News RSS Feed


Residents are asked to reconsider CPZ refusal

8:14am Monday 12th May 2008

comment Comments (18)   Have your say »

By Elizabeth Ings »

People who voted against a scheme which would see residents pay to park outside their homes are being asked to put forward their views for a second time.

A controlled parking zone (CPZ) is being proposed in St Margarets which in South Bridge Road, Brook Road, Chertsey Road, Godstone Road, Hill View Road, Kenley Road, Moor Mead Road, Orchard Road, St Margarets Grove, Sidney Road, South Western Road and Winchester Road.

David Clark, a lawyer living in South Western Road, has written to the council a number of times wanting to know why residents were being asked to comment on it again, when the first stage of the consultation in May and June last year showed people were against the schem e in his road.

He said: "As far as I am aware, the residents in both my road and St Margarets Grove voted virtually unanimously to reject the council's proposals.

"I want to know why this whole process has started again. The council says these schemes only start in response to demand, but I want to know where that demand came from."

Cabinet member for traffic, transport and parking, Councillor David Trigg explained though people had voted against the CPZ in their street, their roads are still being considered as part of the scheme because neighbours in adjacent streets wanted one there, and it could have a knock-on effect. He said more than 900 consultation packs were sent out last week and CPZs only come in where there was demand.

A spokesman for Richmond Council said: "CPZs bring many benefits for residents as they prevent all-day commuter parking, improve vehicle access especially for the emergency services and refuse vehicles, reduce the number of abandoned vehicles and generally improve parking conditions."

Residents have until Friday, May 23, to register their views by writing to the manager for highways and transport at the Civic Centre, York House, Twickenham, TW1 3BZ.

There is also an exhibition of the proposals in Twickenham Library, Garfield Road. It will be staffed by council officers on Saturday, May 10, between 10am and 2pm and Wednesday, May 14, between 4pm and 8pm.

Your Say YourRichmond

Jill, London, says...
10:18pm Mon 12 May 08

More proof positive of the bullying nature of Richmond's Liberal council. They don't like the answer they got - why they'll keep wasting council taxpayers' money until they get the answer they seek. Otherwise they'll just impose their will. This undemocratic tactic was used by the unlamented former Mayor of London Livingstone - and look what happened to him when the electorate 'spoke'.

George, Twiceknham says...
10:21am Tue 13 May 08

Jill G is talking nonsense. All that is happening is that some roads voted by up to 80% in favour of going into a CPZ and are being granted their wish. Other nearby roads are being asked, in the light of this, if they wish to change their mind.

Jill, London, says...
10:16pm Tue 13 May 08

George just parrots Cllr’s Trigg’s comments in this article, and accuses me of “talking nonsense”.

Others “talking nonsense” – using George’s logic – include the original complainant mentioned in this article – “David Clark, a lawyer living in South Western Road”. And “St Margaret’s Parking Association's CPZ Meeting” as they wish “to counter the council’s proposed CPZ”. Moreover, on the St Margaret’s website where I found this information is somebody else complaining about the bullying nature of Richmond’s Lib Dem council: “I have neighbours who felt they were being bullied and intimidated into voting pro CPZ by the second question on the survey form”.


George, Twickenham says...
3:26pm Wed 14 May 08

Lawyers can talk as much nonsense as anyone else; sometimes they are even paid to do it. How can a question be bullying? It is just as I said before; a question asking what if the other road decides in favour?

Tom, says...
5:19pm Wed 14 May 08

I'm surprised that Jill hasn't suggested that this is all the fault of the Marxists, the Socialists, the Bolsheviks, the Trotskyists or whichever Reds have the misfortune to be hiding under her candlewick this week

Jill, London, says...
11:31pm Wed 14 May 08

George – I suggest you read the latest RT&T print edition – it’s full of letters complaining about Richmond’s Lib Dem council – and CPZs.

Julie Hill says: “The contemptuous way in which his LBRUTish regime behaves towards residents of the borough is appalling.” And she continues about: ”unwanted controlled parking zones. It is no wonder that action groups are springing up all over the borough”.

I have already mentioned “St Margaret’s Parking Association's CPZ Meeting”. And another letter is from Brian Holder “Leader of the roads and transport group, The Teddington Society” regarding the recent CPZs in Teddington where “Teddington’s residents have never been consulted” and “that the newly introduced CPZ consultation procedures approved by the cabinet in July 2006 would be by-passed”. This led to “a blunder of monumental proportions” – which to paraphrase for brevity – a public meeting wasn’t advertised, and residents weren’t invited.


Tom – the fault – in this thread - lies with Richmond’s Lib Dem Council. You have added nothing to this thread except for demonstrating – once again – your penchant for personal abuse – at the level of a primary school playground – instead of debate.

Jill, London, says...
11:33pm Wed 14 May 08

George – I suggest you read the latest RT&T print edition – it’s full of letters complaining about Richmond’s Lib Dem council – and CPZs.

Julie Hill says: “The contemptuous way in which his LBRUTish regime behaves towards residents of the borough is appalling.” And she continues about: ”unwanted controlled parking zones. It is no wonder that action groups are springing up all over the borough”.

I have already mentioned “St Margaret’s Parking Association's CPZ Meeting”. And another letter is from Brian Holder “Leader of the roads and transport group, The Teddington Society” regarding the recent CPZs in Teddington where “Teddington’s residents have never been consulted” and “that the newly introduced CPZ consultation procedures approved by the cabinet in July 2006 would be by-passed”. This led to “a blunder of monumental proportions” – which to paraphrase for brevity – a public meeting wasn’t advertised, and residents weren’t invited.


Tom – the fault – in this thread - lies with Richmond’s Lib Dem Council. You have added nothing to this thread except for demonstrating – once again – your penchant for personal abuse – at the level of a primary school playground – instead of debate.

Tom, says...
11:05am Thu 15 May 08

Just a thought Jill. If you were asked a question about parking zones and voted 'No' and then, at a later date, some of the streets next to you voted to have a CPZ which would then have a knock on effect on parking in your roads wouldn't you welcome the opportunity to reconsider your original answer?

Jill, London, says...
12:23am Fri 16 May 08

Nice try, Tom – but I’m not giving my personal comments. The overall point I’ve made concerns residents complaining about the cavalier attitude by the Lib Dem council – now dubbed “LBRuTish” – regarding unwanted CPZs.

George, Twickenham says...
12:21pm Fri 16 May 08

Which just goes to show that your comments were totally unjustified in the first place.

George, Twickenham says...
12:24pm Fri 16 May 08

Incidentally there is more than one view on the subject in St Margarets. I assume this is the site you mean http://www.stmgrts.o
rg.uk/archives/2008/
05/letter_why_we_nee
d_a_cpz.html

Tom, says...
1:48pm Fri 16 May 08

So you're complaining for the sake of complaining Jill? Thought so.

Jill, London, says...
11:14pm Fri 16 May 08

George and Tom - you may try and dismiss viewpoints other than your own - it says more about you than me.


Sarah, Richmond says...
2:00am Sat 17 May 08

The CPZ have caused chaos where i live in Richmond. We have non-residential roads included in the CPZ meaning commuters are forced to park in residential areas while the road remains empty. The reason.... commuters are then forced to park in residential areas increasing the chance of neighbouring streets voting for the CPZ scheme. The end result for me is i am being forced to agree to having a CPZ in order to park in my street.

It is nothing more than an ill thought out money making scheme for Richmond Council.

If this scheme was about solving parking issues;
Why are we charged for every car when numerous other boroughs only charge for second and third cars?

Why can't commuters have the option to buy a permit (naturally at a higher rate than residents)?

Or, ask businesses to part fund the schemes??

Why should WE have to pay for the permits in the first place? (I was informed by someone at the council that the revenue generated funds the scheme itself, however im sure there a few pennies left over)

There are many, many other ways of solving the parking problems, none of whicg the council is prepared to look into.

Where is the logic in charging residents to park in their streets during the weekday - at time they are least likely to be there???? Surely it makes more sense to charge the people that DO actually want to park during these times.

But then... the council wouldnt make as much money i guess.

Cllr's Lourie and Trigg, when will you start listening to us and actually do something constructive?

Fed up of CPZ's, Kew says...
2:05am Sat 17 May 08

"A spokesman for Richmond Council said: "CPZs bring many benefits for residents as they prevent all-day commuter parking, improve vehicle access especially for the emergency services and refuse vehicles, reduce the number of abandoned vehicles and generally improve parking conditions."

May i suggest this "spokesperson" pays a visit to the roads surrounding Barn Church - perhaps in an emergancy service vehicle and see's how easy the access is. Oh and, maybe try something radical like knock on people's doors and ask their opinions before making sweeping, ill-informed statements such as this.

Tom, says...
10:49am Sat 17 May 08

Jill, London wrote:
George and Tom - you may try and dismiss viewpoints other than your own - it says more about you than me.
Well now you're just making yourself look silly, Jill. You are equally dismissive of others views, so don't come the flouncy mary with us, dear

Jill, London, says...
12:48pm Sat 17 May 08

Tom - You may think I'm "silly" because I support local council taxpayers' complaining about Richmond Lib Dems - but at least I'm not a bully like you.

Tom, says...
4:30pm Sat 17 May 08

Jill, all the jeering in the world won't help you on this one. There's no bullying going on here, simply people disagreeing with what you say. People have voted in favour of the CPZ so it is entirely valid that those who rejected the proposal should be given the opportunity to change their minds in the light of fresh developments and the knock on effects it may have on their streets.

Your sayYourRichmond

comment Add your comment

Register for a FREE Richmond and Twickenham Times account and you can have your say on today's news and sport by adding comments on articles we publish. The best comments may even get published in the paper.

Please register now or sign in below to continue.




Forgotten your password?

Hot Jobs

Local Services


Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Sponsored Adverts By Yahoo