On 16 Apr 2014 at 4:21pm Merlin Milner wrote:
In case you missed my post further down, the response from ESCC about the apparent anomaly of HS Zone permits and maps that I said I would find out about.
"As a general rule resident permits are only available to addresses within a zone. To enable us to assist residents permit eligibility does not form part of our traffic regulation orders. This gives us the flexibility to respond to specific parking problems and assist in locations with exceptional needs.
There are two differences in the boundary of zone HS and the addresses eligible for a permit. These are locations that have been identified as having very limited parking and permit eligibility has been amended to assist residents. The two differences in zone HS are:
•North Street (between West Street and Little East Street) where there are no parking bays, and
•Bull Lane where there is only one parking bay.
On 16 Apr 2014 at 4:41pm Tipex wrote:
Thanks Merlin. So conspiracy theorists, it sounds like ESCC were just trying to help out those who would otherwise be unable to park in a resident permit bay. All that jumping to conclusions must be exhausting…
On 18 Apr 2014 at 3:37pm Local Bod wrote:
Thanks Merlin, you are unearthing a can of worms here, aren't you? Finallly the Council come clean, although why they could state this before is very interesting. You were told no permits were being issued to residents who didn't qualify for them. Well how do these residents qualify? Do they live in HS or not? That is the only way I can see that a resident can qualify, as there are no categories in any documents allowing what the Council are describe to you.
Where is this new policy that allows the Council to invent Zone extensions that breach the very clear policy that one has to live in a Zone to get a permit for it? When were other people consulted about these secret changes? That is an enormous number of secret passes for a very restricted zone. Why didn't the council just include these streets in the HS zone, since that is the point of a zone. Lots of us live in problem areas and the original question was actually how are these people eligible. That key point has still not actually been answered. Being worthy does not make a residence eligible, as plenty of us in problem areas know only too well. I still want to know how we can be eligible, and how we can apply for a permit in a zone we don't live in, because the answer that has been eventually extracted from the Council doesn't explain what legal process is being followed, and how it makes sense. "the boundary has been amended" How? Zones boundary changes require a Traffic Regulation Order, which is how the HS came into existence in the first place after we were all consulted. Plenty of us also though we were worthy of being in it, but aren't, so how did these streets get into the Zone…when they aren't!. Was it brown envelopes, or cock-up? I hope Merlin you might continue to find out how the rest of us in difficult streets with no parking availability can get this priority, policy-breeching treatment. Thanks! :-)
On 18 Apr 2014 at 4:56pm Parker Knowles wrote:
Um, Tipex, I live in HS and I don't recall anyone consulting me about sharing what are a handful of spaces with all these extra mystery people. How would you feel sharing what few spaces you have with all these extra people without anyone telling you? What on earth is going on here?
On 20 Apr 2014 at 11:11am Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
I think the reply seems to be saying that no variation in the Traffic Order is required to vary permit eligibility, Local Bod, which is slightly different from varying the zones.
It's now clear that if the council want to "assist" you by issuing a permit when you live outside a zone, they can. I think anyone who wants to park where they don't live should ask to be "assisted" in this way.
It would "assist" me no end to have a permit for anywhere around the Grange Gardens. Maybe I should ask for one, although I daresay as I don't even live within the CPZ, I would not be eligible.
On 20 Apr 2014 at 12:46pm Lewes Bod wrote:
yes, that is what ESCC are saying, which is odd, as there are plenty of historic TRO's with minor parking space alterations on them. Of course saying you can do something, because you have been caught doing it, is not necessarily the same as really being allowed to do it. Is it? ;-)
But you are exactly right. if ESCC is claiming that they are not breaching the explicit and logical policy that one has to be resident in a zone to qualify for a permit in it, then this must be a fascinating new arrangement, that doesn't seem to be written down anywhere , and must apply to us all.
I hope Merlin will ask yet again for ESCC to actually answer the question which I think the poor yet resilient man (thank you) has had to ask 3 or 4 times now. That question is still - how can we apply to be 'assisted' in the way ESCC has described, and how do we qualify for this 'assistance' ?
not living in the CPZ is irrelevant isn't it? I fail to see why this mysterious undocumented policy would prevent anyone from parking in any zone that would alleviate problems that merit assistance. We just need to know what the criteria are, and if you or I satisfy them. The information Merlin has uncovered so far also needs to be put on the Parking Website so that everyone knows that permits CAN be issued to people who are not resident in a zone. This is contrary to the current advice, which is clearly incorrect and wholly misleading. A Council has a duty to publish accurate information about permit eligibility, and qualifying criteria. It also has a duty to not discriminate.
On 23 Apr 2014 at 8:27am Mike wrote:
You lot have WAY too much time on your hands.
On 23 Apr 2014 at 8:34am Parker Knowles wrote:
Mike, I presume you are one of the people who has been getting these secret benefits and aren't so keen to share them with the rest of us?
PS,glad to see you had time enough on your hands to read what you thinks is so crap :-)