Parking policy review

[Tim Lund]

Lewisham are currently undertaking a review of parking policy. There is a consultation document available at:

http://lewisham-consult.objective.co.uk ... icy_review

If you have any views on CPZs, on street parking, or car parks in Lewisham then I would encourage you to complete the survey.

[stuart]

Well that was interesting. As someone with a professional interest in statistical surveying I'd say that was intentionally or maybe unintentionaly designed to elicit the answers it wants or expects.

I really hope I'm wrong but anyone who listened to the extract on Radio 4 this morning from 'Yes, Minister' will understand.

Stuart

[Eagle]

Thanks Tim

I hope this also has measures to ban or restrict destruction of gardens so they can be used as parking lots.

This has dome immense damage to Sydenham streets.

[michael]

I hope this also has measures to ban or restrict destruction of gardens so they can be used as parking lots.

Try filling it out, you won't be disappointed.

[Robin Orton]

Well that was interesting. As someone with a professional interest in statistical surveying I'd say that was intentionally or maybe unintentionaly designed to elicit the answers it wants or expects.

I too was a bit uneasy about filling this in (although I did so). A lot of the questions were quite detailed and technical, about the mechanics of CPZs, and very difficult to answer for people like me, who don't have any experience of CPZs and don't particularly want one in their street. I was worried that I might be giving answers which I might later regret - even if that was 'don't know' (which it was a lot of the time.)

[stuart]

Yes Michael - there was a section where I confused Carer's permits with the Blue Badge scheme. So I gave the answers for one to the other. I guess I could have gone back and corrected it but time is not my friend. It was designed for people who know how everything works and we don't know it all (forgive occasional appearances to the contrary

It would have been good if they had broken it down. First the facts on parking demand in the borough and its effect on the environment. From that we could have made informed decisions on the options available for managing parking (which are not the same as CPZ) and then work down through the options.

My favourite howler was the implicit assumption that electric cars are good (in the UK). That comes from lazy thinking about the environment which gets passed on. Whereas the owner of a small efficient petrol or diesel car is a greater friend of the environment by most measures. We must keep reminding 'green thinking' politicians of that.

Stuart

[Annie.]

Private roads where the residents are not " allowed" to park by their properties and so park on adjacent roads , what would happen should the adjacent roads have to get permits to park ?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Annie.]

I thought people had to ask permission of the council to do that,because of the surface water having no where to go? But I bet there are loads of people who didnt know they had to ask

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Eagle]

Yes Annie they have to ask because the council have to build a crossover of the pavement.

i do not think banned for the reason you mention , but ought to be.

[Bazman76]

Filled out the review and I'm dead against it.

Having lived in CPZ zones at all my previous addresses I know what a nightmare they can be.

They are just a revenue generator for the council, don't think that they will mean easier parking for you. They council always issue too many (to generate income) + the areas covered typically very large eg your post code (the SE26 part), so those who choose to park near the station most of them will be in the SE26 post code so that problem will remain.

Plus the CPZ doesn't guarantee you a space outside your house or anywhere else within the zone. It's just an extra charge to have the same parking facilities you have now.

[Robin Orton]

What the survey says about dropped kerbs etc is:

Some residents have paved over their front gardens to create additional private off-street parking. In some instances, this has been done without the appropriate authorisation and does not include a dropped kerb, which is required by law. A dropped kerb is an area of lowered pavement which gives access for vehicles from a road across the pavement and onto private off-street parking.

Please say how much you agree or disagree with the following statement [...]

The unauthorised use of private off-street parking space (i.e. those without dropped kerbs) is a problem in my road

[michael]

My favourite howler was the implicit assumption that electric cars are good (in the UK). That comes from lazy thinking about the environment which gets passed on. Whereas the owner of a small efficient petrol or diesel car is a greater friend of the environment by most measures. We must keep reminding 'green thinking' politicians of that.

I almost wrote a long response to that question to the effect that this is a subsidy for 'the rich' who are the only people who can afford electric cars. I decided against it as electric vehicles are still a 'good thing' in my opinion.

But the most fuel efficient / least polluting car is a *parked* car. The idea that parking charges on residential streets will reduce the pollution is not really the best answer for me, especially when the government keeps on holding off on increases to fuel duty. I don't know if a 3p rise in petrol prices would reduce journeys, but it would raise plenty of money to subsidise train travel, reduce bus fares, and increase provision of safer routes for cyclists. In relation to fuel duty, parking charges are an ineffective way to 'save the environment'.

[Eagle]

Michael
The least polluted car is not to have one at all. It takes a vast amount of energy and raw materials to build each car.

Sydenham not built for cars.