Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Or to put it another way, CPZ revenue is used to fund LTNs as well as other things. The two are interlinked, something that up until very recently you denied. Why? 

It is you that keeps mentioning a conspiracy, I haven't. Another attempt to deflect and misrepresent? 

 

"Road safety and public realm improvements would include things like filtered streets, bike lanes, expanded pedestrian spaces etc."

On 20/12/2024 at 08:39, Earl Aelfheah said:

Yes, it is. If you read my previous post I have listed some of the ways it can be used. 

On 17/12/2024 at 12:13, Earl Aelfheah said:

The use of any surplus that results from parking is strictly governed by legislation and is tightly controlled. It can only be used for activities specified in Section 55 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (as amended). These activities include:

  • public realm improvements
  • road safety initiatives
  • freedom passes for disabled people and people over 60

(👆🏾this one)

Road safety and public realm improvements would include things like filtered streets, bike lanes, expanded pedestrian spaces etc.

 

...and again, this is a thread about CPZ. Not an LTN introduced 4 years ago. Not about someone being annoyed they got caught in a bus lane. 

Edited by Earl Aelfheah
4 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

"Road safety and public realm improvements would include things like filtered streets, bike lanes, expanded pedestrian spaces etc."

 

...and again, this is a thread about CPZ. Not an LTN introduced 4 years ago. Not about someone being annoyed they got caught in a bus lane. 

And again, CPZ, and LTNs are interlinked. Maybe bus lane violations also help fund LTNs?

The DV LTN has improved safety how and for who?

4 minutes ago, first mate said:

Maybe bus lane violations also help fund LTNs?

We now have multiple threads about an individual having got caught driving in a bus lane and how this is not a consequence of their actions, but somehow a Southwark Council conspiracy.

...it's rather embarassing.

  • Like 2
2 hours ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

The council cannot introduce a CPZ for the purposes of generating income. If you think that this is what they're doing, then you should make a complaint to the Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman.

Yet any revenue surplus they do raise can be used on projects like LTNs.....hmmmmmm...seems like there might be a loophole appearing there.....do you not see the issue here? Why on earth have revenues increased so massively over the last few years from fines etc and the council seemingly trying to force revenue generating CPZs on everyone whether they want it or not?

Do you not see the disconnect from your position and the action of the council? Generating revenue from these measures seems to be a huge priority - they aren't doing that for the sake of it?

By the way does anyone know what the Environment Reserve gets spent on? That's a huge chunk of the revenue generated from CPZs/PCNs etc.

Edited by Rockets
  • Agree 1
1 hour ago, Rockets said:

By the way does anyone know what the Environment Reserve gets spent on?

I’m not sure (so stand to be corrected), but I think it’s an investment pot to fund projects tackling the impacts of climate change over the next decade or two. If you email your councillor I’m sure they could give you more info.

If anyone has any clue what the Environment Reserve is spent on that would be good to know as £6m is a bit chunk of cash and when I looked at the full accounts for the council I could find detail on a lot of the reserves but not the environment one.

On 03/01/2025 at 21:37, Rockets said:

If anyone has any clue what the Environment Reserve is spent on that would be good to know as £6m is a bit chunk of cash and when I looked at the full accounts for the council I could find detail on a lot of the reserves but not the environment one.

It would be interesting to learn more about this.


The CPZ in the main part of Calton Avenue is now live but penalty free until 20th.  There are no markings in the road nor any kerbside signs. Just a sign fixed to the Belisha beacon at the zebra crossing close to the Woodwarde Road junction and one on a lamppost at the junction with Townley Road. See attached photos. Both could be easily missed by drivers.

It appears that parking is only allowed for one hour. No visible information about obtaining a permit. Perhaps it’s only a temporary arrangement……….

IMG_0792.jpeg

IMG_0790.jpeg

IMG_0789.jpeg

On 08/01/2025 at 20:16, Glemham said:


The CPZ in the main part of Calton Avenue is now live but penalty free until 20th.  There are no markings in the road nor any kerbside signs. Just a sign fixed to the Belisha beacon at the zebra crossing close to the Woodwarde Road junction and one on a lamppost at the junction with Townley Road. See attached photos. Both could be easily missed by drivers.

It appears that parking is only allowed for one hour. No visible information about obtaining a permit. Perhaps it’s only a temporary arrangement……….

IMG_0792.jpeg

IMG_0790.jpeg

IMG_0789.jpeg

Can someone clarify this sign please? Does it mean even with a permit you can only park for an hour or if you dont have a permit you can still park for up to an hour? I assume its the latter but then why does it say "permit holders parking only past this point"?

Edited by sandyman

Very confusing signage - clearly for DV as all of the CPZ signs refer to the "DV" zone. 

 

To Glenham and Sandyman's point what is that sign supposed to mean:

- one hour for permit holders between those hours?

- one hour for anyone who isn't a permit holder outside those hours?

- one hour for anyone outside those times?

 

Perhaps someone should get Southwark News to take a look as the councillors do respond to them much more quickly than constituents?

I presume Cllr McAsh is the one responsible for signing this stuff off?

 

Edited by Rockets

Surely resident permit holders can park at any time but what I don't understand is that if you can park for an hour during the restricted times how does that reduce parents driving to and from school to drop off and pick up children?  Or was it that local residents didn't want school staff parking in the streets all day?  And is this free but time restricted parking or will pay machines be installed?  I'm confused.

6 hours ago, Rockets said:

Very confusing signage - clearly for DV as all of the CPZ signs refer to the "DV" zone. 

 

To Glenham and Sandyman's point what is that sign supposed to mean:

- one hour for permit holders between those hours?

- one hour for anyone who isn't a permit holder outside those hours?

- one hour for anyone outside those times?

 

Perhaps someone should get Southwark News to take a look as the councillors do respond to them much more quickly than constituents?

I presume Cllr McAsh is the one responsible for signing this stuff off?

 

Actually if I was to put money on it I'd bet it's a fourth option:

One hour for non permit holders within those hours (and unrestricted outside those hours).

but it is utterly confusing.

By the way, I think the signs might have been put high because when they were lower they were vandalised and this post is right by a bench for easy vandalism access.

 

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

    • For every person like OP that moans their doorbell was rung and there was a knock on the door, there's someone else moaning that they didn't hear the delivery drivers. If you've ever done delivery work you'll know that loads of people's bells don't work. The delivery drivers probably goes to a hundred doors a day: press bell, knock door, drop package, move on. If you don't like delivery drivers, insist on delivery by Royal Mail where the workers have wages and a union - or just stop ordering shit online that's artificially cheap. But most of us (me included) don't want that
    • If someone comes to my house and bangs my door and slams my gate, I'd speak to them about it nicely and ask if they would please not do that. And then subsequently less nicely if they keep doing it, ending in reporting them.  We don't slam doors at home and I don't put up with that either. I can see us moving to a culture where we bribe drivers to be nice by tipping them, but we shouldn't have to. It's not necessary - does not matter if they are on minimum wage or not, or if society means that delivery services are outsourced or whatever reason anyone would like to concoct.     
    • We’ve got a gap on the roof of our shed that needs patching  don’t want to buy a huge roll so hoping someone has some leftover  happy to collect/reimburse 
    • I never said I thought it was targeted or deliberate. There also has never been a “stand off” or confrontation, we’ve spoken to them in a friendly manner about it. Our experience is they don’t seem to care. That’s the frustrating thing for us, if someone politely raises a concern at least take a second to reflect. Treat others how you would want to be treated.  I don’t want them to lose their job, far from it. But considering it could cost me a days work to fix any damage, I’m within my right to try prevent it.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...