Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Removal of Daily Parking Vouchers | Have your say Now - Deadline November 13th
Hi All,
Following on from all the previous discussion, I just received an email about the removal of Daily Visitor permits etc, giving me the chance to comment.
https://new.haringey.gov.uk/parking/consultations-parking/have-your...
I have emailed my objection to:
| traffic.orders@haringey.gov.uk |
Citing:
1. It making it more expensive.
2. More onerous in terms of having to keep booking
3. That it obviously won't stop misuse - if a "good" permit holder can book 12 x hourly visitor permits then so can a "bad" permit holder - especially when they're motivated by financial gain.
Let's try an win this one!
(and Hugh please feel free to move this post as you see fit)
Tags for Forum Posts: daily parking permits, parking, visitor parking, visitor parking permits
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Elizabeth M on
-
I've said elsewhere on one of the many chains on this topic I think the charges should be equalised across the Borough so that a day's worth of parking costs the same. The builders' van will likely be there all day regardless of whether a CPZ covers 2 hours or 6. The only assumption I made is that if a person can afford to pay probably more than one person minimum wage 5 days a week for 6 months to work on their house they should budget for the parking permits too which will cost a lot less than the builders will. That's hardly a wild assumption. And I know exactly where to send my official response to (and did before you told me twice) - no need to assume otherwise.
-
-
Just picking up on this line:
There should be an exemption, concession or lowest-band provision for Historic Vehicles in the provisions for charging for parking spaces.
Isn't this just a request for the council to subsidise people's hobby? Like saying can I have a 15'x6' spot for my model train set for free.
-
-
Plus if its an actual piece of history you would want it in a garage not on the street.
-
Permalink Reply by Nigel on
-
The point was to illustrate the fact that the Council Paper ignored its own professed policy justification for the change.
The council policy is to discourage the pollution levels and congestion caused by motor vehicles. Historic vehicles pollute less and use less road mileage. If that was really the policy reason they'd exempt or reduce the charges for them.
But it isn't really the policy reason for this measure. It's revenue raising and discouraging vehicle ownership, which is outside their remit.
BTW, yes, I am keen to find a garage on or near the Ladder. All info welcome.
-
-
I've just done my objections. I read somewhere the closing date is 20th November. Does anyone know if we can attend the meeting where the proposals are to be considered?
-
-
Technically they've already been considered by the council and they passed them all in a previous meeting.
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
Correct. In fact it’s more than a technicality. The proposals have been formally approved and passed over to officers for implementation, including the legally required statutory consultation. Bar any behind-the-scenes goings-on, the officers currently have the formal authority to make any adjustments following that consultation. If the matter is brought back to the Cabinet for discussion, this would be an extra-ordinary step occasioned to a great degree by the resistance led from Harringay.
-
Permalink Reply by JulieB on
-
Let's hope we get the extra-ordinary step.
All the local councillors' communications I've seen have said 'no decision has been taken', even when I replied to my ward councillor that this wasn't true and a decision had most definitely been taken and approved.
-
-
Challenging them offline gets a more honest response. They are to a great extent rather restricted by the Haringey party line.
-
Permalink Reply by adamvietnam on
-
Is there scope for any kind of judicial review?
-
-
Personally I i think in all likelihood we'll get a "We've listened to our residents and we're not making this change".
It's a badly thought out policy that got waved through on the basis of a few anecdotes and bit of pressure from local businesses. No one actually considered the real impact and the huge amount of negative responses (and lack of positive responses) and I think they'll be looking to quietly extricate themselves from it.
On the upside, no one is paying much attention to the rest of the changes.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
