Melbourne Grove South CPZ consultation

[first mate]

I would imagine he is already aware, after all if the council choose to use a freebie magazine to announce things it seems likely they (or their supporters 😉 ) will also dip into threads on here from time to time. The forum is reasonably well-known.

I know James McAsh used to post on here when he started, following in James Barber's footsteps, but then he declined to post stating a preference for private emails, so it is also clear that is the council's preferred mode of comms and it keeps a lid on things, I guess. Charlie Smith could clarify on here or perhaps he'll put something into the next issue of SE22?

[ianr]

A councillor is not the council.

[first mate]

True but Cllr Charlie Smith and Cllr James McAsh are local councillors representing residents on the same specific roads to be affected by the revised CPZ ( if it goes ahead). James McAsh is also the Cabinet Member in charge of streets across the borough. Presumably, as joint local reps they discuss matters that will affect their Wards? Especially events like consultations? Do you not think it a bit odd then for one of them to disseminate information about local street changes if it is not correct?

[Earl Aelfheah]

On 17/09/2025 at 18:52, first mate said:

Lots of teenage boys skateboarding up and down the MGN LTN this evening... Is that the intention, that the local roads become a skateboard park?

That kids are able to play outside in a residential area without fear of being run over? I hope so.

It used to be considered quite normal.

Edited September 30 by Earl Aelfheah

[first mate]

It is two days until October, the month the council's own online documents stated would see implementation of the proposed and reduced MGS CPZ, subject to statutory consultation. No sign of any consultation yet?

[first mate]

Reading SE22 magazine today. A piece by Ward councillor and Cabinet Member for Streets, James McAsh. No mention of the MGS CPZ at all, nothing. He asks us all to go and look at the lovely street redesign and planting in MGS North.

[malumbu]

Yes, I like the planting/planters

[first mate]

I have searched and no update on this CPZ. I know local residents in the roads that would be in the proposed CPZ have not been contacted about a consultation or implementation either. It all seems very peculiar.

[first mate]

Please, if any of the council/CPZ suporters can shed light on what is happening with this CPZ do say.

[CPR Dave]

I don't think there is any doubt it is going ahead in the form set out in the link that James McAsh provided.

Those documents state very clearly the smaller scheme has been approved (by him) and I think references in there to "statutory consultation" are references to the so-called consultation that has already been undertaken. 

References to "statutory procedures" I take to mean simply drafting and approving the necessary Road Traffic Acts notices for the new parking bays and hundreds of metres of new double yellow lines that will be imposed to punish those who voted against the CPZ.

[first mate]

I fear you are right. But, on the online document I read earlier in the year, which now seems to have disappeared, the use of the phrase "subject to statutory consultation was used in such a way as to suggest imposition would only occur after a consultation, indicating further consultation. I don't see how proposed measures can be termed "subject to statutory consultation" if those exact measures have not been consulted on? 

Edited October 3 by first mate

[Earl Aelfheah]

On 15/09/2025 at 11:47, CPR Dave said:

Have had a prompt reply from Mr McAsh. 

 

The documents are available here...

 

https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=8364

Thanks for actually writing to the local councillor and sharing the reply, it's really helpful.

I've not taken much interest in this to be honest, because I feel it's mainly up to those who live on the roads in question. Having taken a quick look through the documents though, am I right in thinking that they've consulted with residents and only intend to introduce controlled parking on streets where it has the support of the majority of those who live there? 

Also looks like they're only introducing controls on three streets? Maybe I've missed something.

Edited October 3 by Earl Aelfheah

[first mate]

The strange thing is I cannot find one person in the relevant streets who say they are in favour. As for the 'it is only three streets' line, we all know this is just the beginning. Displaced parking is certain, meaning adjacent streets will soon be wanting CPZ too and so the domino effect will continue- resulting in the Council's original aim to CPZ all of ED.

[Rockets]

Displacement is very much at the centre of the council's CPZ strategy - I suspect they might have an internal motto of "One street at a time, to reap the gold mine"