Residents' Association Forum

Residents are invited to comment in this thread, on Surrey's latest proposals for parking restrictions in Thames Ditton  which I have put up here: http://residents-association.com/news/parking.php  

Please also read the backgrounder on that page which follows the latest proposals, before commenting.

Peter Hickman has obtained these proposals to put on our website in advance, for the early information of residents.  Note that there is not much point in contacting SCC Highways on the proposals at present.  They will go before the local area committee as they are, and it will be during the period of public consultation that residents' views will be collected by Surrey and taken into account in the final implementation to follow.  

Now putting on my citizen's hat, I'll start things off by asking questions:

What do you think about the idea of two Pay-and-Display bays in the High Street for short-term parkers?  SCC officials keep pointing out that just round the corner in the car park, there are many empty spaces at just 20p for a short stay.  Is it worth having two shopper bays in the High St?  What about the two ugly pay-and-display machines on the pavement in the conservation area?  

Has enough been done opposite Linden Close to break up the long line of parked cars in Watts Road, or should there be another short passing bay (no waiting any time)  along there, like the two passing bays they have provided for on the East side of the High St?

On Ashley Rd at the Church Walk end, I am thinking that the no waiting area might inconvenience Church Walk residents with deliveries and supermarket shopping.  But my guess is that the yellow lines proposed are designed to ensure access for emergency services (fire especially) and for the garbage collectors.

Well I never thought I would say this but they actually look quite good.

Right constructive criticism time:

I don't feel pay and display is the way to go in the High Street, firstly as the ticket machine will look out of place (as said by Keith) but will do nothing to improve turnover of parking - keep the 1hr parking limit but make them free. Now not knowing the cost of a ticket its difficult to say, but it is highly unlikely the revenue from parking will ever be sufficient to cover the cost of the machines anyway - we as a taxpayer will have to foot the bill and I dont see the benefit of paying to park in certain bays when you can park for free on the road a few metres away????? that just doesn't make sense to me.

And finally, I have to slightly disagree with Keith but also feel something should be done further on Watts Road - I see the problem being vehicles coming from the High Street back up and block the junction outside the George and Dragon - providing an additional passing place may not help - as it only takes one or two vehicles too many to fit in the passing place to cause gridlock (as happens now) (I hope that makes sense) - I would suggest the existing waiting restrictions on Watts Road by the pub are extended by about 15m southwards, permitting a longer area to wait in advance of the parked vehicles and hopefully not blocking the High Street - this would also allow the Linden Close junction to act as the passing place and should hopefully help out a bit more........

CP:  On the 'shopper bays' it is quite often not the case that during the day you'd be able to park 'for free' (free as in beer) nearby on the High St anyway.  The idea behind shopper bays is that a few places  -  it looks like just four in all-  should be kept free (free as in available) for short-stay shoppers close to the two groups of shops frequently used.   The small parking bay put in near Bachmann's at Winter's Bridge has been well used by shoppers who *could* park for free round the corner in resdential roads.  SCC keep saying, correctly, that there is 'very cheap parking for short-term shoppers nearby in the car park' - 20p - but empirical evidence of Winter's Bridge - where there are no machines - as well as one's understanding of human nature suggest that having bays available practically right outside shops, on the street, will attract 'passing trade.'  If there are machines I am assuming, but it would need specifying, that the 'ticket price' would be either zero or the same as the car park.

The question is, for four shopper places is it worth having the paraphernalia of ticket machines, markings etc. in the conservation area?  I have an open mind.  Could we start with an honour system?  i.e. no ticket machines.  Retailers would keep an eye on whether parkers in those bays were playing fair.   Call the wardens if an offender spotted.  (EBC has the same logic on dog mess, it seems: make it illegal, rely on people's compliance, hardly any enforcement.  They think it works 'most of the time').

Also an open mind on Watts Rd - my first reaction on seeing the map was that wasn't quite enough.  There is enough room for cars to park along Watts Road if they are strung out rather more.  Your suggestion is interesting.

Please note that SCC have now sent us a small update to the pdf files of the diagram for Watts Road, which takes into account an extension to the Watts Road existing double yellow lines. 

They propossals go before the Area committee today, I believe.

I'm not sure how far all these parking proposals have got but does anyone else think it would be a good idea to extend the no waiting a little further along Station Road - from Watts Road to Basing Way?  This seems to be a major cause of congestion in this part of the village, is extremely dangerous from a visibility point of view and very irritating when there are usually less hazardous spaces a little further up the road.

It is a real shame that some people have forgotten their highway code or choose to ignore it, in particular DO NOT park your vehicle or trailer on the road where it would endanger, inconvenience or obstruct pedestrians or other road users; included in that is do not park on a bend.

I love this village but sometimes I hate driving through it!

The Surrey parking proposals - late Feb 2010 - are as in the maps given in links from our parking page (see start of thread), and they were placed in cold storage by the council'during the election period' for some reason.  There is a meeting of officials at any moment to fix the revised schedule for the public consultation. As soon as I hear, I'll post something on the web site. At this stage (after a very long period of informal and formal consultations over the past three years) the public consultation would probably be on the whole package outlined.

But by all means (after revising what the proposals are) post additional practical suggestions here - they will be picked up, tasted and maybe put into the pot.

from what i can see from living here for the short time I have..

Its fairly straightforward..

Ashley rd was free, all businesses used it..

Now they have to pay they get to work early and park on the street.. as a resident there is virtually no parking whatsoever, its very difficult.

The swan has reduced its parking from 20 spaces to about 7, now, whereas i used to always get parking for 1 maybe 2 cars on slipway, I now manage to park 1 car there about once every 2 weeks.

it strikes me that metering the high street will take it from being a nice village to looking like any other high street and will cause more problems. If I want to leave a car here in the day, what should i do?

I have been to ashley road a few times recently, there has never been more than 3 cars there..The simple thing to do it, apportion half of it to business users who can buy a subsidised yearly pass to park there..The rest of it for shoppers & local residents (who in turn would get a residents pass either free or at a nominal cost)

This would make a huge difference in my eyes. I doubt they'll do it thoughm, things are rarely straighforward or commonsense where councils are concerned.

Somewhere in the middle of the potted hsitory I did of the RA is a page or two on the history of efforts to get some sense into traffic and parking over the last....40 years....! http://residents-association.com/pdfs/consult.pdf

makes very interesting reading, good job

I think we should leave things just as they are.  Especially if it discourages big four-wheel drives from charging down the High Street daring anthing to try coming in the opposite direction.

Where have SCC got the money from for carrying out the consultation? Is this a good use of money when the council is possibly facing a 25% cut in its funding over the next 4 years!! I would personally rather see the money allocated to the social care budget or even pay for the pot holes to be repaired in Thames Ditton. If there is a consultation we need to make sure the right questions are asked, so that Thames Ditton citizens can have a real say!

I don't think it's a great deal of money - a bit of legal work and the postage now.  And after all these years of effort and agony It would be a bigger waste not to take the process to its conclusion!

I'm sure that Peter Hickman will try to make sure that questions are fairly asked (and their answers not only fairly assessed but acted upon).  As I see it, the risk is that we'll be bounced with the question: "do you accept this package or not" whereupon we have to consider replying "Accept provided that there are no pay and display machines for the two High St bays" (of four spaces each IIRC).   

The minimal yellow lines proposed are to ease regular obstruction points, though the desirability of lines round the octagon are debatable; and the long-suffering residents of Basingfield Road deserve the curfew parking arrangement which offer the prospect of reducing commuter parking (but not eliminating it) while parents will still be able to park temporarily for the school run.  It's not all that Basingfield Road wanted, but it seems a practical step towards easing the pain.

The real thorny problem is the one that mostly drove the atempt of the last few years to get better solutions: providing at least some free (and easy) shopper parking in the High St to support our small retailers who live on a financial  tightrope and whose presence keeps the village High St alive.  We surely don't want pay and display bays; we want short term bays like the one at Winter's Bridge that we pushed for successfully: no meters or machines, works very well, loads of shoppers use it, nobody seems to abuse it by overstaying.

I still think the Ashley Road carpark should be better utilised.

Here are some proposals - with some pros and cons, these can be mix/matched... 

1. Up to 2h parking is FREE for all on Ashley Road 

Pros: people can use it to access the high st shops,  better utilisation of the car park and therefore less cars on the high st except for people who genuinly need to get that close to the shops.

Cons: its hard to police up to 2h free so would more or less rely on trust!, loss of some revenue for council (hence less money to maintain car park)

2. Parking on high st limited to 1h or 2h max

Pros: allows shoppers access, keeps people moving, people who need all day will have to use the car park

Cons: again hard to police

3. Parking permits for high st to be issued by retailers (for free), i.e. parker can nip into a store and get a stamped pay and display ticket

Pros: parking only for people visiting retailers

Cons: admin, trust of retailers to not issue to 'mates', etc

I'v got some other ideas too - like a pay n display permit that can be issued by retailers!

If they are doing legal stuff they are probably drafting the regulation order and this consultation could well be the formally required notice period only- therefore no opinions on scheme factors - we will have to wait and see. 

As long as the parking warden doesn't give you a ticket whilst your in the shop! Realistically for me I'm just being lazy if I don't walk into the village.

I think we all, including our councillors, agree on that: but the ruling faction on the council puts uniform high pricing across Elmbridge first.  See below. I think you will find that both businesses with employees, and residents of the High St, not to mention Islanders and others, do not accept that there should be such limits all along the High St.  You'll have seen that the proposals are limited to two short-term bays of four spaces each, plus a short area enabling cars coming in opposite directions to pass each other.
The extra inconvenience would tend to inhibit quick stops.  As would some bizarre 'clock' scheme (don't ask!).  They are unnecessary - the proof is in the Winter's Bridge bay established two years ago after we and the retailers pushed for it (and partly funded it) - which works perfectly well without any issue of tickets to park.

Lastly, the 'shopper parking' isn't limited to residents who are within walking distance.  Several of our small retailers and businesses need people to visit from a wider area if their businesses are to survive ("passing trade").  Ease of free parking for ten minutes or so is a factor.  In Ashley Road car park we do have quite good provision for short-term shopper parking - 20p for the shortest stay - even though it's not as convenient as parking outside the shops for nothing.  There is the question of signage for the car park for people who don't know the village well and would come to buy clothes from Adiva or a painting from View Gallery if they knew how easy it was....

The issue with Ashley Road car park is that with Thames Ditton's varied economy there are so many all-day parkers.  It has long been the aim to get them off the High Street and into the car park.  That aim is shared by Surrey Highways, but it has not been shared by Elmbridge's rulers, who have applied a blanket policy across Elmbridge's village car parks of discouraging long-stay parkers in favour of short-stay shoppers.  It should be quite possible to adopt a flexible approach, car park by car park, ward by ward, to suit local circumstances (and this is the Residents' approach) - but the Council bosses won't hear of it even though with their policy, the car park is yielding less revenue than two years ago before the huge price hike for staying over four hours.

You may not be aware but SCC are currently out to consultation on their 3rd Local Transport Plan - part of which includes parking provision - and more importantly the provision of pay and display. It can be found here:

http://www.surreycc.gov.uk/sccwebsite/sccwspages.nsf/LookupWebPagesByTITLE_RTF/STP+Parking+Strategy+draft?opendocument

This has significant implications for what they propose for TD as the provision of P&D won't be implemented until it is formally agreed into LTP3 - which is currently seeking OUR views - although you probably didn't know about it. Its worth telling them how you feel while you have the chance.

If you get 5 minutes its worth a read - especially bearing in mind the provision of parking enforcement for revenue generation is not allowed. 

It is littered with phrases such as "Charging for on street parking would also make a significant contribution to reducing the parking account deficit" and "It is therefore necessary for the County Council to look to increase its income from other parking charges" and also worringly "the cost is also a useful tool in facilitating other objectives of the Council such as controlling the number of vehicles on the network" AKA price people out of the car.

It also effectively states that on street parking will be as much if not more than off street facilities to promote their use - but in some instances (Walton) car parks are private and costs can be increased pretty much at will - and so will the charges.

On 28th February SCC are discussing 'pay and display' parking throughout the Borough at their Local Committee.

The papers are on-line but surprisingly there are NO proposals for Thames Ditton at all included???....  ??? ???

Claygate, East Molesey, Esher, Walton, Hersham, Weybridge and Cobham are included but not TD - does anyone know why??????

Perhaps they realised that it would be no use marking the roads around TD station with parking bays as the roads are always under a large pool of water ... !!!

pay and display parking would absolutely ruin td. I hope and pray it never comes in.

The Residents' Permit system worked very well in Surbiton, and applied to businesses as well, for a reasonable annual cost of £90.  It kept the local roads clear of long term parking by commuters, and available for short term shoppers, thus benefitting the local businesses.  The 2 hours free at Waitrose also helped.

In TD, I have rarely been able to park in the High Street to pop into a shop eg Post Office, as most of the spaces seem to be taken up by long term parkers, possibly commuters, so I rarely use the shops.  If I do, I park in the Ashley Road car park, which is so convenient.

I agree with some earlier comments, and propose agreement to:
1.  Ashley Road park free for first 1 or 2 hours, which will encourage short term shoppers, and help local businesses.
2.  Residents/Business permits for local spaces in High Street and near Station -- will at least keep commuters out, and also help local businesses. I cannot see how this would "ruin TD " !
3.  Better policing of local rogue parking, eg double parking in High Street and village end of Summer Road opposite Home of Compassion

From our soundings over the past few days the local retailers in the High St, who were mostly in favour of a small number of  free and unmetered parking bays, are now mostly and strongly against the imposition of pay and display which will make matters worse for them, they judge.

For the Association a key point is to back the small retailers who keep the beating heart of the High t alive, and who find trading conditions very tough.  Particularly when competing with large supermarkets and stores where parking is free....

Another key point is that once imposed, pay and display will not only never go away, but will be extended everywhere by degress to the point where we have a forest of posts and machines and markings daubed everywhere, to add to other unsightly street furniture that mars the villages.

Amused to read in Dominic Raab's blog "Elmbridge Borough Council have announced they are halving the all day charge for 'off street' parking charges - a valuable boost to local trade".   

Has he already forgotten it was the bumbling Elmbridge tory councillors themselves who only recently raised the charges so vastly that the car park emptied, the high street was clogging with commuter cars, and car park revenue reduced to almost zero ??   

On one level it's funny, but not when local business have been harmed, and the local community has had to spend a huge amount of their time and effort persuading the muddle headed Tory Elmbridge rulers to drop car park charges again - only for Raab to give them the credit for boosting local trade  ::)

So regularly do EBC tory councillors impose unwise and unpopular policies, overruling local residents in the process, one must question their reason for assuming office - is it truly to help and support the local communities they purport to democratically represent ?

I'll put an update on the parking meter saga on site shortly (I'm tied up with other stuff including marking 79 scripts for the OU) but in brief:

- we have three information requests put to SCC under FOI and will escalate to the Information Commissioner if not met

- SCC officials have declined to answer (in two weeks, and with a reminder) a direct and civil question about whether the decision on TD High Street will be taken together with other Elmbridge pay and display proposals in Cabinet (100% Conservative) on 24 May, or whether, as we had been told earlier, they will be subject to first examination and recommendation in the Local Area Committee of 20 June before Executive decision.  The latter is the normal course for NEW proposed statutory orders (as with TD & WG) whereas in the rest of Surrey the decision relates to the conversion of EXISTING restricted parking bays to pay-and-display.  The question has now been added to the FOI requests.

- a petition is being raised along the High St to gain three minutes' speaking time at the Local Area Committee

- it is clear from FOI replies elsewhere (e.g. Oxted) that there was no proper business case made out before the proposals were put forward

- it is clear that the Elmbridge Conservatives are wholly complicit in the imposition of pay and display by the county and will simply aver that amendment to give an 'introductory free offer' of the first 30 minutes 'free' will 'take objections into account'

- it is also clear that the contract to buy pay and display machines is in train and expected to be signed before even the Cabinet meeting of 24 May: so much for 'consultation.'

SCC will review the newly-established P&D bays in 2012 and will impose additonal restrictions (read additional meters) where the bays have displaced parkers to adjacent areas.  So without a doubt, once established P&D bays will spread pretty much everywhere along with the associated traffic wardens etc.

http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/2091870_police_and_county_council_monitored_over_fois

SURREY County Council being monitored by Information Commissioner's Office (until 30 June)  to ensure they respond to requests for information within a reasonable time. Surrey are one of 16 authorities about which the ICO received six or more complaints concerning delay within a six month period.

I believe the debate tomorrow will be broadcast live on the Surrey County Council website. Any idea where the link will be? I can't find it.

Yellow lines etc are about to be implemented.  You can download the final maps here (each is a pdf file on the Surrey website, direct download link):


Claygate Lane, Summer Road, Queen's Road, Basingfield Road, Watts Road, Linden Close,  High Street,    Ashley Road,  Station Road, (http://surreycc.gov.uk/sccwebsite/sccwspublications.nsf/f2d920e015d1183d80256c670041a50b/be7a2bac9bb786c6802578f10043e645/$FILE/ELM_10_Review-%20Dittons1%20final.pdf)

Embercourt Road, Weston Green Road, Station Road, Speer Road, Old School Square,  St Leonards Road, Watts Road, Winters Bridge,  Angel Road (http://surreycc.gov.uk/sccwebsite/sccwspublications.nsf/f2d920e015d1183d80256c670041a50b/ce3451f4072b0aa2802578f10043f956/$FILE/ELM_10_Review-%20Dittons2%20final.pdf)

Ember Lane, Carleton Close, Weston Green Road (http://surreycc.gov.uk/sccwebsite/sccwspublications.nsf/f2d920e015d1183d80256c670041a50b/be13f5d0043281e9802578f1004406ec/$FILE/ELM_10_Review-%20Esher1%20final.pdf)

The Woodlands, Grove Way, Lower Green Road (http://surreycc.gov.uk/sccwebsite/sccwspublications.nsf/f2d920e015d1183d80256c670041a50b/7204cdf9bd98dd06802578f100441584/$FILE/ELM_10_Review-%20Esher2%20final.pdf)

"The next parking review is on the way..":  see this (http://www.surreycc.gov.uk/sccwebsite/sccwspages.nsf/LookupWebPagesByTITLE_RTF/Elmbridge+2011+Parking+Review?opendocument)

Surrey County Council have now dropped controversial plans for parking meters at various locations in Leatherhead, Ashtead and Bookham.

The attempt by the leadership to railroad through the pay and display policy has been an all-round disaster for them.  They are now stuck with £2million worth of parking meters, pre-ordered.    Council Leader Povey is now going to stand down, we're hearing - see home page headline.

And now the Cabinet member responsible for Surrey's Highways, Ian Lake, bites the dust.  Night of the Long Knives.   See home page and onward link.

Will Surrey residents be given the opportunity to vote for the new leader of Surrey County Council ?

Of course not!  Just a few in the party caucus have decided.  You get the chance to 'endorse' their decision in the next elections.

Meanwhile, the grapevine has it that Lake is being reappointed LOL.  So it seems the leadership struggle was more about personal power and political egos than issues.  Plus ca change...

http://www.elmbridgeguardian.co.uk/news/9299035.On_street_parking_charges_scrapped_in_shock_u_turn/

Nothing about the £2m contract to buy the meters, initiated before the result of the "consultation" was known.

But at least this benighted  policy has been defeated.  If only they actually asked people, and listened properly, before they embarked on policy-making this sort of wasteful, enervating, ghastly struggle could be avoided (cf also  NHS reforms, planning reforms, flogging off forests, &c &c &c)

Sorry I was posting on the wrong thread on this topic!

But yes shocking waste of money as our roads (in surrey) are still awful - so to see money that could be used elsewhere wasted on this proposal is galling to say the least.

Maybe they can flog them on e-bay or freegle them!!

Isn’t it a dream to drive through the High Street now the temp traffic lights are in place?  

Maybe it should be a permanent fixture, but stopping at each end.  It would stop the 'rat-run' people using TD as a short cut?!

I am amazed by the chaos of traffic in the village, I aviod like the plague ever since moving into the area, surely the heart of the village needs a heart and stop being subservient to the car?

I have always thought that by closing the High Street at weekends to traffic would improve the feel of the street, and would feel safer to walk etc, maybe the cafe and resturants could spill out onto the road, maybe a market each Saturday??

I do agree with one of the comments on this thread about the lack of use of the main car park, people seem to prefer on fighting into a space in the High Street.  I hate the feel of the High Street at the moment - and always have since moving into the area in 2001.  Why do people continue to park on the High Street when there is a brilliant car park less than 100m away?

I would love a permit for the car park and would be more than willing to a buy a year permit or something similar..

Traffic lights and close it at weekends for me..

Mark Ferris
19 Thistledene

As a TD resident you can buy an annual season ticket for Ashley Road car park for only £100 and park there any time.  If not a resident, the charge is £200 I believe. We managed to get rates halved to that last summer.  Contact Elmbridge Borough Council.

Many would sympathise with your view of the tyranny of the car, and that has been a running theme for the past fifty years here - see the potted history (http://residents-association.com/pdfs/consult.pdf) of the Residents' Association.   The ideas of a partial or whole pedestrianisation of the High Street, or making it one-way,  were among the many controversial things discussed extensively during the consultations of the past six years or more and especially 2007/8/9 culminating in the exposition by Surrey Highways in the Library.  But those who have their shops or businesses in, or live in, the High Street have been generally opposed to this.

The idea of a periodic market is being 'looked at.'

Personally I think the idea of stop lights at each end of the High Street is worth exploring.  But after we see the practical effects of the yellow lines which SCC are tardy in putting down - they will include two short 'passing places' in the High Street - see parking page (http://residents-association.com/news/parking.php), download pdf for High St proposals (http://residents-association.com/news/news_pdfs/Thames_Ditton_1.pdf) (the pay and display areas apart)

What do others think?

I gather from a Basingfield Road resident that Surrey's contractors last week installed just one post with the restrictive parking warning.  Residents have had no notification from Surrey of just when this will be enforced.

Meanwhile the yellow lines along Watts Road opposite the junction with Linden Close have been painted, and already the situation for two-way passing cars has improved a little.

Sorry to keep on mentioning it - but it is very shortsighted to just think about parking problems in the High Street and near to the village centre.  Any restrictions in this area will just push the parking problems further down Station Road (which is where I live - so this is very relevant to me!!!) in fact, this has started to happen already.  Now I get abuse when driving down Station Road,  - which is just not nice!!!  I am also fed up of seeing cars driving on the pavement down Station Road because they don't think there is room for them to get by the parked cars and are too impatient to wait.  The whole of Thames Ditton needs to be considered when parking is the issue - especially when we have a train station with access to Central London.  Are we the only place near to a station where there are no parking restrictions?   

I also agree with the one way system through the High Street - it just seems such an easy and cheap way to restrict traffic flow.  To help shops in the village centre there should be lots of parking bays on the High Street, with free parking for 30 mins maybe an hour.  The residents of the High Street should be given free parking permits for the very underused Ashley Car Park.  Shops would have more customers, the threat of abuse when driving through my village centre would be taken away and the rat run would be stopped.

What would be wrong with this plan? Simples as the advert says.

Sorry - just realised that in my SIMPLES post I should have said that the residents and the SHOP KEEPERS should have free parking in the underused car park.  There should also be free unloading areas for the shops as the shops are the lifeblood of the village.  

Now I've got going again I must say that I would love to shop in the village shops more - much more - but quite often I shop after I have been out somewhere, to Kingston, to work etc.  I know that if I try to stop off in the village on the way home there will be nowhere to stop quickly and pop in to get a paper, a cake, a card etc so ........ and this is the bit that annoys me ......... I drive to the nearest supermarket where I know I can park and buy stuff there, that won't be anywhere near as good as the things from the village.  If there was free, short stay, parking along the village High Street I would not hesitate to buy as much as I could from the village.  

Right - now I will stop with my rant.  

SIMPLES AS THE ADVERT SAYS

Alas we've been round this loop many times and everybody has differing views, all strongly held.

The argument that a solution is needed for the whole area leads to what many regard as unacceptable limitations.  The argument for a one-way street has been vigorously opposed both by retailers (who fear loss of half of what passing trade there is) and by residents who are opposed to much easing of traffic flow in the High Street on the old (and valid) argument that easing traffic flow results in more and faster traffic.

Your argument that partial solutions simply displace parking are well understood (by almost everybody) and that is why almost no partial solutions could find consensus either.  All that was adopted was a minimalist establishment of yellow lines at choke points i.e. where there is frequent and actual obstruction, and where in most cases white lines were being disregarded; and a partial solution for Basingfield Road which suffered from particularly severe problems and where it was felt that some commuter parking should be made more difficult.

There is no realistic prospect of getting free parking in the car park unless the village were to succeed in buying and managing it ourselves.  Who will volunteer the money and the time for that? - offers here please.  But we are looking again at the notion of a few free short-term bays in the High St.  That had found earlier support but Surrey put the kybosh on it with the pay and display demands.  It is one of the considerations that bays make us vulnerable to a resurgence of that in future.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying whether I agree or disagree with your points personally, just pointing out that we have been here before, extensively, and the arguments did not result in a 'Schimple!' solution at all, but in bitter division within the community.  It has been notable that many of those advocating residents' parking are those who would not be eligible for such parking as they have space for two or more cars on their own properties.

My own view after shadowing this for the past six years, attending meetings with Surrey Highways people, organising a meeting for business people, participating in a residents working group, reasearching the history of traffic management in Thames Ditton etc. is that removal of definite and repeated obstruction points is essential but that any other measures taken to restrict parking will have unfortunate knock-on or side effects - to the extent that changing the ecology of parking is difficult and risky and while individual residents may suffer inconveniences (as we all do) we should be very careful what we wish for.  I for one do not wish to live in the circumstances of many London boroughs where there is no free parking at all.  We would end up in future paying to park where we do freely park at present; with less parking overall; and with lines, posts, signs and wardens everywhere.

I think the idea of lines, parking meters and wardens taking over the whole of Thames Ditton is a bit of a red herring.  I also think that our current parking situation only benefits people who live outside of Thames Ditton.  I may be wrong, and I would certainly love to hear what other residents of Thames Ditton think, but, apart from the people who live in the High Street and the shop keepers, the only people who require long periods of parking in the main Thames Ditton roads are commuters.  Residents from Thames Ditton probably NEED short period parking availability.  I am thinking of residents wanting to shop locally, people transporting children to school, going to the library, going to the doctors, taking their dry cleaning in.  We don't need parking meters and bays to enable us to stop for a short time in the village, just a few signs.  We already have wardens inspecting the car park.  I wonder what the shop keepers would think of the one way system of road use - if it was off-set by loads of free parking spaces for their customers just outside of their shops.  Surely this would increase their profits not decrease them.  I can deeply sympathise with the people who live in the High Street not wanting cars to be able to go fast along their road, we all want that, but instead of this stopping a scheme which might help the traffic through the whole of Thames Ditton perhaps a solution of a one way system and  traffic calming measures  could be adopted.  I suppose I am going back to the same old thing again - you can't think of one road on its own - the whole village needs to be considered.  Of course, that might mean that I don't get all that I would like - but as I said before - life just is not fair is it!

I can now confirm that the yellow lines have literally just been applied to Station Road, Basingfield Road .....paint still wet!! Expect total pandemonium Monday morning.  ;D

I am all for the double yellow lines (wish they'd been extended a little further so I could get out of my drive more easily) but I don't quite understand why the double yellows have been put in the lay bay. What do SCC propose that this lay by be used for now?!

As an aside, I think that a lot of the parking congestion may well be caused by lazy Thames Ditton villagers who get some zzzzzz's and then drive from the river roads (and others) to the station.  I've clocked you!

If I recall correctly, Surrey's traffic people thought that the lay-by was part of a needed amelioration for school drop-offs/pickups: it is for the daily coaches from other schools but parents (either waiting for the coach, or parking there for the Junior and Infant Schools) and commuter parking were clogging it so that the coach had to stop in the carriageway, adding to the bedlam at those times.

It's a point to note that the 'lay by' was originally the bus stop for the 201 single decker. 

Just to show how bad the parking is now to how it was then, the 201 used to run through the village. I dread to think what would happen today if it was still running.

Midibob

I think the parking situation is getting better at the moment and now that more yellow lines have been painted this weekend I am hoping that it gets even better.  Having limited parking down Station Road means that commuters aren't certain of a place to park and I think it is putting people off.  Will certainly give it a chance.  I still wish we had restricted parking everywhere though, just restricted enough to stop all day parking, but would enable people to park outside the shops.  

We need to encourage people to stop and shop in Thames Ditton.  You know, just pop in on their way to and fro.  I know we have a car park, but being able to stop for a few minutes outside of the shops is just the best option and we need to support our shops.  So get rid of commuter cars and encourage shoppers from Thames Ditton and outside of Thames Ditton.  

The shops are the life of the village - commuters aren't!!!!!  SHOPPERS NOT STOPPERS - that's a great slogan!!!!!!!

Commuters are the life of the station though.  These arguments over parking keep going round in circles.  We have got some essential changes now.  Let's just get on with it.

Having become aware that one local resident (who likes to leave notes on people's cars (http://residents-association.com/forum/index.php?topic=535.0)) has THREE cars parked on the High Street I think commuters are receiving a bum rap. At least local office workers often buy their lunches locally and contribute to supporting our shops and pubs with their trade.

yup thats the fellow, he does love to have all his cars parked around him too I've noticed, I think he has convinced himself they are classic, they arent!  I find it embarassing.

hmmm - 'classic' cars parked on summer road nr the swan / red lion?

I've not seen many. 

There was a lovely old porsche I saw occasionally (on the island car park) but the owner was a numpty and let that beauty go... 

;)


Other than that I have seen a nice capri (though slightly dubious interior) and a lovely red Elan.

Its not the Elan is it?

I consider that car to be a classic!!! but then again I am admitedly biased for Lotus cars 

ha, my brothers friend now owns that one and yes, i do regret selling it!

none of the above, think 3 pointed star

Ah ok thats ok then!

I really do like that red Elan I see sometimes parked next to the Red Lion!

cheap as chips now, I had one for the weekend once, has a weird grey hardtop sometimes that one I think.

yeah the hard top does not look that great on it but its a lovely looking car

a great drive too although that might be based on nostalgia rather than fact

Hi Everyone

I do agree that people working in Thames Ditton spend valuable money in our shops but I do think that we, the residents, are a more lucrative prospect and also our needs should be put first.  As was anticipated, the new yellow lines have pushed all the parking problems to the area around the Station, that have been left out of the yellow line deal.  As I am one of those residents who now gets angry drivers scraping their cars past mine, when I drive down the road that I live in ( - ie Station Road)  and can't get in and out of my drive safely - I don't think that the system is "finished" yet and hope that it will definitely need to be reviewed asap.  The very worst thing about it so far, was yesterday, when I was walking back from the doctors,  the cars did not have enough room to go around the large puddles at the side of Station Road.  They had no option now that half the road is taken up with parked cars,  but to drive through the dirty puddles  and I got heavily splashed by dirty puddle water.  It is also frightening walking down Station Road now, because some of the cars virtually drive on the pavement, on the side of the road where cars have weirdly decided not to park on.  As this is the side of the road where my house is, this is the side of the road I walk on.  Very scary now.

I think that Station Road, if not the High Street as well, should have restricted parking times  - then for most of the day the road would be much better than it is now.

I really feel for you, terrible situation. This same debate is raging on the about Thames ditton Facebook page. I will point the particularly aggrieved residents here too

Hi
Will search out the Facebook page - thanks for that info.

What is the Facebook page called - I did try and find it but couldn't.  Many thanks.

I know I am somewhat biased in my opinion, and I know this is not going to be very popular, but I think it should be left well alone. 

The people that drive around TD do so for a very good reason, whether its to shop, commute, pick up, reside etc... the vast majority are not going to stop driving just because you put down a few extra lines. All that happens is the same amount of cars get pushed to the outskirts without restrictions, and instead of a few cars distributed all over the place - you get lots of cars congregated all in the same areas. When this occurs the reaction is then to put in more lines and the cycle continues over and over until you reach a tipping point, at which the driver is not prepared to walk from where they can park and will stop coming, instead finding somewhere easier (or cheaper).

Whilst some argue this is a good thing, the house prices in TD, and the viability of the Station rely on access to London and those that commute. Remove the commuters and you reduce the viability of the Station - if this fails TD would be hit very hard.

The Thames Ditton Residents page is here: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002210310804&sk=wall  but I think Craig meant the About Thames Ditton magazine's Facebook offshoot.

With Twitter too, there are rather too many sources of noise!  

I cant cope with twitter, its like someone shouting in your face all day

commuterparker: after following this issue for six years here, and shadowing the Surrey engineers, and writing up the fifty years of history of traffic and parking contortions in the village, I am with you on this.  Everybody has their own idea.  Most are based on their own individual situation/advantage.  But it is very dangerous to tinker with the ecology of parking, as there are inevitably side-effects, often unforeseen, and often they are worse than the existing situation.

Most of the yellow lines just put down are to sort out a few choke points where real (i.e. actionable) obstruction was happening occasionally or (as at the bend by the George) there was serious congestion at rush hour regularly.  But some of the yellows were for what seem to be marginal theories or regulations by Surrey's engineers.  The fairly minimal new arrangements have caused mingled cries of joy and anguish, as witness the threads here.  I strongly urge villagers to let things settle down before embarking yet again on other upheavals that might serve some better, but others worse.

I tend to find the same!

We looked at (and have) a Twitter page as well as Facebook pages but in the end, decided that this site and forum were the best place to put it all together and so that's what I concentrate on, while when they are used the social media reflect back here for the real and full stories and comments by thinking residents.  There might be future exceptions e.g. in fast-moving situations as for the last pay-and-display protests (where there was confusion and inaccuracy on others' Facebook pages) where we might amplify on Facebook.

One thing that strikes me strongly is how ephemeral the social media are; whereas here one can search back for earlier substantive material

its just a new way of looking at things and for certain products or situations it has its merits.

I think one has to find its level and what works. I totally agree that this site works far better than a fb version would as it needs substance and longevity but equally I think thats why the facebook site works better for About Thames Ditton because its about more immediate things/offers businesses might have etc.

I use both for my motorsport business and for different clients different things appeal. Twitter I just dont get really, its like someone text messaging you every 5 seconds but that said, some people like it.

As these newer and more "evolved" types of social media infiltrate us it can become easy to fall into the trap of covering everything which leads to meltdown sometimes.

I vaguely remember a report saying that children now, are able to cope with processing many more things at once because they are handling text messages, computer games, facebook, twitter, other child based social media, email, all at once..BUT, as a result, their attention span is greatly reduced.

I find I can just about cope wth the 2 or 3 forums Im active on, facebook for my business and email, oh, and er work! (but my work is quite sporadic!)

Hi Everyone

Yes I do agree Admin, that we ought to wait and see what happens for a bit, because things do need time to settle down.  But I also thing that it is important to tell "the powers that be" that we rely on, to represent us, that all is not well.  Sometimes people keep quiet and hope that things go away and when they don't, everyone around them is surprised because they had no idea that anything was wrong!!!! So I think we should keep on posting our "problems" where we can,  even though we are still giving the problems time to sort themselves out.

I do think that "commuters" view that Thames Ditton would suffer if people didn't drive to our village to get the train is not right.  Trains still stop at all the villages and towns that have clamped down very hard on all day, commuter parking.  If we clamped down very hard on all day commuter parking trains would still stop here.  In fact we have "an ace up our sleeve" and it's called HAMPTON COURT PALACE.  Luckily for us, that wonderful visitor attraction is at the end of our line and we benefit from the fact that visitors get the train to go there!  

Maybe stopping commuters parking their cars would be an incentive for them to get a bus here - these increased bus users would go towards a better bus service for the village which would be GREAT!!!!!!!

I think all social media is great - the only problem is trying to keep up.  Not easy when you are older!!!

But if you are wrong, and given that a significant percentage of season tickets are from this source, then we might see Network Rail/ SW Trains in a year or two thinking: "Well, we have now invested in the new station at Hampton Court, and season ticket sales from Thames Ditton have dropped significantly since the residents stopped people parking there, and it costs more in maintenance and staffing than ticket sales, so let's close it and they can use Hampton Court station or Esher, which are within walking distance."

Also, as I've mentioned before, there would be knock-on effects like:  people prevented from parking near the station will discover the Library car park within five minutes walk of it.  To stop the parking there, parking controls will have to be established in that car park, with knock-on effects for the Library, the school, and the Hall....  Parkers shifted from there will flow elsewhere, and eventually we will have parking controls, posts, markings, meters and wardens over the whole village.  If that is what a clear majority of villagers want, so be it....

On the basis that the parking is just as bad if not worse at the weekend, and that quite a few of the cars you mention are there over night tends to suggest it is not mainly commuters that are the problem. 

If you recall a few years ago Surbiton clamped down on parkers and it pushed the parking further out towards Long Ditton and Thames Ditton - unfortunatly for TD it is sat at the edge of Zone 6, i.e the furthest you can go on a normal travelcard. So anyone that drives is as far out as they are probabaly prepared to go and as such will stick around here at pretty much all costs. Any more restrictions will just push people into the area around Thistledene or out towards Ember Court - areas largely unaffected at present.

There is a bus service, and its dire, and it goes past HC, so chances are people would get off there and not come through TD. Anyway this service is run by EBC and its not free for those with a travelcard (like me), and its slow, and the times are all wrong so there is no incentive to use it. To be honest if all those things were resolved I still would not use it as it would still be quicker to park anywhere in TD and walk than get the bus.

Every time Surrey mess with the parking, there's less parking.  I say we are better off if we don't ask them to do anything more!  Look at the mess they've made of even the yellow lines that they've put down.

I would like to see drivers and parkers show more consideration.  I see lots of drivers on their mobiles and cars parked obstructively.

you dont have 3 mercedes do you?  ;)

Definitely not!  Nor even one....  They are like Jags used to be as far as taste goes.....

ah its not you then! with the "FAIR PARKING" notes

Well, lets give it a chance BUT if any resident has problems or concerns about it we must not keep quiet or let it be swept under the carpet because our concerns are more important than people who want to park all day for free.  The question we must ask is, why are commuters parking in Thames Ditton - and the answer is, because everywhere else has had the common sense to stop all day free parking.  

Why are we not as "switched on" as everywhere around us?  We should not be the free parking zone for the whole area - that is madness.  I have to pay to park when I go anywhere - so why can't people pay here?  

I think that the amount of people who live in Thames Ditton, who commute by train, are enough for us not to have any worry about the drop in numbers if people are put off from parking in Thames Ditton when they have to pay.  If we have to have wardens, parking meters etc - well that is what happens elsewhere so we should all be used to that in this day and age!!!!

It would be nice if the "powers that be" choose to support its residents and choose not to support people who don't live in the area and just use our community for a FREE CAR PARK!!!

I think it's very refreshing that there are no fees for parking on the street in Thames Ditton.  In some ways, we are a lot more 'switched on' than some of the surrounding boroughs.  

Parking fees/ Residents Parking is not the be all and end all, especially when councils use it as a back door measure for raising revenue.  It doesn't actually increase the number of overall spaces either, but usually decreases them.  It was brought in in my road when I lived in Kingston, and made no difference to the overall parking problem, since it was actually the residents causing the parking problem!  All it did was to ensure that everyone had to pay an ever increasing amount for a permit.  Everyone likes to blame commuters etc, but in actual fact, the vast majority of cars parked in Thames Ditton belong to residents.

As others have said, be careful what you wish for.

I agree with Rhodrich.  Some commuter parking may be affecting Station Road and therefore mg's interests, but there's a great deal of other all-day parking around the village which is residents, islanders, workers and shop assistants in the village and so on.  I bet the 'commuter parking for the station' is just a small proportion of it.  If parking controls spread there will be a lot of grief all round, not just the minority of commuters.  There will be less and less parking if yellow lines spread, with obvious results.

Of course residents should raise concerns, and thanks for this forum where we can and do raise them.  It's what it's for, isn't it?  I do get a bit tired of people raising the old old arguments though, which have been gone over time and time again and where just as many people disagree as agree, just because their ideas were not agreed with the first time.    What the 'powers that be' whoever they are should be interested in is the changes in parking that are resulting from the changes in controls they have just put in place.  As far as I can see, there are just as many people who don't like them as whodo  like them!

usually the people who are wishing for parking controls are the ones who won't be affected by them - the ones with plenty of parking at their house!

Correct

Hi Everyone

I certainly would not want residents parking - I too lived in Kingston and it was awful when they introduced it!  I think, if you come down Station Road at the weekend, the road is usually free from parked cars.  So it really is commuter parking that is causing the problem.  I have no problem with people driving their cars, I rely on mine as I have an illness which makes driving essential, but I would not expect, in this day and age, to be able to park for free.  

If you go on the  About Thames Ditton Facebook  page  (we all seem computer literate on this site) you can see that other people in Thames Ditton are suffering like I am.  It is awful!  There is not room for three cars side, by side, down Station Road.  The commuter car parked near my house today got a massive dent in it - because drivers are just scraping by.  The other problem for the people down Station Road and maybe other roads, is the fact that people are having to drive on the pavement when they can't get by the cars that are parked.  This was the main problem on Watts Road - now it is happening on Station Road.  That is so dangerous.  

So, people should be able to drive - I would not be able to funtion in this world if I didn't, but this present situation is not good enough for the residents of many roads in Thames Ditton.  I hope it all sorts itself out and the problem goes away - but I am sure none of you will  mind if the people who are getting upset about this situation keep on saying so, and saying it loudly.  You don't have to read what we have written.  LOL!!!!!!

Then you are the minority. Look at what happened to Surrey with pay and display - and the recent rebellion in Westminster about weekend charges, people have swithched on about being penalised to park and being nothing but a source of revenue.

I think the opposite is true - more and more people feel parking is a right as a driver, a right that should be free and where it currently is will be fought for.

totally agree, we pay enough in taxes on fuel, VED and vat on anything we buy for our cars, why should we also have to pay to park them?

I can understand in very busy towns and cities where there is simply nowhere to go and too many cars, but ultimately we have pretty much enough space here

Ten years ago many in Elmbridge were nodding their heads to the slogan "the parker pays".  That led among other things to charges being levied in the thitherto free village car parks - and the effect on Thames Ditton (and Molesey) was instant, damaging and enduring. 

With councils stipulating that parking controls must be enforceable  and enforced, and requiring them to be funded from fees and fines, not to mention the attractions to them of raising revenue well beyond that (which has led to the fiascos mentioned above), it is doubly dangerous to push for more parking controls.  Once established, they will never be removed.  The overall effect is to reduce the amount of parking overall.  And we end up paying to park in order to pay wardens to make us pay to park, where before we parked freely without having to support the costly admin of that.

Equally, freeing up points where traffic is slow-moving in rush hours will generally have only temporary effects, as first, traffic goes faster (witness someone's comment about pedestrians needing to be more careful crossing in the High St since the yellows went down); and then, more drivers are drawn to using the route.

Matters of real and persistent obstruction (as contrasted with congestion) are of a different order.  If a bus or a fire engine or refuse truck can't get through, that has to be addressed.

they've painted dble yellows through the layby near the station too I see

See above for explanation of SCC thinking already given: http://residents-association.com/forum/index.php?topic=204.msg5722#msg5722

It does look rather odd though!  A resident thinks we should have a competition to find the best use for this lay-by.  I suggest it is used for the subbies to practise painting yellow lines until they can do a decent job.  The ones round and about that they have just put down are horrible - wrong colour and thickness  in conservation area;  not even parallel e.g. round the octagon; daubed on splotchwise; painted over existing solid white hatched areas.

A(nother) dog's breakfast.  And another reason to be careful when asking Surrey to actually DO anything by way of change....?!.

I drove through the village yesterday and to me it looks ruined by all these lines, i know they will fade a bit but it was so picturesque without them

For a joke I'd like to set up a facade, Dom Joly style as a prestige car lot, put 2 decent cars in there with for sale signs, a little hut.

Would be worth the fines

Going around with the camera makes me look carefully at things we just pass by.  And when I get the photos on screen for processing at full resolution, the things I notice constantly that spoil almost every scene are: parked cars, and road signs.  (As if anybody pays attention to the latter - but there is always the cry "put another / a bigger sign up....")

I was talking about this with someone I know who still works there and we were having a joke about this. Here is a challenge, list a scheme SCC has put in recently without fault - I cant

- Yellow lines, painted all wrong
- Street lights, wrong,
- Surface dressing, missed massive areas because of parked cars, wrong
- Hampton Court cycle route, massive problems had to be redesigned, wrong
- filling pot holes, wrong

And this one makes me chuckle (I am sad I know) - new 'host County' signs at the entry points to the Borough for the Olympics are wrong (County spelt with a small c) - you would think they would have checked wouldn't you.

I am sure there are many more.

Completely agree.  Thames Ditton has just made another retrograde step towards bland suburbia with these lines.  What a mess!

There's a school of thought that I subscribe to that says that  the less signs and lines there are, the more carefully people will drive and park too, as people have to be more aware their surroundings, rather than relying on the signs and lines to guide them.     The railings near the station are also a waste of time.  Do they stop people crossing the road via the roundabout in the middle of the road?  No.  Do they mean that if someone crosses in the wrong place, they find it harder to get onto the pavement, and are therefore stuck on the carriageway?  Yes.    

There was a study done that found that on average, people drove more slowly and carefully in villages without 30 signs than ones with them

I think the Open Meeting on Tuesday evening might be lively.  Which is good.  I suggest that residents with a particular interest in the recent parking changes should try to come.  Always on this subject, if it is raised, there will be strong representations from residents with some particular interest, and those with other, sometimes opposing, interests might consider the risk of being under-represented.  

It was noteworthy that at a well-attended Open Meeting last night, in the immediate aftermath of the new yellow lines, no residents attending raised any matter of further parking controls, nor was there criticism of the yellow lines, Peter in his report to the meeting having commented that some liked them, others not.

This is a further sign, I think, that after several years of great effort in consultation, both by the Association and then by Surrey, in which every conceivable suggestion was examined and found to be contentious and vigorously opposed by substantial groups of residents or local businesses, there is overall acceptance of Surrey's minimalist proposals now implemented for  yellows at previous choke points, and little appetite for further change at this moment.

Nobody is entirely satisfied.  It is open to residents with specific ideas to take these up with Surrey Highways in the normal process of seeking modification of traffic and parking controls (engineer visits; local residents sounded out; proposal formalised; statutory consultation of all residents in the road affected begins; Local Area Committee finally approves/rejects/modifies).   Where there appears to be general agreement among residents/businesses, the Association will support.  

Yellow lines are an excellent improvement.

Would anyone like to see less or wider bumps on Station Road?

Why would anyone want wider bumps?

They are less anoying to drive over, less rocky

generally the bumps are as they are to allow emergency vehicles and buses over without hitting them. Wider ones wouldnt perform in the same way.

2 schools of thought on them

- They stop it becoming a rat run and do slow people down
- they are ugly and cause untold amounts of damage to cars and surrounding buildings

I dont like them because they cost me a lot of money every year in car maintenance

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/9091602/Motorists-hit-by-parking-bay-squeeze.html

More to make you think twice before allowing councils to get more control over parking.....

Just seen a notice attached to a lamp post in Alexandra road about the next stage of the consulation on the variuos highways proposals for TD.

having looked at the Surrey website (search Elmbridge Parking review 2011 - will give you the right results) there are a few more proposals being put forward.  Haven't looked at them all yet but know the proposals at junction of Summer Road and Alexandra Road (which directly impact on me) are out of all proportion to need and will remove 4-5 parking spaces from somewhere that suffers from underprovision already.

Have objected and advised Peter Hickman of my objection.  

Just had another look.  Roads affected:

Summer Rd / Alexandra Road
Winters Road
Aragon Avenue
Station Road
Angel Road.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/council-parking-attendants-5-8-043619156.html

"Councils have increased their number of parking attendants by nearly 6% since 2008.

At the same time, 17% of local authorities have reduced the amount of free parking in their areas, figures from LV car insurance showed. The statistics, obtained under a Freedom of Information request, showed that 10% of councils have increased the number of parking attendants on duty by 20% or more.

In the past 12 months, 10% of drivers have been hit with parking fines, with offenders forking out £340 million"

I saw someone with a 4 x 4 getting nailed stopping at the Octagon to buy flowers a couple of days  ago.

I know people should be using the car park but the reality is, they just zip in and out of the shops on a whim and measures such as this will stop people using our high street.

Surrey:  Item 10 - "Operation of Civil Parking Enforcement in Surrey" Environment and Transport Select Committee meeting to be held on 19/09/2012

...will consider this document on enforcement (http://online.surreycc.gov.uk/legcom/CouncilP.nsf/f5fb086c73d64f3000256954004aed25/3b04c8088b9740fb80257a77004fc95f/$File//Item%2010%20-%20Operation%20of%20Civil%20Parking%20Enforcement%20in%20Surrey.pdf) of parking controls.

I see that Elmbridge, which showed a profit of £38,975 for Surrey's enforcement of on-street parking controls, is expected to opt for private agencies in the new agreements for enforcement.

It was my understanding that Thames Village was going to get more yellow lines, which I thought was a great idea as the public car parks were not used very much.

In the recent Surrey cc. Pdf that admin has posted here, the work doesn't seem to be quite completed, especially on
Dwgs.3282.  - do the council intend to complete the works ie the red lines on station

This corner is critical on entering the village and during rush hour

The lines on Station Road were rejected, following a consultation of the local residents who were not in favour of them (19 responses against, only 1 for).  See thread here:

http://residents-association.com/forum/index.php?topic=559.msg8590#msg8590

Yes, I have reviewed the thread and sensed that in fact the majority did want the lines, so perhaps members can address especially station road residents. Loss 4 or 5 spaces will have a great impact at rush hour.

I'm fairly new to the area, I have not seen any parking wardens in the village yet, are they out there? 

Elmbridge tories increase car park charges by *50%*

http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/2131554_car_park_charges_going_up_in_elmbridge