Beckenham Controlled Parking Zones carving up the neighbourhood, bad for you, bad for business too

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Reg Adams on April 1, 2012 at 22:40

"I imagine everyone agrees ..." (on any controversial topic you can think of) looks like a shaky premise on which to base an argument. By extension, do you imagine that everyone agrees that the whole of Europe (from the Atlantic to the Urals) should have voted on Norwegian or Swiss or Faroese (or UK) independence of the EU?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by PReeves on April 2, 2012 at 7:33

thanks Reg, being picked up on my loose comment in my final paragraph has really added the debate here - well done.  Shame you didn't actually respond to the points I was making with regards to the CPZ in Beckenham and my perception that it's an inequitable council practice which does not solve the problem it intends to.

and for the record, Norway et al would have voted on their own independence because they are accountable to their own national parliaments - just as I image (oh carfeul, loose words again?!?) Beckenham is an accountable 'ward' / borough within the local authority.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Reg Adams on April 2, 2012 at 18:45

That's one of the great things about this website. In the same forum, we can debate the very local issue of whether you or I can park anywhere near ClockHouse Station whenever we like and the very big issue of what Democracy means.

 

You raised a very interesting point, John. Who should be allowed to vote on whether residents-only parking should apply in this road or that road or the other road? I'm sorry I responded to it only obliquely before. Thus far, the policy that Bromley Council has adopted is: 1) Carry out a survey in a designated area, by means of a 4- or 5-point questionnaire delivered door-to-door to each dwelling in the area, the key question being "Do you think controlled parking is needed in your road?"; 2) Tot up the votes for & against 'controlled parking needed' on a road-by-road basis; 3) By a simple majority of respondent votes, determine whether a particular road is "for" or "against" inclusion in a CPZ (though this type of survey has always been described as advisory, not a binding referendum); 4) Following the formal decision by the PortfolioHolder, implement the CPZ scheme; 5) Six months or so after implementation, re-survey households in the roads affected, with the key question: "Do you want the CPZ in your road to remain in place, to be removed or to be retained with certain specified amendments?" So, to sum up, only the residents (and business owners, if any) in a particular road are invited to vote on whether that particular road becomes part of the CPZ.

 

Is that fair and equitable? Well, in my view, it is. Residents in a particular road are best placed to give a view on whether their road has enough on-street parking capacity to be able to absorb parking by 'outsiders' (rail/tram commuters, staff at local hospitals, schools & businesses, customers for the sports-centre, recreation grounds, library, shops, etc.). If the road does get included in the CPZ, then all the residents in that road have to pay £40-80 per vehicle per year for a CPZ permit (whether they voted for a CPZ, voted against a CPZ or didn't bother to vote at all).

 

Should people living beyond that particular road be allowed to vote on whether or not it should become part of the CPZ? I don't think so. If you do think so, then where do you draw the line as to who can vote and who can't?

 

As for Beckenham's status, well, Beckenham Municipal Borough was created in 1935 and it was dissolved thirty years later. Beckenham was then effectively merged with Penge, Orpington, the core of Bromley and part of Chislehurst & Sidcup to create the London Borough of Bromley, which has been in existence for more than 45 years. So, sadly maybe, Beckenham is no longer an "accountable borough" and the "Beckenham area" is not a clearly defined territory, though it consists of big chunks of several separate Wards, including ClockHouse, CopersCope, Kelsey&EdenPark, plus parts of Shortlands, WestWickham and Penge&Cator.

 

Back to the wider world, yes, of course you're right: the people of Norway (and nobody else) voted in their referendums (Sep 1972 and Nov 1994) not to join the EU. Similarly, the people of Switzerland (and nobody else) voted in their referendums (May 1992 and March 2001). Thirty years after the Falklands War, there has been a lot of stuff in the news-media recently about the hallowed principle that each nation has the inalienable right to self-determination: each nation can freely choose its sovereignty and political status, free from outside interference. In my view, Scotland is certainly a nation: it has its own long-established systems of law and education. It even has its own football leagues, which are quite distinct from the leagues that English and Welsh teams play in. And although the UK has been governed by Tory Administrations several times since WW2, there have always been very few Tory MPs in Scottish constituencies. Right now, there is only one (out of a total of 59 Scottish MPs). There was only one during the 2001/05 and 2005/10 Parliaments and there were none at all in the 1997/2001 Parliament. So, rather than imagining that everyone can/should agree on all UK residents voting on Scotland's future, it is arguable that the voting on that issue (whenever it may come) should be restricted to Scottish residents.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by PReeves on April 2, 2012 at 19:18

Great answer Reg, thanks for the large amount of time you spent writing it - I disagree with some parts of it, but don't want to reiterate some of my earlier points. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ade on April 4, 2012 at 16:56

totally agree that a CPZ can help people. The stress i have with a family when i cannot park anywhere, and i mean anywhere near my home is awful. It's dangerous too, i sometimes walk over 1km with my toddler and baby, crossing roads etc just to get to my house from where i have parked. What, so people can enjoy the freedom parking where they like. I only use my car for long journey's so it's when i return with all my bags etc that i am stuck. Can't wait for a CPZ so i can park within eye shot of my house.

F Thomas said:

Dear John

To be fair to Mat...it is actually quite useful in day-to-day life to be able to park somewhere vaguely near one's own house occasionally.  I find it so patronising when people (like you) 'point out' that no-one has a 'right' to park outside one's own house.  I think it can be safely assumed that we all know that. We ALL really, really already know that. But thanks for pointing it out anyway.

The CPZ in my road has made my life a whole lot easier.  I can recommend them.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Fiona Murphy on May 14, 2012 at 16:12

Does anyone know if the council or other agency provide an online facility to report illegal/dangerous parking? On Blakeney Ave we had double yellow lines added on the junction with Blakeney Road to stop cars parking right on the junction which was really dangerous.

This afternoon, despite the double yellow lines, a car is parked on the double yellow lines on the junction! I think the car might have a disabled badge, does this mean the car can be parked anywhere? Surely dangerous parking is dangerous parking?

 

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page