Waltham Forest News RSS Feed Send your news, pictures & videos


WALTHAMSTOW: Residents' views 'ignored' over new CPZ

9:18am Monday 14th November 2011 in Waltham Forest News By Daniel Binns

Residents in St Barnabas Road say their views have been ignored. Residents in St Barnabas Road say their views have been ignored.

FURIOUS residents have accused Waltham Forest Council of breaking its pledge to only introduce Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs) in areas where a majority of households support them.

Residents in St Barnabas Road, Walthamstow, claim there is near-unanimous opposition to new permit regulations in their street, which will cost them between £22.50p to £120 annually if they have one car.

But during a public consultation in several streets nearby, including Queen's Road and Lansdowne Road, households overwhelminglly backed the new restrictions.

The scheme was then introduced throughout the area as the council grouped results in several streets, which showed there was a majority in favour.

St Barnabas Road residents appealed to the council and handed in a petition signed by 77 people to demonstrate the strength of feeling.

But petition organiser Abi Gulzar, 39, said: “I handed it in to the council in September and was told officers would hold a meeting on October 27 to discuss the situation in our road.

“I haven't heard anything since and now suddenly they've started putting up the signs in the street. “I'm so angry it makes me want to go out and take them down. We've had no communication from them at all and they've ignored our views.”

Neighbour Rich Coleman, 39, an IT manager, said: “It's absolutely despicable. If a majority voted for the CPZ here I wouldn't be happy but I would accept it as democratic – but this isn't.”

Unemployed Paul Blackwood, 51, said: “There's plenty of parking space here and we don't have problems, so there's no need to have a CPZ.

"It's extortion. It's outrageous that the council is doing this in these economic times.”

Telephone company worker Mary Prospere, 53, added: “Our concerns haven't been taken into consideration at all.”

Residents say a similar petition has also been signed by most residents in nearby Belgrave Road.

The Guardian is awaiting a comment from the council.

But its cabinet member for the environment, Cllr Clyde Loakes, previously commenting about CPZ consultations, said: “Ultimately it is up to residents. If the majority of responses reject [permit proposals]...we will not implement the CPZ”.

Click here to follow the Waltham Forest Guardian on Twitter

Click here to follow the Waltham Forest Guardian on Facebook

Comments(21)

Jonnykopite says...
11:09am Mon 14 Nov 11

The contagion of CPZ spreads!! Look at the response in Walthamstow Village. Look at the response in St Barnabas Road. Why does Loakes and his henchmen continue to bully and ignore the residents of Waltham Forest?? 60% of people in the Bakers Arms/Shernhall St area voted AGAINST the scheme but now we have the chaos of CPZ because we were IGNORED BY LOAKES. He said that "If the majority of responses reject ...we will not implement the CPZ”. Then why has this happened? They have fiddled the books and changed the consultation to get the response they wanted. An absolute disgrace. The people of Waltham Forest should vote them from office when they next get the chance.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

bhrE17 says...
11:13am Mon 14 Nov 11

When I lived near Ealing Common Station only 3 years ago- the parking permit was only £20 per year. Quite affordable. Why are they so ridiculously expensive in this part of London?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

RayJay says...
11:39am Mon 14 Nov 11

As I posted last week on the previous article about CPZ's (see below), this council is hell bent on a policy which is dividing people within the borough with little monetary gain. Why are they doing it????
http://www.guardian-
series.co.uk/news/93
49233.WALTHAM_FOREST
__New_CPZ_signs_targ
eted_by_vandals/?ref
=mc
This council is hell bent on introducing as many money making CPZ's whether residents want them or not and I believe it is one of the most divisive issues in Waltham Forest.
In areas with larger houses which have drives they have parking restrictions but of course they don't pay as they have somewhere to park for free. So it is a tax on the poor only.
I find the councils whole approach to cars and transport strange.
Why do they shut car parks near stations yet introduce CPZ's citing commuter parking for the station as the reason?
Why did they cite commuter parking as a reason for trying to introduce a CPZ in the Lloyds Park area over a mile away from the station when the area around Orford Rd which is half a mile closer had no CPZ?
Why do CPZ times vary?
I could go on.
Why can't everybody in Waltham Forest be given a permit to park one car in the borough with a few select streets close to Stations and major shopping areas having an exclusive permit for those streets?
Or would that just be a cost with no revenue?
What about taxing houses with dropped curbs & driveways to pay for it?
Surely that would be the socialist way!
This issue is emotive to most residents whether they drive cars or not and a fairer system is required.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

mdj says...
12:20pm Mon 14 Nov 11

'The people of Waltham Forest should vote them from office when they next get the chance.'
Jonnykopite,
Consider some features of the last election: the local turnout was higher than for the simultaneous general election, when all parties claim to lament the rise in voter apathy;
Labour swept to overwhelming control in its fiefs in east London, when there was a wide and general swing against Labour nationally which pushed the party from government;
one ward in the Borough recorded a turnout of 105% at the count (to Labour's benefit), which none of the supposedly professional politicians or officials, equipped with electoral rolls and likely turnout statistics, spotted on the day: this task was left to a private citizen;
The Chief Executive, who many had hoped would be a new broom, investigating murky areas of Council conduct, was at once pushed out of office by the new 'Strong' Leader, with a £350k payoff of our money.
Several of our senior officials, who share responsibility for the conduct of elections, are trusted Labour insiders, one even being a former Labour Council Leader.
Can you smell the bananas yet? Do you really think that your Council vote has any greater value than your vote over residents' parking?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Tom Thumb says...
12:46pm Mon 14 Nov 11

There is nothing undemocratic about this CPZ. They have always been introduced on the principle of majority support. It is simply unrealistic to exclude one street inside a much larger area, if the majority support a CPZ.

The problem with CPZs is that they exist only for car drivers, not for pedestrians and cyclists. The charges are insanely low. The quoted fee of £120 only applies to vehicles over 3 litres, and the reality is that local streets are totally unsuited to bigger vehicles and no one should be allowed to park vans and lorries on them. Under 3 litres (which covers almost every car on the road) the fee is £30, which represents a massive subsidy to car drivers.

The people cited in this story are the usual whinging minority of petrolheads who think the world should rotate around their cars. Waltham Forest is a car-clogged nightmare and it's high time the council started closing off streets to through traffic and discouraging multiple vehicle ownership. The existing system just benefits people with big cars and fast cars, who are usually the people you see driving recklessly, and chatting gormlessly on mobile phones.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

bakers arms says...
1:22pm Mon 14 Nov 11

Totally agree with Tom Thumb. We've a CPZ down our street and I’m happy to have it. It costs us £30 a year, which is 57p a week and is nothing when you compare it to the cost of running a car. Less than a tank of petrol in fact.

The bloke in the story says they don’t have parking problems – you will do if the next street gets a CPZ and you don’t.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

leyton_man says...
1:47pm Mon 14 Nov 11

From Tom Thumb:
"Waltham Forest is a car-clogged nightmare and it's high time the council started closing off streets to through traffic and discouraging multiple vehicle ownership."

Hear hear, I'm sick to death of having cars/vans/oversized vehicles racing between the speedbumps using the road as a rat run, turning right onto Lea Bridge Road across the carriageway blocking traffic flow.

Lets face it, the more areas covered by CPZ, the more revenue the council gets when olympic punters park in the area to catch the 257 to Stratford.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

RayJay says...
3:50pm Mon 14 Nov 11

The last 3 comments from Tom Thumb, Bakers Arms & Leyton_man have clear issues within them.
Tom Thumb says the CPZ was voted for but the Guardian says it wasn't.
He also say's "the fee is £30, which represents a massive subsidy to car drivers" which means any council tax payer subsidises the CPZ's whether we have a car or not.
Bakers Arms says "The bloke in the story says they don’t have parking problems – you will do if the next street gets a CPZ and you don’t" Which is exactly why it is undemocratic & divisive!
And lastly leyton_man says that CPZ's will earn the borough revenue and reduce traffic (which Tom Thumb also suggests), but how do CPZ's reduce through traffic and make revenue particularly as the car parks are being closed and if CPZ's are subsidised?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

leyton_man says...
4:32pm Mon 14 Nov 11

Sorry Rayjay, I didn't mean them to be related issues. The CPZ is one issue, the through traffic is another.
I just think if the council want to help residents, reducing through-traffic to main roads by installing width restrictions, no right turns etc, may be a nice thing to do without anyone having to pay out.
The matter of the closure of car parks and the steady introduction of CPZ is very interesting though. Clearly it is for financial reasons.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

technojist says...
4:50pm Mon 14 Nov 11

Most people down our road want it and are happy to stop people from Essex hogging the Streets and Walking to central tube and saving thousands an parking fees per year. At least we will be able to drop our shopping off.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

RayJay says...
11:58pm Mon 14 Nov 11

leyton_man wrote:
Sorry Rayjay, I didn't mean them to be related issues. The CPZ is one issue, the through traffic is another.
I just think if the council want to help residents, reducing through-traffic to main roads by installing width restrictions, no right turns etc, may be a nice thing to do without anyone having to pay out.
The matter of the closure of car parks and the steady introduction of CPZ is very interesting though. Clearly it is for financial reasons.
I now understand your comment leyton_man.
IMO through traffic should flow through without disrupting local traffic/commerce.
Local traffic needs to be controlled but it should still support local commerce and borough life.
What I want is the council to come up with traffic policies that support local businesses and society but dosn't penalise us using an excuse that commuters cause the problem.
If the council is anti car be honest and have an open debate.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Silent Majority 2009 says...
10:43am Tue 15 Nov 11

This council,led by the Labour Party, seems to have lost its vision as to what a socialist party is. Surely they should be squeezing the rich to pay the poor but instead they install CPZs in the poor areas and leave the rich areas alone. Surely the time has come, after many years of numerous battles over CPZs, to accept the CPZ as originally coneived no longer has a place. It has been turned into a simple way of raising additional revenue so surely the whole Borough should be one CPZ and we all pay the same to park our cars or to welcome visitors. This hypocritical nonsense about ballots in each street should stop and this tax fairly applied.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

RayJay says...
12:06pm Tue 15 Nov 11

Silent Majority 2009 wrote:
This council,led by the Labour Party, seems to have lost its vision as to what a socialist party is. Surely they should be squeezing the rich to pay the poor but instead they install CPZs in the poor areas and leave the rich areas alone. Surely the time has come, after many years of numerous battles over CPZs, to accept the CPZ as originally coneived no longer has a place. It has been turned into a simple way of raising additional revenue so surely the whole Borough should be one CPZ and we all pay the same to park our cars or to welcome visitors. This hypocritical nonsense about ballots in each street should stop and this tax fairly applied.
Hear Hear. Well put.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Bernard 87 says...
2:30pm Tue 15 Nov 11

CPZs should only be implemented if parking is a hugely major issue. WFC seem to implement CPZs to raise money. If only they used all that effort to close down the many takeaways that blight the streets that would be making a real difference in the borough!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

fabster says...
10:19am Wed 16 Nov 11

CPZs only serve to divide communities - before it came into force on our street and others locally, we were able to visit friends/neighbours/e
lderly residents & pop in for a quick cuppa & chat. Those visits were quick & easy. Now you cant do this anymore because you would need a visitors permit which cost the people you visit money! Also CPZs in the end become 'policed' by over zealous wardens - the day your permit expires, you can be sure they are next to your car at 8am issuing a ticket. Visitors get clamped before they have the chance to fill in a visitors permit and come out to display it. Because I work from home during the day, I've lost count how many times I've witnessed & had to knock on neighbours to say they were getting a ticket because their permit had expired that day, or they were in a different/hire/court
esy car whilst theirs was being fixed, or their visitors hadn't had the chance to display a visitors voucher yet. This happened to my sister-in-law, who visited us, got clamped before we even got the chance to say hello put the kettle on and fill in a visitors voucher for her!

Overall, it is more of a negative experience than a positive one. When we move out of WF eventually, we are certainly going to make sure it is not in a CPZ area!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Tom Thumb says...
8:02pm Wed 16 Nov 11

"When we move out of WF eventually, we are certainly going to make sure it is not in a CPZ area!"

That rules out Greater London, then, because it will eventually become one vast CPZ.

CPZs exist to benefit car owning residents and for parking management. They do not exist to make money and they are not environmental.

No one has the right to occupy road space for nothing, and every parked vehicle impacts on other road users.

Amazingly just a few generations ago people managed to travel short distances without a car.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Tom Thumb says...
8:05pm Wed 16 Nov 11

Saying that CPZs are hard on the poor is garbage because the very poorest people can't afford to buy or run a car.

London still has amazingly high levels of non-car-owning households, who are systematically discriminated against.

The notion that the Robbins-Loakes regime is anti-car is ludicrous. They bend over backwards to pamper the affluent owners of big, fast cars.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Jonnykopite says...
1:13pm Thu 17 Nov 11

So what happens to non car owners who live in a CPZ? They still have to pay if a car owner visits their home. It may a delivery or a builder or a relative but whoever it is, the resident has to pay to have a voucher (and they don't come cheap). So even those people that the obviously over affluent (effluent?!) Tom Thumb denigrates are charged to live in a CPZ. And not all car owners are affluant Tom Thumb!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

mdj says...
3:02pm Thu 17 Nov 11

'The notion that the Robbins-Loakes regime is anti-car is ludicrous. They bend over backwards to pamper the affluent owners of big, fast cars.'

I think there are recent signs of increased sympathy to the needs of car drivers: whether this is connected with Cllr Loakes, formerly a zealous anti-car ideologue, having purchased a 4x4, is of course sheer speculation.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

tjw422 says...
5:00pm Fri 18 Nov 11

Understand the frustration. Priory Avenue E17 next to the Walthamstow central Station gave a 2 + hour presentation and 27 page report and parking findings to this council 3 years ago. It totally proved that parking in P.A. was the worst case scenario for residents in the whole of ME zone. They have totally ignored the case we put forward for a separate, and unique zone to actully protect us from other 'ME very selfish commuters' using us as a parking lot so they could commute OUT of the borough by train. Business, disabled and charity users also add to the total conjestion in our avenue. We are also totally ignored.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

don.mapp says...
12:25am Sun 20 Nov 11

Cllr Robins and Loakes and the present Labour party (at least I get a reply from the Conservative and Liberal leaders. The Labour leader did not even acknowledge my letter about our imposed CPZ in the village) are no better than the present leaders of Syria. They totally ignore the wishes of the people and unless the people stand up to them we do not stand a chance. Democracy what democracy this CPZ thieving Council don't know what it means.
CPZ stop people from interacting and destroys an area. Just look at roads that have CPZ for a year or two. Gardens dug up to park cars friends and family cannot visit for any length of time. Kiddies parties are a thing of the past (Just ask some residents of Barnet where the price of a visitors tickets is now £4). This will eventually happen in W.F. when everyone gets CPZ. Health visitors are reluctant to use their cars due to CPZ. This raises health costs and reduces services and speedy care. The same with visiting trades people who passes on the extra cost to those who do not even have cars. A lock down society where everyone keeps to themselves. Ticket wardens sticking tickets on cars that are legally parked and residents having to spend time challenging tickets.
The Council has fiddled the figures to get CPZ imposed. That is why they do not respond to complaints even though they are oblige in law to respond.
We must fight them and get CPZ reversed. I am doing my bit and anyone who wish to help can contact us at stopwalthamstowcpz@g
mail.com or follow us on Facebook http://www.facebook.
com/permalink.php?st
ory_fbid=24027981936
5981&id=217132214980
518 I even have an e-petition on CPZ:- http://epetitions.di
rect.gov.uk/petition
s/3706, but I am surprised at the apathy of residents as only a few persons has signed it.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

click2find

Most popular






About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree