Questions and Answers
Won't property values drop when parking controls come in?(as asserted by the "NO" campaign)?
Come on -- this is one of the most absurd pieces of logic I have ever seen.
- The purpose of the pilot RPZ is to make parking easier for residents which, one would presume, would help property prices.
- It is a pilot, so if it actually doesn't work, it will be taken away.
- In the light of this, we don't see any threat to property values whatsoever (and this campaign will make very sure that the Council formulates a sensible exit strategy and sticks to it if the scheme doesn't work).
Is this fair to students?
Students are people too. However most students in this area are within easy walking distance of the facilities for teaching and learning which bring them to our area. The University of Bristol recommends that they do not bring their cars. Their use of cars is mostly for leisure, whereas local residents need their cars for the whole spectrum of their lives. Under the circumstances of a limited resource, we think that the needs of local residents should take precedence (although of course households with students would be able to purchase parking permits on the same basis as all other residents).
Here are a couple of quotes from the University of Bristol website... (http://www.bristol.ac.uk/accommodation/usefuldocs/movingon.pdf)
"The University strongly recommends that you don't bring a car to Bristol..."
"Student cars parked in the road and rarely moved all term are a source of great frustration to residents who can't find a parking space near their home but need to use their cars every day to take children to school, go to work, etc."
Why can't we keep on muddling through?
Things will only get worse -- this is not a static situation. There are more offices coming online just outside our area as well as more apartments which have no parking of their own. In addition, residents of the development at the bottom of Church Lane (which will have its own rather limited parking) will be allowed to overlap into our streets unless there are parking controls in place.
Isn't this unfair to the commuters who underpin the economy of our city?
The commuters have a choice -- they can use park-and-ride and other forms of public transport. This is not completely satisfactory but the fact is that we are all victims of central government policy. This is to grant planning permission to offices and multiple occupancy dwellings in cities without adequate parking in order to socially engineer us to abandon our cars. In the face of this, residents on the periphery of the inner city cannot be expected to shoulder the entire burden of providing free parking for those directly affected by these policies.
Won't the implementation mean so many yellow lines that the number of spaces will be reduced so dramatically that we still won't be able to park?
The overwhelming evidence is that the problem is caused by people outside the area using us as a free car park for the centre, and by student households with 4-5 cars -- not local residents -- controlling this fairly will free up many spaces.
Secondly, by working closely with the council we can influence the degree to which our streets are yellow lined. The council appear to be very willing to be flexible over this.
Thirdly, if it really doesn't work, the council has promised to develop a clear exit strategy. We as a group will make sure that is set in stone before anything goes ahead. We are just as passionate about having a system which works as the "anti" campaign.
