| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Grove Park CPZ again | |
| Posted by: | Dan Murphy | |
| Date/Time: | 07/09/15 11:55:00 |
| Simon, this was one of the most iniquitous aspects of the entire two-road CPZ. The fact is that the vast majority of residents in Park Road have private off road parking for 1, 2, or more cars. The situation is even more blatant in Staveley Road, the entire road is almost total empty of cars. Most residents in these roads simply never needed to park on the road, they park in their private driveways. And since the CPZ was introduced, the roads (as your photo shows) are now virtually empty. It is appalling that in an area like Grove Park, where we know we have a dense parking issue, that two of the longest roads in our area should be left empty like this whilst everyone else has to absorb the 200-300 cars which were previously parked in these roads, causing no inconvenience for residents as the majority of them have their own private parking. If the council were going to force a CPZ into two roads, these should have been the VERY LAST roads to be considered. There is not, and has never been, the slightest case for controlled parking here. The case for pushing CPZ into these roads was predicated on the belief that introducing car park charges in Chiswick House would result in "massive displacement" of commuter cars into Park & Staveley. This was a blatant lie, and has since been demonstrated to be a lie. Have a look at the photo Simon posted, and see if you can spot all the Chiswick House car park cars which were displaced. Total nonsense - there never were any commuters parking in that car park, of course. And the various FOI requests we put in asking for all correspondence between Councillor Mayne, and the small number of residents in Park Road who were putting him under severe pressure to let them have their CPZ, revealed a lengthy and private correspondence between him and those residents (many of them close family friends, known to him since childhood because this is the road where he grew up). The entire scheme was cooked up between them, out of the view of public scrutiny. The clear conflict of interest between the lead member and his close family friends (and family) who would benefit from having a quasi-private road (just look at the photo!!) was never once admitted publicly. And all this was supported by the Head of Legal services, Mr. Richard Gruet, who advised and supported the lead member at every step of the way. Mr. Gruet threw the weight of LBH legal services into supporting this CPZ scheme, and frustrated every single attempt to get to the truth. It was a truly shocking display from start to finish. But we're stuck with it now, and in time we will be stuck with an area wide CPZ. There is nothing we can do to stop these people. |