change appeal or trying to reduce emissions caused by cars.

I have never seen such lack of self awareness of what a council should do and missunderstanding of how to positively impact climate change through its position in society.

If the goal is to impact climate change, please focus on waste management, which is a function of the council and it is poorly handled. We don't recicle enough, we can do a lot more there.

The situation in the streets of southwark (especially east dulwich) is becoming so difficult that asks for a different approach. We need more council members who are there to make our lives better, not harder. Life is already super hard to manage with all the commitments (family, financial, etc) . We need a council that helps you.

Looking for candidates who are against this absurd that is happening now.

 

 

[Earl Aelfheah]

Yes, the council does want to reduce car use. I don’t think they’ve hidden that fact. I’m not sure who wouldn’t want to see reduced car use.

The PTAL around East Dulwich train station is not low. There is err… a train station there.