Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Isn't it time we had residents parking in East Dulwich, especially around Barry Road area? I don't know about everyone else, but it is getting increasingly difficult to find somewhere to park. It seems that people from outside the hood are turning up and dumping their cars for the day - their right of course - to catch the god awful number 12 bus.
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/4970-time-for-residents-parking/
Share on other sites

Simple answer is NO


Residents around the barry road area don't want permit parking bays, they restrict parking outside your own house, cost money and stop friends visiting and delivery drivers


Please don't try and gain support here for a council based money making scheme, in times of recession no one can afford the cost just to park outside their own home...

Yep, but remembering rightly, the results of the survey weren't black and white - it's not possible to say "residents don't want...", you'd need to qualify that:


Below are the actual results in graphical format.


file.php?5,file=2944


As a quick summary, gold and pink colours are those who want parking restrictions of some kind. It's no surprise that these dominate responses amongst people who say they're affected to a 'high' degree by parking issues.


For those residents that said they had a 'high' degree of parking problems, over 80% said they wanted parking permits - and these were predominantly living in streets immediately adjacent to the north end of Lordship Lane.


However, these residents were only a small proportion of total ED residential respondents, most ED residents don't have a parking problem, and hence 54% of total respondents completely rejected any idea of parking permits. That just about squeaks a majority.


In other words, if you don't suffer directly, then you don't want to pay for protection, and you want free access to other people's roads (or parking spaces!! ;-))


The question in a democracy is whether you want to protect the rights of those living next to LL, or protect the rights of those who want to drive in to LL.

it's getting harder to park because the majority of 'new' residents to ED turned their front gardens into driveways and shut of the parking to everyone else. The council should have stopped this practice by refusing to drop the kerb stones.....but maybe they wanted parking charges all along ?

AllforNun Wrote:

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

> it's getting harder to park because the majority

> of 'new' residents to ED turned their front

> gardens into driveways and shut of the parking to

> everyone else. The council should have stopped

> this practice by refusing to drop the kerb

> stones.....but maybe they wanted parking charges

> all along ?


xxxxxx


Not the majority, surely?


And none in my road.

Regarding residents driveways.The average permitted driveway is 2.5 metres wide.

An average family saloon car, say a Ford Mondeo is 4.7 metres in length.

If the car of 4.7 metres in length is on the driveway, as oppossed to being the road, an extra 2.2 metres of roadway is available for parking.

Huguenot Wrote:


Firstly very good analysis.


However:-

.."and you want free access to other people's roads (or parking spaces!! ;-))


If any one sentence perfectly summarised these Orwellian (Council dictated) Times its that one complete with symbol like it was some outrageous idea(!):)):))


Imagine it people! Guys actually want to visit other people where and when THEY want instead of when the Council dictate to you that you should!

WHAT A CONCEPT!...sooooo very rose-tinted Inner London 1970's...:-$


p.s.Obviously one should not adversely affect Residents by parking across anyones front drive.

I'm referring to the open road.

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

    • Hey Sue, I was wrong - I don't think it would just be for foreign tourists. So yeah I assume that, if someone lives in Lewisham and wants to say the night in southwark, they'd pay a levy.  The hotels wouldn't need to vet anyone's address or passports - the levy is automatically added on top of the bill by every hotel / BnB / hostel and passed on to Southwark. So basically, you're paying an extra two quid a night, or whatever, to stay in this borough.  It's a great way to drive footfall... to the other London boroughs.  https://www.ukpropertyaccountants.co.uk/uk-tourist-tax-exploring-the-rise-of-visitor-levies-and-foreign-property-charges/
    • Pretty much, Sue, yeah. It's the perennial, knotty problem of imposing a tax and balancing that with the cost of collecting it.  The famous one was the dog licence - I think it was 37 1/2 pence when it was abolished, but the revenue didn't' come close to covering the administration costs. As much I'd love to have a Stasi patrolling the South Bank, looking for mullet haircuts, unshaven armpits, overly expressive hand movements and red Kicker shoes, I'm afraid your modern Continental is almost indistinguishable from your modern Londoner. That's Schengen for you. So you couldn't justify it from an ROI point of view, really. This scheme seems a pretty good idea, overall. It's not perfect, but it's cheap to implement and takes some tax burden off Southwark residents.   'The Man' has got wise to this. It's got bad juju now. If you're looking to rinse medium to large amounts of small denomination notes, there are far better ways. Please drop me a direct message if you'd like to discuss this matter further.   Kind Regards  Dave
    • "What's worse is that the perceived 20 billion black hole has increased to 30 billion in a year. Is there a risk that after 5 years it could be as high as 70 billion ???" Why is it perceived, Reeves is responsible for doubling the "black hole" to £20b through the public sector pay increases. You can't live beyond your means and when you try you go bankrupt pdq. In 4 yrs time if this Govt survives that long and the country doesn't go bust before then, in 2029 I dread to think the state the country will be in.  At least Sunak and co had inflation back to 2% with unemployment being stable and not rising.   
    • He seemed to me to be fully immersed in the Jeremy Corbyn ethos of the Labour Party. I dint think that (and self describing as a Marxist) would have helped much when Labour was changed under Starmer. There was a purge of people as far left as him that he was lucky to survive once in my opinion.   Stuff like this heavy endorsement of Momentum and Corbyn. It doesn't wash with a party that is in actual government.   https://labourlist.org/2020/04/forward-momentum-weve-launched-to-change-it-from-the-bottom-up/
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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