Refused resident's parking permit in zone C1- Bankside

Peter, good point! Sandgrown Dave, you are probably waiting for a specific set of garages, but if not contact them as something has gone wrong as the Council often advertises garages for rent.

eDWaRD WooDWaRD wrote:

Brendan D wrote:

No one is 'entitled' to a car......
It is an largely unnecessary, expensive, polluting, congestion-causing nuisance.
Completely agree with the council.

Of course everyone is entitled to car. Whether it's unnecessary etc. is nothing more than an opinion. You say you agree with the council - are their reasons as noble as yours? Do you generally agree that it's OK for one party to decide what another party is entitled to?

Yes I do. We live in a densely populated city and a society where democracy allows society to decide the limits of individual freedoms for the common good. Enough said....

Sandgrown Dave wrote:

Brendan D wrote:

No one is 'entitled' to a car.....

Well, it may be semantics, but I would say that everyone is entitled to own a car if they wish to, and are willing and able to pay the associated costs.

That's it.

Everyone isn't entitled to a parking space.

There simply aren't enough of them.

Brendan D wrote:

eDWaRD WooDWaRD wrote:

Brendan D wrote:

No one is 'entitled' to a car......
It is an largely unnecessary, expensive, polluting, congestion-causing nuisance.
Completely agree with the council.

Of course everyone is entitled to car. Whether it's unnecessary etc. is nothing more than an opinion. You say you agree with the council - are their reasons as noble as yours? Do you generally agree that it's OK for one party to decide what another party is entitled to?

Yes I do. We live in a densely populated city and a society where democracy allows society to decide the limits of individual freedoms for the common good. Enough said....

So when was it democratically decided that no one is entitled to car? Also, to repeat my question: do you think the council's reasons for the parking space issue are as noble as yours?

[quote Ivanhoe][quote Sandgrown Dave][quote Brendan D]No one is 'entitled' to a car.....[/quote]

Well, it may be semantics, but I would say that everyone is entitled to own a car if they wish to, and are willing and able to pay the associated costs.[/quote]

That's it.

Everyone isn't entitled to a parking space.

There simply aren't enough of them.[/quote

There is plenty of space for example in those 2 parking lots off Southwark Street for example, only the cost is exorbitant.


I drive a 15-year old car I took over from an uncle who didn't need it any more - I've never had a new car. Before that, I used Streetcar, but they're gone and Zipcar's deal was ridiculous. I used to rent cars, but that's too expensive. I use the car for heavy shops and trips - again, train would be too expensive, and we like to explore rather than being stuck in the same place as everybody else who came off the same train. Being able to take my children to the countryside increases their respect for nature and the environment. For everything else I walk (anything under 1 hour) or use public transport. I like to think I am considerate, also as far as the environment is concerned, and do my bit as much as possible. To be told that I don't need something I obviously do need is ridiculous. It's also another excuse for the council to make money with no regard for the people who live here. What I don't need is that kind of council.

Edward its your use of 'entitlement' that bothers me.
You choose to run a car, pay for it, and for the costs of parking it, as you have a desire to do trips with your family. Thats fine.

In the context of the OP, who was bothered by not being able to apply for a parking permit, 'entitled', means everyone should be able to apply.
BUT there aren't enough... so are we going to have a waiting list, or price everyone but the rich out of a space (i.e. have a market), or are we going to cover our streets with parking and cars, adding to congestion and decreasing safety for pedestrians and cyclists?

I think the current Balance is right. Restrict supply, discourage car ownership and prioritise other transport means, but not to the total exclusion of those who feel need. The OP can always rent a parking space and they usual go for £80 per month in SE1.

Zone C1 is often impossible to find a residents' parking bay in, and there's only a finite number of on-street parking bays. If they started giving out permits to everyone who lives in a new development in C1 then there'd probably be several cars for every bay, and no-one would ever find a place to park. As far as I know it's been policy for years and years to not allow on-street parking permits for new builds, and not just in Southwark - all across London.

The alternatives to owning a car in London are generally much cheaper over the course of a year, and nearly as convenient - zipcar, taxi, hire car, Uber, supermarket delivery etc.

It's plainly barmy to expect every home in SE1 to have the entitlement to a parking space.

In the 15-20 years I've lived here, the area of SE1 has stayed the same, but the number of flats in the area has increased by a huge amount.

You *could* build a lot fewer new homes, and make every one with a car parking space. But then the new homes would be even less affordable than they are now.

You could allow all new homes to apply for an on-street permit, but it seems to me that the residents' bays are always full as it is.

Or you could make a ruling that new developments don't qualify for residents' permits, making this clear at the planning stage so everyone knows about it.

Personally, I think the latter option is the best situation.

Edward, you said it yourself - you chose not to use car rental and trains because it's too expensive - so it (and other alternatives) are available, but because of the massive subsidy the council provides a minority of residents in the form of very cheap parking you perceive them as being poor value.

If the cost of an on street space reflected the value of the land occupied, in SE1 you'd be looking at a sale value of several hundred thousand pounds, and an annual rental cost of thousands. Then you might not think Zipcar to be such a bad deal.

Their shouldn't be surface carparks in SE1, the land is too valuable and demand for housing too great. There's a good discussion to be had about developments providing their own off street parking (lendlease, for example, are of the opinion that some is essential in elephant, and I recall discussing it at 1 Tower Bridge), but for the most part the current policy of capping demand and retaining low cost parking for existing users seems sound.

Extending the thought, it might be worth considering a 'no new permits' or 'market price permits' policy on existing buildings in places where demand is too high for supply, or where the space could be of more benefit to more people used as something other than storage for occasionally used cars. I wouldn't want to deny access to something that someone has planned their life around, but so long as it's clear that lease's are sold with terms attached I've no issue with it.

Just to be clear - the main issue I have a problem with is being told that I don't need a car. That's up to me to decide.