Council launches public consultation on parking in Lewisham

Alan: Henry I’m right am I not that my distant relative was involved in perhaps one of the most important pieces of town planning that Norwich has ever seen? 
Genealogist: Well he worked in the office of town planner. 
Alan: Changing what was Deering Square in to what is now Deering Lane... 
Genealogist: It certainly made getting in to the centre of town that bit more straightforward. 
Alan: And the rest! If it weren’t for Deering Lane you’d have to come in on the ring road! That an ancestor of mine had to wrestle with that awful decision: on the one hand, the square gave people to sit – a respite from the frenetic pace of life, in Norwich. And yet on the other, I mean direct access to Hobbes Road must have been like the promised land to civil engineers, cutting journey times from the east half of the city in half! He was caught between a rock and a hard place. It must have been ruddy hard…
- Alan Partridge - Mid Morning Matters

Lewisham Council has launched a public consultation about parking policy in the borough. It says:

This review aims to update our parking arrangements, which have been in place for 10 years, to meet the growth we expect for the future. Our population is always growing but our road space is not.

The review will consider whether the Council's approach to identifying areas to be covered by Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs) is still appropriate. It will also consider how the Council's parking arrangements can encourage people to visit local businesses, provide fairer access for carers to help residents, and for residents' visitors more generally, and allow for practical arrangements such as deliveries.

The consultation closes on September 28th. Click here to complete the survey.

The review points out that the population of the borough has grown significantly and will continue to grow over the next decade:

Like everywhere else in London, Lewisham's population has increased significantly over the past 10 years. The Census 2011 shows that the number of households (116,100) in the borough has grown by around eight per cent since the last Census in 2001. The population (275,900) is projected to grow further by another 10 per cent before 2023.

However, as the population of London has become more dense, car use has declined and per capita car ownership in the city has fallen, so it would be good to see figures for total car ownership in the borough, rather than assume (as this survey does) that the population rise necessarily means there is greater pressure on parking than there was a decade ago.

With thanks to Michael on the South East London forum.

53 comments:

mb said...

so many questions that seem to merge together or trip over themselves. Who devises these things? they must put so many people off actually filling them in (except those with an agenda) that the results are inevitably unreliable.

For the record, I have a car but would like some more people friendly design. I'm looking at you Lewisham Station roundabout and Coulgate st.

Blunderbuss said...

Agreed, awful questions. Contradictory, confusing and in some cases hard to understand. Would put off most sane people from wasting time on it.

Tressilliana said...

It did go on a bit, didn't it? I only realised partway through that it isn't one of those awful questionnaires where you have to answer a question or you can't proceed. You can leave some blank. That should have been clearer, or there should have been more options to say 'Don't know' or 'Not applicable'.

Anonymous said...

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

CPZ around the station!!!!

No to CPZ!! said...

Here we go again. CPZ's are for idiots!

J.R. Shakerley said...

This was launched quite a while ago. To avoid the lag time, simply subscribe to this feed: http://lewisham-consult.limehouse.co.uk/rest/objects/events/rss?q:advanced=false&q:folderId=7673&q:keywords=Keywords&q:status=open

Hope this helps.

Anonymous said...

The Ladywell CP has been a disaster for anyone trying to actually use their car and drive. Lewisham's absurd parking charges need to come down, and it should be possible to pay for 15 or 30 minutes in the car parks. Why should we pay £1.40 (up from 90p) to stay for 10 minutes?

Anonymous said...

I've done the survey, phew.

Anonymous said...

"The Ladywell CP has been a disaster for anyone trying to actually use their car and drive"

Hence the widespread support by mungo

ANGer Badgerment said...

Maybe ther could be the enforcement of the law NOT TO PARK ON tHE PAVEMENT!

Sweep the feckless up and SHIP THEM TO JAIL!!!!

Anonymous said...

Totally disagree with anon 1739. As someone living within the CPZ I think it's been great.

Anonymous said...

"As someone living within the CPZ I think it's been great." Good for you, I expect your car is parked outside or near your house. But on the fringes of the CPZ there is chaos. Vicars Hill in the evening for example. It was pretty bad before the CPZ, now it is unbearable. Was that the idea of the CPZ?

Living in a spot I bet Lewisham would love to turn into a CPZ... said...

Just filled it in. Questions mostly made sense when you thought about them. I definitely got the feeling that Lewisham BC would lvoe to introduce as many CPZs as possible though, and are eyeing up the revenue potential.

Anonymous said...

"It was pretty bad before the CPZ, now it is unbearable. Was that the idea of the CPZ?"

You have a flavour of what the people in the CPZ used to put up with, and you think that is an argument against CPZs?

Anonymous said...

Free parking for all please

Anonymous said...

Instead of the commuter parking around Ladywell being spread around, now it is concentrated outside the CPZ, which for most of the day is empty of parked cars, and shoppers probably.

Anonymous said...

I agree with the free parking anon. Why should we pay? Parking controls and bays, but why fees? If the council were thinking of their residents they could just introduce 1 hour no parking for non residents at say 10am - 11am, or 12 - 1pm, like parts of Bromley and Greenwich.The rest of the time anyone could park in the mostly unused resident bays.

Anonymous said...

“The Census 2011 shows that the number of households (116,100) in the borough has grown by around eight per cent since the last Census in 2001. The population (275,900) is projected to grow further by another 10 per cent before 2023.”

From 116,100 to 275,900- isn't that surely more like 137% growth?

If that's true then we're well ahead.

No new homes

Brockley Nick said...

You have confused households with population. Build more homes on brownfield sites in the borough.

Anonymous said...

How about we actually tell people to stop having so many kids?

It's a true sign of our times that every Trinny and Nicholas seems to think they have a right to create three little Mungos to replace them.

Moronwatch said...

Yes, because only middle class people have children.

Stoopid said...

Yes, the universal declaration of human rights does say that people should be free to have kids if they want. Damn those united nation bastards. How would you stop it? Other than being so breathtakingly stupid no one would ever sleep with you, which I guess is route you're taking.

Moronwatch said...

Poor stupid Anonymous 13.59. He's really just trying to shoehorn in a bit of 'mung' nonsense.
He's clearly weirdly obsessed with the middle classes. Probably off having a cry and a wank over a Boden catalogue by now.

LadywellLass said...

I've filled out this form - I live on the border of the Ladywell CPZ and the whole thing has turned a friendly road into a neighbour-against-neighbour battleground.

People who want the CPZ are those who can afford it without batting an eye. Most of the extra cars at the moment are builders working in the town centre - which will soon be done and they will be gone - but a CPZ is for life.

Many of the questions didn't leave an option for not agreeing with a CPZ - and council wanting to be able introduce CPZs without consultation is outrageous.

My personal parking moan is people who think they have the right to put out cones to reserve parking outside their own home - fine, if you've got a wedding, or a funeral, or a removal van NOT IF YOU'RE JUST SELFISHLY TAKING UP A SPACE ON THE PUBLIC HIGHWAY FOR YOUR OWN CONVENIENCE!

Everyone who is against CPZs (basically a way for the council to raise revenue, without a cap, indefinatly, and in these times when they have centrally-imposed limits on council tax, they need to put in CPZs everywhere) needs to fill this survey in, long as it is.

People on benefits shouldn't have to pay to park their car (because lots of people on benefits have minimum wage jobs and need their cars as work vehicles).

Only the housebound get a free parking space. How ridiculous is that?

If I have to pay a fiver to have the guy come to do my front garden, I'll just let it grow back over and lower the tone of the street. If I have to pay a fiver to have my health visitor turn up to see me, I will just have to wait until i feel well enough to go out to her.

IF YOU ARE AGAINST CPZs PLEASE WADE THROUGH THE COUNCIL'S FORM AND TELL THEM SO!

LadywellLass said...

...sorry, to continue my rant...

Lewisham actually ask if
1. the whole borough should be CPZ (yes, keep out you nasty visitors unless you want to pay to see your friends/shop/help someone out) and

2. the price should be the average price for parking in London. But we're not an average-income London borough - we're clearly at the lower end.

CPZ doesn't guarantee you can park outside your house any more than free parking does.

If you don't mind a CPZ, because you can afford it, please spare a moment for people on minimum wage, who need a car/van but for whom this will be a real impact on their already squeezed pockets.

LadywellLass said...

Sorry, will go away and have some breakfast in a minute...

The people who can't afford to park their own cars on the public highway are probably those who can't afford a computer either, so don't get the opportunity to respond to this kind of survey.
Which will skew the results to the richer end of society who don't mind paying for parking because they'll not notice the cost as to them it's not much money. Giving LBL the extra revenue they crave.

Robert said...

I am very much undecided on CPZs.

My gut inclination is to agree with them in principle, as they are probably likely to contribute to a decrease in car use in London - if they were to be used widely.

However, I am also concerned about the social and economic issues. A wider coverage of CPZs in the City will almost certainly make it a less fair place to drive. In essence we are admitting that a larger proportion of the population of London should be economically prevented from using a private vehicle in the city - if we go the all encompassing CPZ route.

It will also be a faff to arrange for temporary parking permits for visitors and trades - though I don't mind this so much, I'm pretty sure we'd get used to it. Most friends that visit us come by public transport anyway.

Tamsin said...

"Many of the questions didn't leave an option for not agreeing with a CPZ - and council wanting to be able introduce CPZs without consultation is outrageous."

The classic case being the reply paid flyer that came round in Telegraph Hill just before the introdction of Congestion Charging.

"Do you want to be consulted on the introduction of a CPZ?" and taking a "yes" to that as being a "yes" to a CPZ!

Agree with most of what Ladywell ass has said. The non-computerate and survey non-savvy do get very left out of these self selecting questionnaires. Agree that it is an economical way of guaging opinion and that is a good thing in these stringent times, but the designers should be aware of these issues and build in additional questions on household income, make-up and main bread winner's occupation so that they can compare that to census data and have some handle on the extent to which the results are inevitably skewed.

But at least this one can sort by postcode rather than road (as different ends of a long road can have very different CPZ issues) - an improvement on what has been gone on before.

Tim said...

lady well lass and Robert seem to think a car is some sort of right, rather than an economic good.

Anonymous said...

Newham (which is one of the poorer boroughs) effectively operate a borough wide CPZ, however parking permits are free to residents for the first car and there is then a relatively small fee for additional cars. Residents can also buy books of tickets for guests etc... Which work out at about 20p per ticket and allow parking for up to 6hrs.

Business permits are more expensive, but as an operating cost these can be claimed back against tax.

I have no problem with the concept of CPZs where there are parking issues, however these should not be set up with revenue generation in mind.

As a resident and car owner, I already pay council and road tax and would personally not be in favour of any additional charges (other than a nominal amount) for being able to park outside my own home.

LadywellLass said...

In response to Tim - I don't drive, don't have a licence (never have) don't have a car nor access to one should I decide to learn. A CPZ for me would mean I would have to pay to have friends/workmen/health visitors visit me.

But I live next door to a carpenter, who is on low income and needs a van for work, and in the same road as people who work in Sainsbury's - also low income - who share childcare for their grandchildren and need a car for collections. These are two people who need a car, can't afford to pay for parking, and neither have computer access so neither can say "no" to the council.

There were questions in the survey asking whether the council should be able to introduce CPZ without consultation.

This road was balloted twice, in the last 2 or 3 years, and both times said "no thanks". And here we are, again, being pressed to say yes. The council will presumably keep asking until they get their way and therefore their money.

I agree with the suggestion that some questions should have been included to verify whether the respondants to the survey were truly representative of the borough's poplulation.

As anony 12:41 said: if you've paid your road tax, you should be allowed to park on the road. If you've paid your council tax, you should be allowed to have people come and visit you.

Anonymous said...

Here here to Ladywellass. The survey didn't ask income or occupation etc., but it want to know our colou and sexual orientation, and even if the gender we claimed was the one we were born with! What thats got to do with a CPZ I don't know.

Robnert said...

"lady well lass and Robert seem to think a car is some sort of right, rather than an economic good."

Tim. Not sure what you mean by this. To some people, owning a motor vehicle gives them an economic advantage (taxi-drivers, roving sales, deliveries etc), whilst to others (like myself) it is an expensive luxury that makes life easier sometimes.

Also, are you suggesting that car-use isn't a right? That our freedom to use a car in the city should be legally curtailed? Are you suggesting that I think that everyone should be able to use a car for free? The only things that are free in London are oxygen, conversation, and self-propulsion*

* the latter two require fuel to work, at a reasonable cost.

headhunter said...

Road tax doesn't exist and it doesn't pay for roads... It's called ved and it's a tax on emissions and goes into general central government coffers.roads are paid for by anyone who pays council tax, not just car owners... Just sayin'

LadywellLass said...

Headhunter - sorry - not a car driver, assumed that was what it was for...

Don't drive, don't agree with CPZ, have no problem with other people parking outside my house. Do object to people coning off "their" bit of street as if it IS "their bit of street.

Agree that the gender I was born with (etc etc) should make no difference to the CPZ question for Lewisham, and there are a lot of questions in the survey which don't allow you to say "actually, no CPZ thankyou" as all the choices given are for a CPZ option.

Anonymous said...

Believe it or not, it's actually legal in Lewisham to park partly on the pavement in certain places (quite a lot of places). (I think this is utterly ludicrous, but there you have it.

Hibernis said...

Grr I hate CPZs. Used to have one when I lived over in Tooting. Didn't help parking at all and all it did was work like a cash point for the council. Now this I'd love to see kicked into touch.

Warden of the People said...

Dont want a CPZ but I'm in crofton park and have an off street parking spot - I might think differently if I lived elsewhere...

But fundamentally any CPZ should be a tool operated for the benefit of the residents - it should be as cheap as possible to operate. It should only be operated where it is needed and should only cost enough to be self sufficient - I'd expect fines to pay for most of it...

I have always thought that traffic wardens should be far fewer and should drive around on scooters - the public could call in any parking or tax disc violations and get a cut of any fine or clampiing fee levied. Even better, you could dedeuct their finders fee off of their next years CPZ fee. The ticket would still be administered by the warden but the public would be their eyes on the street. You could even have an app for it...

In other news I went through the whole survey and it crashed when I clicked the submit button. Grrrrrr.

Anonymous said...

I used to live in Islington and the CPZ there was a nightmare. All it did was cost residents money. After paying for one parking permit and getting some permits for visitors, workmen, deliveries etc I think it cost me around £150-200 a year to do basic things which I should be able to do for free given that I paid council tax to live there and road tax on my car.

Local businesses also told me their trade suffered badly - the main streets didn't suffer but the more out of the way places did.

Most importantly for me, being able to drive is very important as my brother is disabled and when he visits to give my parents a break I have to be able to drive and park otherwise we are trapped in the house.

Anonymous said...

'Road Tax' is known as that by most people because that is what it was originally. Governments have chosen to absorb it into the general tax coffers. Only recently was it linked to emissions, and only for vehicles registered from March/April 2001. Vehicles in use registered before then pay a flat rate whatever their emissions. The survey asks if it would be a good idea to link parking charges to emissions. I agree the council should operate to benefit its citizens, not its coffers or its workforce. If there were 1 hour parking restrictions in the middle of the day, the council would need fewer wardens in fewer places at fewer times. Car owning isn't a right but it is an option. Freedom is just another word etc.

Mb said...

",,,the council should operate to benefit its citizens, not its coffers or its workforce...."

Well yes, you have to pay people who provide a public service, you know, teach our kids and look after the elderly or should it be done for free? Sub it out to the private sector, I'm sure they would deal with it for a fraction of the cost (!)

"road tax" stopped being ring fenced before the last world war, ask that notorious communist Winston Churchill. His idea.

Mb said...

http://ipayroadtax.com/no-such-thing-as-road-tax/bring-back-the-road-fund/

See? And anyway, car ownership is great but also has a negative impact. Taxing that impact can help reduce it, tax has been used to modify behaviours since forever. It's one of governments levers.

Enough Council but no more said...

MB - Valid points but I think the gist of previous posts was that it shouldnt be just another revenue stream. Of course you make a valid point that it could be 'profit' generating if it was in the general interest - i.e. used as a lever...

Vehicle excise is already linked to Co2 so not sure we need that lever applied twice? Also not sure how much parking controls would affect congestion (thats not to say there wouldn't be any effect. As has been noted by others 200 odd quid a year would hit the poor disproportionately.

So I for one feel that unless the council specifically want to apply a 'lever' and can convince us why(perhaps they can) then it should be run at cost (or as close as can be achieved).

Anonymous said...

Sure tax fags and booze and anything else people don't really need in order to inhibit their use. But some people need their cars/vans motor bikes etc. The price of insurance, servicing and fuel is already inhibiting. And the increasingly strict MOT. Lewisham Council don't encourage happiness.

Anonymous said...

Re concern about non-Internet users being unable to participate: apparently printed copies of the survey are also available at libraries, housing offices, the parking shop and access point.

LadywellLass said...

Ah, yes anony 15:34, but how do people *know* it's there, without access to things like this blog to advise? I only came upon it by chance (when I was trying to find out about people coning off what they felt to be "their" bit of the road, when it's actually public highway).

This is LBL claiming to have a public consultation but actually missing out large sectors of the public (coincidentally the large sector of the public who probably wont' agree with them).

This consultation should be advised via flyers through the door(saying to log on or go to the library), posters up in the shopping centre (etc). Bet it won't be though.

I appreciate your comments, though, & will pick some copies up for people I know who don't have internet and don't want CPZ

CPZ forever said...

Yes, yes, yes ,yes yes yes yessssssss to CPZ around the station.

I only found stupid the question about whether people that live around stations or shopping centers should pay more. When I bought my place I did not have a choice. The only place available at the time was near the station. I would have loved to live a bit further away..

Anonymous said...

So, CPZ forever, if you get your CPZ around your station, you'll change your name to Jack? Because you'll be alright?

LadywellLass said...

CPZ forever... you bought a place with a CPZ there at the time - so you made a choice to live in a CPZ and not buy a place where you could park for free. That's nice, and it's your choice.

Some of us have chosen to live in places where we can park for free, and would like to continue to do so.

Perhaps, as you think it's a good idea, you should pay more?

david said...

CPZ Forever, no-one is forcing you or anyone else to buy a property anywhere. It was your choice. You may have chosen to compromise but you still chose, presumably not lightly, to spend tens of thousands of pounds on your place. In the same way the residents of Lewisham should have the choice in issues which affect them. Parking controls of some sort around stations and shopping areas can be effective and helpful. Blanket CPZs cause a wide range of different problems to the ones they seek to solve and we should be able to choose where we wish to compromise.

Personally, I've said I don't want a CPZ, but I have far more issue with the limited access to the survey provided and the question around whether the council should be able to act in the future without consultation.

mike-geb said...

I am strongly in favour of anything that reduces car use and car parking in my borough. I don't drive, nor does my partner, but it feels like the whole area is built around cars. My partner is partially sighted and there are hardly any pedestrian crossings anywhere. Even as someone without a disability, I find walking and cycling in Lewisham intimidating and unwelcoming. People forget that the majority of households in inner London don't have a car - why is the whole city built around them?

Tim H said...

CPZs are an excuse to issue parking tickets no more no less. When I lived in Morden Hill we'd never once had a parking issue - always plenty of space all day every day. In came the CPZ (that everyone we asked had said no to in the consultation), they painted badly planned lines reducing the amount of spaces in our close by half and making us park with wheels on the path instead. And we then could not have driving visitors until after 5 or 6PM every day including Saturdays!! unless we went all the way doe to Lee High Road to BUY (£££) parking permits - absolutely ruined the street but the wardens were up and down there like vultures all day long issuing fines - £££ for Lewisham. Say no and encourage everyone else to as well or they'll steamroller it in and you and your friends will be paying for it for ever more.

Roy from Caister St Edmunds said...

Sends a shiver down your spine...

Latest Tweets

Brockley Central Label Cloud

Click one of the labels below to see all posts on that subject. The bigger the label, the more posts there are!