Forum Topic

Alex, With all due respect, I cannot see your logic.How do you know how many cars will park in less spaces when no-one, not even the council know how many cars there are per household?It is impossible to gauge, and as one other post points out, sometimes it is very easy to park and other nights completely impossible and that's without factoring in football matches.One has to live with the football traffic be it vehicular or pedestrian. If you really don't like it, then why live here? It's been part of this area as long as the houses have been here and it's been far worse when attendances were so much higher. Even in the early 1980's the queue of traffic pre saturday K.O. Stretched to St. Mary's Road in South Ealing. and extra 65 buses were laid on . I used to get the 65 with 'South Ealing Station' on the front after many a match.But I digress.  It's well proven that the short 2 hour schemes are equally effective but less punative on residents, especially those less well off and less mobile.I have to agree with Raymond. It's really pure selfishness to have the streets empty by day to suit the whims of a few but costing a great many in money many don't have, just to have visitors and be able to have some sort of normal social life.The reality is 63% of local residents did not even respond.  Of the 37% who did. the vast majority opted for a 2 hour zone the problem is which 2 hours and it is obvious that the council did not really look at the timings properly.This is because no figures exist on cars per household and movements.Other boroughs have formed residents advisory panels, devoid of politicians, where just officers and local residents have combined local knowledge with the officers input on what can and cannot be done. It was this sort of interaction that led to the first 1 and 2 hour schemes.So Alex, as even those who really don't want any sort of CPZ will accept a 2 hour scheme, cheaper to operate and freer for residents, what is your problem?You will still have unclogged streets by day, free of holiday makers and commuters, be able to park when most come home from work after 6.You will be financially better off as you will spend less on visitor permitsOr is it that you thoroughly resent people having visitors, be they friends or carers or grandparents childminding?It could be you one day who needs those all too important visits.

Anthony Waller ● 4142d

What been suggested is not 1 hour a day.It's two hours.That second hour is to deter parking from other residences outside the designated zone.Giving residents inside the zone most of whom who arrive home well after 5.30. at least a chance to park in their street.It's hardly rocket science.Most CPZ are now the standard format as they are cheaper and easier to enforce by being able to deploy staff from one zone to another and equally effective in deterring all day parking from commuters which only requires a 1 hour ban during the day to have an effect.It also means that residents do not have to shell out extra money for visitors permits.In a 9.30 to 5.30 6 day zone the average cost to all residents for visitor  permits is around £160 per year.  In Ealing where my brother lives, his permits have jumped up by 300% and he now pays nearly £260 per year for his visitors.  All residents, car owners or not have to pay this - unless you never receive visitors or services.We lived in a 10.30 to 19.30 zone and it cost us a fortune in visitor permits and that was just with a few visits a week. It used up £5 minimum a week.It was divisive and hurt those who did not even own a car.It's hugely unfair on elderly who have carer visits, social visits and so on and there are a lot of elderly residents in this area.Those who seem obsessed with having empty streets during the day, when a large number of residents are at work anyway are demonstrating a huge selfish attitude towards those less fortunate and less affluent who will be hit hard by this scheme.One day it could be you who ends up housebound, dependent on visits and lonely.

Raymond Havelock ● 4142d