Please post any comments you may have whatever your viewpoint.
Also please answer the survey at the bottom of the blog.
It would also be helpful if you gave the name of your road.


Thursday, 11 February 2010

Questions on CPZ proposal (sorry a bit long).

I have arranged my comments against the paragraphs in the public consultation booklet with a synopsis of the relevant paragraph.
At the end of 2008 LP & WA zones were introduced. Since then complaints have been received about severe parking congestion.

Q. If this is true why haven’t they amended the LP & WA zones as is stated under Monitoring the scheme at the end of the public consultation booklet?
The volume of daytime parking has lessened in the LP & WA zones. Over a third of vehicles parked during the day MAY not belong to residents in the proposed zone. Many residents find it difficult to park and lack of parking spaces causes poor/dangerous parking.

Q1. Where do the cars from the LP & WA zones park now?
Q2. How did the surveyors come to the conclusion that a 3rd of cars parked during the day are not from the neighbourhood?
Q3. Does this not show that the parking problems have been significantly increased due to the introduction of the LP & WA zones.
Q4. How many residents have problems parking during the day?
Q5. If resident parking is a problem at night it raises 3 main questions: -
(a). Who apart from residents are parking in the area at night?
(b). As all proposed times are during the day how will residents benefit at night?
(c). Are residents from surrounding CPZ’s parking long term out of their zone’s?
Q6. How will a CPZ increase available parking spaces at night?

The aim of the scheme is to ease parking during the day. There is a risk that if you do not sign up you will suffer from displaced parking.

Q1. How will a zone benefit at night?
Q2. Is the threat of displaced parking an implied blackmail?
Q3. Are surrounding neighbourhoods who may be affected being surveyed?

The council don’t want to remove the LP & WA zones as the majority of responses these areas were in favour of a CPZ.

Q1. Why was no say given to surrounding zones on the implementation of the LP & WA zones?
Q2. Why was the LP zone introduced for 8am – 9pm 7 days a week.
When an “unreasonable” level of parking congestion takes place dangerous parking could cause delays to emergency vehicles and buses. A CPZ COULD make parking easier.

Q1. What does unreasonable level of parking congestion mean?
Q2. What bus routes are there in the area that are affected by parking?
Q3. If a vehicle is blocking emergency services is this not a contravention of obstruction laws?

People Commuting to the area or who live outside the area will no longer be able to park. Your permit is valid only in the zone where you live.

Q1.Who are these people that commute into the area and for what?
Q2. I live in Waltham Forest pay my taxes to Waltham Forest so why can’t I park in Waltham Forest.
Q3. I live in E17 my movements will now be restricted by a CPZ line. Is this an invasion of civil liberties?

The aim is to make it easier for local residents & businesses to find parking spaces by preventing commuters and long staying non residents from parking. The council aims to provide as many parking spaces as possible.
Q1.Yet again will a CPZ make the parking easier for residents & businesses?
Q2. What businesses are there in the area?
Q3. Who are these commuters & long staying non-residents? Are they from surrounding CPZ’s?
Q4. Do the council really provide as many parking spaces as possible?

It can only be used in your zone. The annual cost depends on how many cars you have & the CO2 emissions.

Q1. Why can’t I park over the road if it is in another zone?
Q2. If the aim of the council is to ease parking, why does CO2 emissions come into it?
Q3. To ease parking shouldn’t the length of the vehicle be more important?
If there is a surplus in parking income, the council can spend it on transport related improvements. The council is reviewing permit charges & the possibility of free visitor parking.

Q1. Why should there be a surplus?
Q2. If there is a surplus why can’t it be repaid to residents?
Q3. Why should my family have to pay to visit me?
Q4. Why should I pay to park in the road I have parked in for 28 years?
Q5. Why when the council is in the process of reviewing permits is this proposal being made?

Permits are not required for motorbikes & parking on your own property.

Q1. Do motorbikes not cause parking congestion and some have bigger engines than my car?
Q2. Why should people in poorer areas who can’t afford properties with off street parking be penalised?

Q1. Why have we not been offered the same parking times as the LP & WA zones?
Q2. Are you planning to change the time in the LP & WA zones?
Q3. Will the 3 zones be amalgamated?

The results of the consultation will be presented to councillors

Q1. Will the results be published to residents?

The council will monitor the scheme. If surrounding areas experience an increase in displaced parking then amendments MAY be made within the 1st 12 months

Q1. Why did this not apply when the LP & WA zones were introduced?
Q2. Is this why the proposed new zone residents were made aware of this opportunity over 12 months after the LP & WA zones were introduced?


  1. http://www.walthamforest.gov.uk/parking_and_enforcement_plan.pdf check out the last 2 pages to see how much they were making out of parking in the Borough in 2003/2004 (over 160k) and 2004/2005 (over £640,000) Just imagine how much profit they are making by now with the relentless spread of these schemes.

    We raised the time limit on changing the LP and WA zones with them to no avail. We also were fobbed off and delayed again and again. W

    e asked for Winns Ave to be removed from the zone (as they voted against being included anyway) to see what impact that had on the surrounding zones, (surely a more cost effective and less complex option that all this) they wouldn't do it.

    We asked that the WA and LP zones be altered before any further zone was investigated - again they not only refused but admitted that the new zone consultation was brought forward above 18 others. Trying to confuse?

    On the issue of free visitor parking - I cannot believe they put that in the information, it is manipulative and of course hasn't happened. THere has been a slight reduction in some charges. I raised the issue 14 months ago - of nondrivers being given a reward for not having cars and using public transport as the Council is trying to make us do through the introduction of these schemes (it is their stated aim). I was told it would be open to fraud - like the current resident scheme isn't? I couldn't get my commuter sister to register her car at my address to get a pass for £45 ? Of course I could, any scheme is open to fraud - it is all about the money.

  2. Your questions about 'who commutes in to the area?' and 'what businesses are there in the area?' are obviously fairly closely linked. The largest businesses in the area as far I can see are Roger Ascham and Winns Primary schools. Winns is the larger of the two schools and right in the middle of the proposed extension (also I'd say Carr Rd, Fleeming Rd and Elphinstone Rd and the most affected by displaced parking from Winns Terrace et al). I don't know how many staff the schools employ, nor what proportion of them might drive to work, but both must account for a fair number of commuters. From the schools' perspective the CPZ would be a further problem for recruitment or retention of staff...


  3. Anonymous. I agree with what you say but I don't see schools as businesses but I see them as essential parts of the community and one of the reasons that I pay taxes. Why then should the council penalise them by introducing a parking tax. By doing this they penalise the local community twice.

  4. Hi,

    Fair point that they're part of the community - I probably should have referred to them as 'employers' rather than 'businesses'.