SE23.com - The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002  -  10,000+ members

Home | SE23 Topics | Businesses & Services | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | Site Feedback | Advertising | Contact
Geddes Hairdressing & Barbering Studio One Armstrong & Co Solicitors


Post Reply  Post Topic 
Pages (2): « First [1] 2 Next > Last »
Parking problems questionnaire
Author Message
blushingsnail


Posts: 364
Joined: Dec 2005
Post: #1
17-10-2008 03:19 PM

Yesterday we received through the door a questionnaire from Lewisham Council about parking problems. We live off Woolstone Road - 'Perry Vale North' in LBL speak. Bearing in mind comments elsewhere on SE23.com about such questionnaires seeming to result in the introduction of Controlled Parking Zones, I made sure to say that we don't have any parking problems and that a CPZ isn't needed in our area.

Interestingly, the questionnaire doesn't ask whether the household has a car, or how many.

Has anyone else received this questionnaire recently?

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,504
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #2
17-10-2008 03:24 PM

Sounds like the sort of thing where honesty can cause you all sorts of problems when they impoze the zones.

Quite ironic, that the planning permission recently discussed for Church Rise, and Waldram completely ignores the parking issues that would arise.

I would like to think that these measures are put in place to help residents, however get the impression thats not the main reason.

In short though, no I have not received one.

Bizarre that it would not ask about cars in the household.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Sherwood


Posts: 1,357
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #3
18-10-2008 08:47 PM

I live in Hurstbourne Road and have received this questionnaire. We are about one mile from a railway station. So commuters are unlikely to park in our road.
If we vote for a CPZ, we will pay ?60 per annum to park where we already do park!

Find all posts by this user Reply
ambient


Posts: 85
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #4
22-10-2008 09:34 PM

We received one of these today too. They are obviously surveying the whole of Perry Vale. It's going back with a big fat No on it too!

Find all posts by this user Reply
fran


Posts: 1
Joined: Apr 2008
Post: #5
23-10-2008 10:19 AM

We got one on and we live on 'old' Stanstead Road which despite it's proximity to the station has never had a parking problem, so ours is also going back with a big fat no on it!

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #6
23-10-2008 10:21 AM

I for one would welcome a CPZ in Dacres Road. All residents have garages but every morning all parking spaces taken up by 7.30 with selfish parkers who cannot be bothered to walk to the station.
When I have vistors etc they have to park 5 mins walk away.

Find all posts by this user Reply
katie one


Posts: 17
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #7
23-10-2008 11:50 AM

I live on Dacres Road and I do not have a garage. Our block has 12 flats and there are only three garages to the rear of it, so that is 9 residences without a garage that I can think of

Find all posts by this user Reply
michael


Posts: 3,220
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #8
23-10-2008 12:22 PM

Parking is a problem around Perry Vale/Dacres Road because Perry Vale car park is no longer free. The solution is not to charge residents to park but to make use of the car park to provide all day parking. Some of the parking can be for 2 hours maximum and some for all day parking, but in both cases it should be free. Of course it is not in the interest of Lewisham council who can make money from parking charges as well as residents all having to pay for the priviledge of parking outside their houses.

Why is Sydenham allowed a free car park but not in either of the car parks in Forest Hill? (neither of which produce much income other than from fines for staying for slightly longer than 30 minutes).

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #9
23-10-2008 01:51 PM

Katie
Not sure where you are but all houses and appartments at the Perry Vale Junction have garages or parking lots.
If you are further towards SE 26 then problem not so bad .
Anyway I appreciate most people seem to be against CPZ's , as indeed I was when living in Devonshire , as they were not required there.
There would be no problem if the selfish parkers walked to the station. Surely no one in Se 23 lives that far from the station. Small trips in a car cause proportunately more polution.

Find all posts by this user Reply
pattrembath


Posts: 16
Joined: May 2005
Post: #10
23-10-2008 04:35 PM

Sydenham Road's free car park is NOT free. It is subsidised to the tune of (at the last count ?16,000 p.a) by one, maybe two, local businesses.

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #11
23-10-2008 06:36 PM

Yes Pat but still free for the end user.
Which shop(s) is funding , do you know.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Simod_the_bod


Posts: 10
Joined: Nov 2006
Post: #12
28-10-2008 03:18 PM

Also got one of these questionaires through.
Living off Stanstead Road, the only problems I find parking are overnight.

Not being able to park on the south circular itself means residents have to park on the side roads leading off of it. In my case its generally Hurstbourne or Femor Rd. Parking during the day causes no issues at all (PLEASE TAKE NOTE LEWISHAM COUNCIL). The problem is parking overnight when a huge chunk of the road is covered in Red Lines and ridiculous and pointless Red Route Bays. Deeming you can park only for 20 mins between 7pm- 7am.

Why???

This causes problems for those who do shift work. I'd half understand it if these roads were near businesses with passing trade such as by the Blythe and Carholme Rd, but they are not. These roads have plenty of parking spaces during the day.

So anyone from Lewisham council, if you are reading and actually give a damn, please liase with TFL and get rid of these pointless money making restrictions.

I am scared by these questionaires, as quite often I believe that they can be manipulated to what suits for the authorities and nobody really listens. The West London Congestion charge extension being an example...

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #13
28-10-2008 03:36 PM

Simon
I must admit I was cynical like you that the result would be manipulted but about 5 years ago we had survey in Devonshire Road and they said afterwards most people did not want any change so there would be none.

Find all posts by this user Reply
kipya


Posts: 62
Joined: Feb 2008
Post: #14
28-10-2008 10:45 PM

Quote:
we had survey in Devonshire Road and they [LBLewisham] said afterwards most people did not want any change so there would be none.


Mmmm, they did the same in Hengrave/Boveney and said residents didn't want any change. The result is Honor Oak Park station parking has crept along Devonshire, round Boveney and up Hengrave Road. There is hardly any space for pedestrians on the pavement in Devonshire Road as it is covered in cars.

I sent some photos of the parking (and consequent broken pavements) to Lewisham who replied "Nuffin to do wiv us guv. Not in our plans this century"

Sorting out the tickets at Honor Oak Park would be helpful too - whoops, sorry, wrong thread.

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #15
29-10-2008 12:39 PM

Kipya
I agree about parking on the pavement. Why do not the police take this seriously. Should be a major fine and 3 points. There is no excuse whatsoever for parking on the pavement.

Find all posts by this user Reply
kipya


Posts: 62
Joined: Feb 2008
Post: #16
29-10-2008 02:23 PM

A couple of parking wardens along Devonshire Road, junction Honor Oak Park, at 9:30 in the morning would cover their pay for a month or two in one swift hit.

It would be parking ticket heaven.

At the corner of Devonshire Road and Boveney Road there is often a car parked completely on the pavement, and I agree there is no excuse for this at all.

One wonders why LB Lewisham is so reluctant to address the issue.

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #17
29-10-2008 04:28 PM

These pavement parkers are completely selfish and do not consider the blind , elderly etc have any rights beside the rights of their god the car.

Find all posts by this user Reply
shzl400


Posts: 729
Joined: Oct 2007
Post: #18
30-10-2008 08:22 PM

When my children were younger, and I used to push a pram everywhere, it was unavoidable that my diamond engagement ring would accidentally, of course, scrape any car that parked so far on the pavement that the pram couldn't get through .... Sneaky

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #19
31-10-2008 09:03 AM

Well done SH
I cannot understand why police do not blitz streets and severely fine any culprits.
Why do not motorists understand cars should be on roads NOT pavements.

Find all posts by this user Reply
borderpaul


Posts: 87
Joined: Oct 2007
Post: #20
03-11-2008 01:33 PM

It is amazing, how cars stay on pavements without the police or any other authority taking action.

Somebody has taken to parking their small blue car very neatly in the middle of the Dartmouth Rd footpath just above the Dartmouth Arms. I see it at night and in the morning, don't know what happens to it during the day.

Now if that was on the road, it would face a tow truck and a swift journey to New Cross with the driver facing a ?250 fee to liberate it, but as it is on the pavement it is exempt.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Pages (2): « First [1] 2 Next > Last »

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields


Possibly Related Topics ...
Topic: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  HOP parking problems Tersie 10 5,122 31-03-2008 02:34 PM
Last Post: CJS
  Dacres Road parking problems brian 24 12,538 08-03-2008 04:45 PM
Last Post: Sherwood