Issues have arisen around the current Hither Green East consultation and your councillors now feel the process has been unduly influenced and compromised and needs to be re-run. To this end we've written the following letter to Malcolm Smith, Executive Director for Regeneration at Lewisham Council:
On 19 Mar 2007, at 13:03, Smith, Malcolm wrote:
It is our intention to re-consult these 3 roads within the next couple of weeks to confirm these results as part of the consultation and take it fully into account in drawing up an area for a CPZ, (should there be sufficient support in the core area around the station for any CPZ). In this case, because of the strong local interest and some differing views, we believe that we should bring a report to Mayor and Cabinet on any possible CPZ that might be identified for a decision.
It is possible that a) there may not be local support for a CPZ at all, b) only support for a very local CPZ that does not extend as far as the roads identified by Bridget Prentice or c) support for a CPZ that includes one or all of the three roads in question.Dear Malcolm
We've discussed how to take this issue forward locally and while not in any way wishing to prejudice the offer you've made in response to Bridget Prentice's intervention to include Chalcroft, Kellerton and Thornwood in the current Hither Green East CPZ, we would however like to put to you our preferred option which is that the current consultation is scrapped and the whole process re-run at a later date, this time including all the roads that were included in the original consultation in 2005.
Our reasons are as follows. The first is that it is grossly unfair to include only some of the original roads consulted in 2005 and leave the others out, especially as it will clearly present problems for the roads that have been excluded if the CPZ is adopted. Further more it is clear from the composition of the roads that are included in the current consultation that issues we were informed back in 2005 would be addressed by this consultation, for example the issue of the yellow line outside the parade of shops in Manor Lane, clearly aren't going to be addressed as Manor Lane, even now, isn't included.
The second is that you're significantly altering a scheme that has already been voted on. Presumably the proposed restrictions will be redrawn for the roads to be included and details of these proposals distributed to them, but what about the roads already consulted and which have voted based on the original plan? Do we get to see this revision and do we get the option to revise our vote? Clearly the voting process at this point could be said to be unduly influenced and compromised.
As parking, yellow line and bus shelter/bus stop issues have already been put on hold and gone unresolved since 2005, we don't feel that another delay in the consultation process will make that much difference but will result in a fairer and better resolution to the problems. Also there will be time to hold a proper indoor public meeting/exhibition to present all the available options, not just a full blown CPZ, so that roads such as Weardale which have a particularly chronic parking problem, can be assured that their problem will be addressed even if the CPZ is not approved. We also believe that there should be the inclusion of a 'two hour' only restriction option as well as the present all day restriction proposal as many of us are unhappy at the inflexibility of the current CPZ offering and believe that where the problems are largely due to commuter parking that a two hour restriction option is more appropriate and would deal with this problem but cause far less inconvenience to residents, their visitors and our shops.
We would be grateful if you would give this request your serious consideration.
My regards etc.
-------------
We believe that during the consultation period all the options should have been presented along with their comparitive costs. Also, that the completely inflexible 'all day' CPZ - the only option on offer in Lewisham - is far more than is actually needed to cope with what is predominately a commuter parking problem, and a 'two hour' restriction should also be offered. We also feel that roads which are under pressure, such as Weardale, should have their problem addressed without being made a perpetual hostage to fortune in the CPZ lottery, and that it hasn't been clearly pointed out the impact that this proposal could have on our local shops, which face a bill ten times that of any resident, or the potential impact on the budgets of our local schools which for a purposes of a CPZ are also classed as businesses. We believe details such as these have not been fully explained and if the process is to be seen as open and fair that they should be.
As always if anyone has any questions regarding this issue your councillors will do all they can to provide you with answers.
