Mole Valley's Parking Strategy was outlined in 2006. SCC looked at the proposal in March 2007.
Last year the the Leatherhead Advertiser reported that the scheme in Dorking had had some difficulties. (link required).
Councillor Sharland wrote in January:
The CPZ in Dorking is giving some problems which you will have read about in the press. Only when these have been resolved will the Leatherhead area be considered. Nothing will be considered for Leatherhead until Dorking's is up and running.
Posts
HP wrote (3-7-2008): ... there will be a brief paragraph in the newsletter, which can then go on the Website to the effect that the SCC Highways budget for 2008/9 includes the allocation of a sum for Consultation on Waiting Restrictions for Leatherhead and a further sum for the implementation of Waiting Restrictions - no mention of CPZ.
ReplyDeleteHC wrote (3-7-2008): This is a Surrey responsibility. But in clearing our study for redecoration I came upon the papers for the last Parking Survey - about 12 year's ago. I wonder if any of the current officers are aware of it! I'll bring it along on Monday evening.
ReplyDeleteRE wote (3-7-2008): Consultation was carried out on CPZ schemes in South Leatherhead in the mid 1990's and the SCC and MVDC proposals were very strongly rejected by residents, particularly in St Johns Road and Windfield area . The schemes were therefore kicked into the long grass by the Councils. Residents had compared the outcomes and the results of CPZ schemes on the residents of Croydon and discovered that the disadvantages far outweighed the advantages for them
ReplyDeleteHC wrote (3-7-2008): Times have changed. One of the consequences of the CPZ was to force parking out to roads such as Garlands Road and Copthorne Road - well that's happening now, and its residents of Park Rise and St John's Avenue that are asking for a CPZ now. Another alternative is parking meters. The problem is that free uncontrolled parking is no longer acceptable. Look what its doing to Epsom Road, Bypass Road, Randalls Road etc. Meanwhile the new Bull Hill car park is not being used as much as it should be.
ReplyDeleteRE wrote (3-7-2008) in reponse to HC:
ReplyDeleteYes, but CPZ is a restriction on the number of cars to one that any one household may park in front of their houses. I am not so sure that times have changed the outcome for residents and it may still be the same as before. People will have to be fully aware of the affects of the proposals on them and that it is not all good, and is what Dorking residents have already discovered. The SCC continues to address problems of parking for employees and shoppers in the commercial centre, but seems to have ignored the needs of residents for years. Perhaps what we need is a congestion charge or similar. Leatherhead is blessed with good public transport facilities and advantage should be taken of these.
AM wrote (3-7-2008) in response to C: I strongly disagree with HC, times haven't changed. I wouldn't like Leatherhead to become like central London.
ReplyDeleteI myself have problems parking outside my house, but would prefer it this way, than have parking meters and residental parking permits. Not only would this be a further tax on motorist but restrict friends and family coming around. It would devalue our houses and cause many other problems,.
HC wrote (4-7-2008) in response to AM:
ReplyDeleteI understand your personal views, A and I am sure that there are many like you. Personally we are a two car household, and often the garage is not available for even one car as I am working on some construction project. Like it or not, Leatherhead is facing parking problems, and there are many people who have greater parking problems than we do. So long as there is free parking in residential roads, regular parkers will prefer to use this space rather than pay for car parks. We need the expensively constructed roads for the prime purpose - transport and not for the storage of private property. Congestion in Epsom Road etc. cannot just be pushed into adjacent roads. Garlands Road is becoming a problem for traffic with school drop-off parking in the mornings, and I expect the same thing is happening in the other roads.
I am not offering my own views on the problems, but just saying that there is probably more parking issues in this town than anything else. Therefore I would like to see SCC conduct a new survey. LRA could well call for, and host a meeting to discuss the issues (preferably without SCC officers. The last parking survey carried out by consultants for MVDC was so badly briefed by MVDC officers that residents were hardly represented - PS spoke up, but otherwise it was left to Heather Ward and me (I was not invited, but asked to attend) to speak for the Residents and Council Tax payers. Never the less the conclusions were heavily weighted against the residents.
The Dorking experience was that the residents did not like what was being proposed - not that they were against the principle of controlled parking. It was called for by residents who wanted improvements. As far as I could see the officers offered schemes which did not meet the needs of the people, and so they were thrown out. This was a failure by the officers, and stems from a lack of councillor control which in turn has resulted from a constitutional failure (powers of delegation) within both SCC and MVDC. Let us avoid the Dorking experience by taking the lead in Leatherhead.
HC wrote (4-7-2008):
ReplyDelete.... But I am now convinced that we should not wait for MVDC or SCC to tell us what they think is good for us. If the blog is a way forward lets use it. But I am convinced that the LRA should take ownership of the debate, however it is carried forward.
HP wrote (4-7-2008) in response to HC/AM:
ReplyDeleteThis is an excellent idea that we should host a meeting to discuss the issues. What concerns me is that without the Planning Officers present we would find that situations evolving that we are unaware of affect discussion about "future" planning which has a considerable effect on problems of parking and increased vehicular activity.
For example. The proposal in the local plan (Development Framework) to include the possibility of building housing development on land at Leatherhead Hospital. Information conflicts about whether or not this land was sold off by SCC to the Health Authority or is covenanted for Hospital Purposes.
I discovered from a personal conversation with CB of the Surrey PCT, that they would not be interested in housing development UNLESS they could find a developer who would provide additional accommodation for the hospital and an increase in car-parking. BECAUSE a GP_ practice in Ashtead has shown an interest in re-locating to the site of Leatherhead Hospital. Subsequently I learn that there is also a GP practice in Leatherhead interested in relocating to Leatherhead Hospital.
Several weeks ago there was a traffic survey officer sitting in his car just below the junction of St. John's Road monitoring the flow of traffic in and out of St. John's Road, (when he wasn't reading his book). On enquiry, he was unaware of why he was doing this monitoring or to what purpose his figures would be put, but it certainly raised questions in my mind. I dread to think what will happen to the parking situation in Poplar Road and Windfield, if we end up with one of these proposed super-surgeries at Leatherhead Hospital. So please lets get the consultation on the Waiting Restrictions in Leatherhead actioned as soon as possible.