New cpz charges!

2

Comments

  • edited 8:21PM
    I wish I was a Victorian mill owner. Yous all be my bitches crushin wheat an 'ting.
  • edited January 2011
    Can I be assigned to 'ting please? I've always liked grapefruit.
  • edited 8:21PM
    Luxury! Er with 4 children, working and nippin up north every other month in a less than luxurious motor, I would class going to the over priced old dairy a luxury. My car is a necessity.
    I will happily walk 10 minutes to my cars new parking space, in Haringey. But if they begin to charge to drive in islington, then this fight is in vain.
  • Bollocks.

    Listen. When I were a kid I had to walk 6 miles through snow THIS deep every day. I didn't need a car. So think on, mate.

    You don't need a car. And despite what you believe, you don't need vitamin C, sunshine, morals, oxygen, moisture or an education. 

    All you need is love. Can the council provide this?

    Actually I need a new mower.
  • edited 8:21PM
    Have you thought about getting a goat instead Philistine? Waste disposal and nice neat grass all in one environmentally friendly package.
  • I do own a goat Mrs. Annie. Alexander Selkirk's intimate relations with the beasts were an inspiration.

    And the other shit you said is a bonus. Bothered.
  • edited 8:21PM
    Curried goat gives me nightmares
  • edited 8:21PM
    Philistine's relationship with his goat gives me nightmares.
  • edited 8:21PM
    'All You Need Is Love' gives me nightmares, but then I watch the last episode of <i>The Prisoner</i> and it makes everything OK.
  • edited January 2011
    Yes all right, a private car is indispensible for somebody with small children and/or aged relatives. I agree. I kept my old car on the road while I had both. At enormous expense and trouble I might add.

    Not everybody has small children though and, generally speaking, I reckon that having a car in London for occasional use IS a luxury. It's a luxury because it is an expensive and anti-social way of organising your travel, mainly for the convenience of having a vehicle parked outside your door, a piece of property of your own, and possibly a status symbol. Luxuries are goods and services that may certainly be of a very high standard, but that you pay over the odds for because you can afford to and doing so makes you feel better. You can get the same without actually owning the thing. Using a Streetcar or a taxi now and again is cheaper and much more sensible.

    Actually IMHO using a Streetcar feels a lot more luxurious than having an old banger outside the house - they are newer and much better kept and maintained than any of the cars I could afford to own. I think a short walk to pick it up is a small price to pay for driving around in a new vehicle.

    If you just love cars and simply have to own one then ......well I guess the box set of Top Gear is already on the shelf.
  • edited 8:21PM
    Owning a car never used to be a luxury - or perhaps it did, but it was a very affordable one. Now its not so affordable and much more of a pain in the arse there's lots of reasons to complain. I used to complain about the car in front of house situation, but now a year without a car and I accept that car ownership is no longer a necessity. I'm glad I don't have the stress of car tax, insurance, parking permits, parking spaces, maintenance etc. To be fair I neither have elderly or young people to care for, so no requirement there. But thats not to say that friends and family member do also need visiting. But when the fomer does becme the case, I'll just try harder to get by with Streetcar, public transport etc. There's a lot to say about supply and demand and the wider economics pointed out by Andy. The simple maths of one building, four flats and one parking space does not go. Somethings gotta give. For me thats been car ownership and it feels surprizing liberating. Don't get me wrong, I used to be a massive petrol head and have owned noisy, very fast motorbikes in my time too. Not owning a car now, I kinda wish the council was raising cash through these means to keep libraries open, grafitti off the walls, dog mess cleared up etc. but I rather wish that's wishful thinking.
  • edited 8:21PM
    Right on, Sincers. 'Surprisingly liberating' - indeed.
  • edited 8:21PM
    Monopsony? Monopoly, Shirley.
  • edited 8:21PM
    Can anyone find the new haringey charges online? (The ones that are tied to the lamposts this morning?)
  • edited 8:21PM
    Hi, I couldn't find any information online either. It was written on the notice tied to the lampost that people are invited to make representations or comments within 21 days of the notice (which dated 13th January). The address is:
    Frontline Consultation, Sustainable Transport Group, 2nd Floor South, River Park House, Wood Green, N228HQ
    Or email: frontline.consultation@haringey.gov.uk
    I am going to write to them but I found it very cheeky that you can't find anything on the internet.
  • edited 8:21PM
    Had my response from John Quinn at Islington Council. Make of it as you see fit, i don't agree (obviously) but if he's got a point let me know. I'll add my response and his final one after this. He did have lost of spaces by the way, i had to delete them to fit it!

    Dear Mr or Ms XXXXXX
    Please accept our apologies for the delay in responding to your correspondence. As you might imagine there has been rather a lot of correspondence on these issues and producing a tailored response for each one has been a very intensive task. Permit price increases: In real terms, parking permit fees in Islington have remained largely unchanged for ten years. The only significant change was the introduction of emission based banding following the Green Parking Referendum in 2007. The responses to the Green Parking Referendum supported measures designed to encourage residents to run fuel efficient vehicles or to change to other more sustainable forms of transport, such as using a car club vehicle. We have now adjusted our fees to match the DVLA banding structure and to further strengthen the incentive for residents to move toward low emission vehicles. The price difference between each band now exactly reflects the increase in band charged by the DVLA for vehicle tax. Permits for fuel efficient vehicles have been reduced in price under the new banding, and those for vehicles with higher emissions have increased. I appreciate that you may be unhappy about the increase in the charge of your own permit but I hope that this explanation as to how and why the charges have changed is helpful. Unlimited visitor vouchers: As more vehicles are parked overnight than during the day, there is usually daytime capacity in most parts of the borough to allow additional vehicles to park. We previously offered residents the option to purchase a limited number of hours of visitor vouchers each year, which can be used only by residents and their genuine visitors. Allegations have been made however that visitor vouchers are abused by some residents who buy them to sell on, specifically on matchdays. In order to combat this we are planning to replace the current paper-based voucher scheme with an electronic system where residents will purchase e-vouchers by phone. These e-vouchers cannot be sold on as is alleged currently. The existing caps have been removed in preparation for this scheme. But in the meantime to ensure the current paper scheme is not abused it is closely monitored. Residents who wish to purchase large numbers of vouchers will be contacted to ascertain why. In addition, all paper vouchers currently sold have a serial number on them and these are recorded when they are sold. Parking enforcement staff check these serial numbers meaning we can ascertain if vouchers are being abused and who they were originally sold to. The introduction of the e-voucher system will remove any abuse but in the meantime we are working to ensure the scheme is used correctly. Consultation on roamer:
    The principal of the scheme was approved by the council's Executive Committee on 21 October 2010. The Executive felt that the scheme would be beneficial to residents by giving more freedom to use their permit and to businesses that are likely to gain additional trade.
    The council conducted a 21 day statutory consultation on the amendments required to change the Traffic Management Orders that control the parking regulations. Proposed changes were advertised in the November/December edition of IslingtonLife and in the Islington Tribune dated 10 December. This consultation officially closed on 31 December 2010, however representations received up until 7 January 2011 were considered. All representations were reviewed and as a consequence a report was approved by the council's Executive Committee on 13 January 2011 which set out two main amendments to the scheme. These were:
    * The Residents' Roamer scheme hours should be 11am to 3pm
    * The scheme will not operate in the matchday zone when extended matchday restrictions are in operation.
    We are writing to all residents who have contacted us as part of the consultation process to inform them of the outcome.
    Timing of roamer introduction:
    We accept that the proposed introduction of the Residents' Roamer scheme seemed to be sudden. The council's Executive Committee approved the original scheme on 21 October 2010 and felt that the scheme would be beneficial to residents and businesses and were keen to see it introduced as soon as possible.
    The original plan was to launch the scheme at the beginning of January 2011. However to give time for the statutory 21-day consultation to be conducted and representations to be considered it was decided to put the scheme back to 31 January 2011. Consideration of these objections led to a significant revision of the scheme, and in order to give time to communicate these changes clearly to the public the launch date has now been set for 28 February 2011.
  • edited 8:21PM
    My response

    Hi John,

    Firstly, I'm a bloke.
    I'm sorry if there have been lots of similar complaints, its a subject that typically has everyone kicking off.

    1. The charges may be in line with the DVLA, but what has that got to do with the IS-J parking scheme and the resultant costs? The scheme doesn't cost any more in 2011, or is more expensive to run, so why the increase? Its still not justified. Given your research says that people haven't been able to respond by buying greener cars, why persist? You say you listen when you consult, but when you see the actual objective reaction (as in no action) you choose to ignore it. You still have an agenda, it's to extract as much money as possible out of the community and do-so with the proviso that its all for a green cause. A £60 increased parking permit cost is not an incentive to change a car. Stop making stuff up, just say you need more money and this is how you can do it. I'd have more respect for an organisation that said "parking is a profit centre" rather than saying they're trying to make Islington a greener place. Again, where are the electric buses and council cars.....lead by example please.

    2. Mis-use of vouchers. What is the cost of changing the scheme to an SMS based option? With a day permit costing me £6 for a hard-copy, what will the revised e-version cost? I'm sure it will eradicate a tiny minority of scheme abusers (and i mean tiny), but unless it drives down the cost of vouchers for everyone then i can only see it as an unecessary cost brought about by the council feeling a bit cheated by a few chancers.

    3. Where is the reponse to your expenditure in your annual accounts? Nothing. Possibly the most important and telling item that should have had some commentary. Will it ever come through?

    I find the final paragraph rather enlightening as to the councils real attitude to resident feedback. "We'll decide if you've got a case and if the top bloke gets to hear about it". I don't have a case, because we have to do what ever you tell us to. Like an email from me is going to change your overall policy? I just have to tell you that we're not stupid, that we know that you see us as a cash cow, there's absolutely nothing i can do about it, and that it makes my blood boil. My car "moves/pollutes" in Islington wards for approximately 5 mins a day, yet you charge me £125 a year for the pleasure and claim you're saving the environment. Absolute rubbish.
  • edited 8:21PM
    The final chapter......i'm sure you've had enough by now

    Dear Mr XXXX
    Whilst I understand your dissatisfaction with the price increases, I am afraid that there is no requirement for any public referendum or vote to be held. The democratic process empowers the elected authority to increase or decrease fees and charges as it sees fit, and that is embodied in the council's constitution. The decision to make these increases (and decreases) was properly made the Council's Executive.

    Yours sincerely
    John Quinn


    My response....

    I have a labour council and always have had regardless of the national political view, the chance of my vote ever counting for anything is zero
    The response below is quite frankly arrogant. Please file my email in the bin with all the other memos about Islington Council creaming cash off its residents.

    ..............and still no response on expenditure to run the scheme.
  • edited 8:21PM
    There was an episode of the Flumps in which Pootle got above herself to impress all the folk of "Silly Green" ie SG in Flump-speak. No cpzs then , but the car broke down and it ended in tears , and I seem to recall, song. Is there a lesson from history here ... ?
  • edited 8:21PM
    @ TollingtonTom
    I suppose there is. Flumps should have breakdown cover.
  • edited 8:21PM
    anyway, back to topic (ish).

    where are the nearest streets that are CPZ free? (nearest to the SG end of stapleton hall rd)
  • edited 8:21PM
    Granville and most of the Upper East Side. No-one's cottoned on so you'll be fine to get a space.
  • edited 8:21PM
    We've just had a consultation in the UES about extending the CPZ, so I guess it will not be long...
  • edited 8:21PM
    A full 6 months without talking about my favourite subject! Anyway, i finally managed to make use of the "roamer scheme" yesterday near the hospital. It was very useful, although i bet it REALLY f*cks off the local residents. Where shall i park between 11 and 3 today?.....think it could be Upper Street for a change, then maybe Essex Road tomorrow.
  • edited 8:21PM
    I've found the roamer useful a few times, and there's always been a lot of spaces left where I've parked. You have to be a bit careful with the permit / pay & display shared bays though.

    I parked in a shared bay in Clerkenwell, meaning to leave it there a few hours while doing a workshop. It was a while before 11 so I started to pay for the bit not covered by the roamer scheme, but there was a 2 hour limit on the bay I hadn't noticed. The machine automatically took all my change when I got up to the time limit and then I had to move the car somewhere else in a mad panic.
  • edited 8:21PM
    I was annoyed by this when the news emerged, however, I didn't really register the outrageous hikes in charges.

    Just renewed our parking permit:

    It has gone up from £70 to £109.

    That is a 56% increase.

    Quite why Islington council thinks it is acceptable to do this and charge people such a huge amount for something with no ongoing costs at a time when people are feeling the squeeze I don't know.

    [As I understand, the CPZ more than funds itself through parking fines]

    If I was a councillor I would be embarrassed about hammering my constituents so shamelessly, especially to read that bullshit justification about above about car tax bands. Why not just be honest and admit it's a money-grabbing ploy instead of dressing it up in greenwash?

    I voted for the current Labour administration and I don't recall anywhere in the councillors' manifestos there being mention of immediately whacking up residents parking charges by such an outrageous amount.

    It smacks of yet more dishonest dealing by the people we elect.

    Any of the councillors who occasionally lurk here, care to offer an explanation of their administration's behaviour.
  • SBWSBW
    edited 8:21PM
    I am not a councillor but i am writing a story for a newspaper about sky high parking permits. It would be good to talk with someone affected by them, maybe you could get in touch? Just joined stroud green btw and your post inspired me to look into the issue which is pretty widespread and pretty outrageous
  • AliAli
    edited 8:21PM
    Have a look at the Park thread. Why not write up something that looks at what the council senior management are getting paid, what they have promised to deliver during the year, then do a 6moths review on their progress, and then one at the end of the year posing the question on whether they provide good value for money on what they have actually delivered ? Quite a bit of research but you get three stories for the price on one and all sorts of stuff will come out as spin offs!
  • SBWSBW
    edited 8:21PM
    I like your thinking... mind you poor old haringey have a pretty torrid couple of years in the press
Sign In or Register to comment.