Text your news & pics
Text your news or pictures (plus 'SLNEWS' or 'SLPICS') to 80360. click here for details »
Residents urged to voice their concerns on CPZs
12:41pm Friday 15th December 2006
Comments (10)Residents are being urged to make sure their voice is heard, as the consultation on a carbon emission based parking charge system ends today (Friday).
Plans to charge residents who live in controlled parking zones (CPZ) more to park if their cars produced high CO2 emissions - and less if they produced low emissions - have been under consideration for around a month.
A questionnaire has been sent to 3,500 residents and 1,500 businesses asking for thoughts on emission based structure for parking permits and a differential structure for second and subsequent permits and every resident who lives in a CPZ has also been asked.
Councillor David Trigg, Richmond Council cabinet member for traffic, transport and parking, has told residents that if they have anything to say on the matter they should contact the council by the end of the day.
But he did admit that with hard copy letters the council would be flexible given the vagaries of the Royal Mail system, especially close to Christmas.
The proposals continue to be criticised in some quarters with Roger Lawson, London regional coordinator at the Association of British Drivers (ABD), urging residents to contact the council and their local councillors to defeat the proposals, which he said are a way to fill the council's coffers and Twickenham man Tony Elsom said the plans were fundamentally unfair.
Michael Glazebrook, the chair of the Kew Society, described the proposal as clumsy and said a lot of people did not like it at the society's extraordinary general meeting on Monday and expressed concern at where the money was going.
"I think most people will just stump up the money," he said. "I know years ago we were asking the council to get us CPZs and we were grateful when they got the commuters out of Kew. Now they are turning it around and charging us more for it."
A vote among members at the meeting revealed just three were in favour of the proposal and the society is set to voice concerns with a letter to Richmond council.
Coun Trigg said there had been a mixed reaction in the responses to date with some residents vehemently against and some vehemently for while others are broadly in favour, with some caveats.
"There are some items in the proposals that we will have to address," he said. "But I can't pre-judge the consultation and I am led to believe there has been a large response and I am very pleased we have had a positive response."
Coun Trigg said that he hoped the plans would go before a council scrutiny committee sometime in the middle or end of January and before the council's cabinet at the end of January.
Your Say YourRichmond and Twickenham Times
A local car owner, says...
2:47pm Fri 15 Dec 06
Simon Fellows, says...
5:06pm Fri 15 Dec 06
1) That poorer people cannot afford "gas guzzlers" - well I am sorry but poorer people will tend to own older cars (large and small) which are not as environmentally friendly as newer cars - and the council has proposed older cars will be penalised too.
2) Cars that have no consideration for others has nothing to do with large or small cars - just poor manners which, I am afraid is all to frequent across all social spectra these days
3) Larger cars with larger engines can be status symobls - in fact I would argue ALL cars a status symbols of one sort or another - but there are many families where a larger car is required (and to fall into Richmond's new parking bands you do not have to have a large car)
4) "Selfishness" and "arrogance work both ways too. I found the previous poster both arrogant in their immediate assumptions (including larger car owners do not use Public Transport) and selfish in that clearly they feel a victim of a variety of experiences.
But I guess this is a contentious issue. I just wish the debate was a bit more grown-up and justified by facts rather than opinions (which we all have right to hold - but not to impose on others.)
Kasper Gore, says...
5:14pm Fri 15 Dec 06
Gwilym Rees-Jones, says...
2:01pm Thu 21 Dec 06
Larry Spear, says...
3:55pm Thu 28 Dec 06
A2 zone Resident, says...
8:13pm Sat 27 Jan 07
We moved to Richmond precisely because being here enables us to leave the car parked outside our home and walk to our local shops. We only really use our family estate car (averages 30mpg, but is in band D!) for family holidays and occasional outings, but we will be penalised for parking rather than using the car.
This is obviously ridiculous and unfair- if the we wish to reduce CO2 emmissions (which scientific evidence suggests we should), then we should tax car usage rather than ownership. For example by simply increasing fuel duty.
I will never vote Liberal again.
A2 zone Resident, says...
8:19pm Sat 27 Jan 07
A2 zone Resident, says...
9:55pm Sat 27 Jan 07
Norman Gordon, says...
11:53am Wed 31 Jan 07
enforce obsurd charges
we already pay tax and
petrol expect to in the future to be charged for breathing
£100 or £50 if you pay within 14 days.!!
In this section
- Future uncertain for £20m Feltham Skills Centre
- Brentford landlord charged with running illegal stripclub
- Arctic explorers tell tale of the ice
- Teen in court charged with Twickenham stabbing
- Alan Keen: 'Squatters should get a job'
- Squatters face eviction from MPs Ann and Alan Keens' home
- Taxi is top dog after sniffing out guns and drug stash
- Comic says gig at MPs home most 'outrageous yet'
- 'Parking charges for Royal Parks will cause chaos': Council coalition demands rethink
Sponsored Links
Local Links
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Anthony Shields, says...
1:06pm Fri 15 Dec 06
Richmond
TW10 6SJ
15/12/06
The Editor
Richmond and Twickenham Times
Dear Sir, Proposed Parking Charges
The percentage of CO2 emissions in Richmond Borough which is caused by larger vehicles owned by residents who do not have off-street parking must be extremely small when compared to the contributions from all the other traffic in the borough. Yet the Council is prepared to seriously alienate many of its council tax payers by an unfair, undemocratic tax which targets larger families and lower earners.
I would suggest that larger vehicles are owned by people who have a need to transport children to school or on leisure activities, as I do. They would not incur the cost and inconvenience of such a vehicle in Richmond otherwise, with all the problems in obtaining a parking space.
The proposed measure represents nothing more than an attack on its own people by a selfish, attention-seeking elite within Richmond Council. It is an attack on the Borough's families, especially the less well-off ones, who cannot afford a home with off-street parking.
Richmond Borough has one of the highest rates of breast cancer in the country, probably caused by the immense pollution from aircraft. Why does the Council not have a go at the expansion of Heathrow and the government, rather than the owners of vehicles who are not fortunate enough to have off-street parking?
Regards,