Notes on CPZ

The editorial by Kim Thomas has resulted in a number of questions and comments about the CPZ that I felt warranted a brief note for clarification and balance.

  1. Many people had questions about the original consultation’s results. This site published an article with links to the Richmond Council documents and many nice charts and maps
  2. The current (second) consultation phase that we are now in was based on a Council decision published not long after the initial consultation results, on 18 July 2007. This site’s article, Expanded CPZ Moves to Next Stage describes the next steps and rough timetable for the secondary stage of the CPZ planning — which the Council has largely kept up with. These include the following three points which suggest what is happening now shouldn’t be too surprising:
    • To progress a CPZ to the next stage of consultation in those roads south of Netherton Road and west of Cassillis Road, (including Southwestern Road and St Margarets Grove in the consultation but not necessarily in the implementation), to include the setting up of a parking working group of resident and business representatives to progress detailed design and advertise a traffic regulation order.
    • To agree for statutory consultation to take place prior to a decision being taken on those roads to be included within a zone.
    • To carry out a review six months after implementation, should a zone be introduced, and the review to include those areas adjacent to the zone.
  3. If you look at the streets currently under consideration, the voting there was closer to 48% in support of the CPZ, it was 65% against if you looked at the entire area in the initial survey.
  4. Prior to receiving Kim’s editorial this site had asked our local councillors, including Cllr Trigg for more information on the status of the CPZ and received only the most basic information and are still waiting for a more detailed and formal set of information to publish an article.

10 December 2007 | editorial


Two points to be taken into consideration:

1. If CPZ is only introduced in selected roads, it will again just shift the problem to the remaining “non-CPZ” streets.

2. Currently, parking on corners stops fire engines being able to get through. This is a dangerous place to live! And I’m sure our insurance premiums reflect this!

We need a solution… not just HALF a solution

Mr Robb at 13 December 2007 9:44 PM

Mr Robb, in my opinion you made three valid points

Have you got any suggestions that might lead to the solution while we make do with what you call
just half a solution?

Gerhard Schellberg at 15 December 2007 12:34 AM

There is no magic wand, and I do not mean that flippantly and we can only play the hand we are dealt with.
The council is encouraging walking,cycling and car clubs as a way to reduce miles driven and the number of cars

Cllr Ben Khosa

Ben Khosa at 16 December 2007 8:31 AM

As for (2) above: To stop street corners being parked on, double-yellow lines can be placed on those corners without the need to introduce CPZ controls next to them. If the suggestion here is people will park on double yellow lines anyway, then the CPZ would make no difference either. I don’t see this safety issue tying convincingly into CPZ restrictions.

In the proposed areas, CPZ controls are revenue earners for the Council and private contractors only. It’s an additional tax on us, the homeowners, where the CPZ streets will be full of our cars still anyway, except we’re all poorer. I used to live in a CPZ in Twickenham (for 3 years), and parking was still difficult, except we were all out of pocket by £70 a year for the privilege. I don’t see the real issues faced in the centre of Twickenham to be valid in the North St. Margarets area (communter parking, shopping, etc.).

Ian at 21 December 2007 10:36 AM

Ben, so our council is encouraging the residents to walk, cycle and join car clubs.

Very commendable, but exactly why? is my question.

Walking and cycling is good for the residents health and CO2 reduction I agree but has precious
little to do with solving the parking problem in St Margarets.

While residents are walking and cycling their cars
are parked on the road.

Using my own circumstance joining a car club is out the question.
Financially certainly a disadvantage.
Availability of a car nearby and as and when I want it is questionable.

If the council is really concerned about reducing
miles driven and solving parking problems roads
north of the A316 that voted for a CPZ and adjacent roads should be included in stage 2 consultation.

It is important that roads that at stage 1 voted
NO are included in stage 2 if they are adjacent to a road that voted YES at stage 1. Both north and south of the A316.

The action taken by the council with regard to roads north of the A316 contravens the councils

Meaningful discussions on how to reduce the volume of cars parked on St Margarets Roads will not be entered into by residents while there are
still a small number of roads without a CPZ.

Like the CPZ in East Twickenham and St Margarets
where initiated by residents moves to dicuss car reduction will come from residents.


Gerhard Schellberg at 10 January 2008 12:47 AM

Post a comment

Remember Me?