CPZ consultation  QUICK Points 

How to Respond to the Consultation: Key Points for Opponents

General Tips

• Stay polite and constructive, but be clear about your opposition.

• Use "Not at all" or "Other" where appropriate to show disagreement.

• Use comment boxes to explain your reasons, especially where no suitable tick-box option is given.

• If a question forces a choice you don’t agree with, say so clearly in the comments (e.g. “ Question [number] does not give me an option to oppose the scheme”).

Introductory Questions

• Email (online only)

• Why you are taking part
  (Note this only applies to the street you are responding for. If you are responding for where you live but also have a school your children go to, or you work in a different location in Greenwich Q10 invites you to add comments there or says "You are welcome to submit another survey regarding another map.")

On the Map and Listening Phase (Q1 & Q2)

• The maps were finalised before consultation began – no changes reflect public input.

• Many questions don’t allow you to say “no”, making previous results misleading.

• State: “This consultation is not a fair or valid reflection of community views.”

On Cycling Proposals (Q3 & Q4)

• The hill is too steep for most residents to cycle — it’s impractical except for the super-fit.

• None of the cycle schemes are planned for [my street] anyway.

• If forced to choose one, make sure to say:
  “This area is not suitable for cycle schemes – please discount my answer to Q4.” in Q3 or Q10

On Controlled Parking (Q5–Q7)

• There’s no parking problem to solve – in [Our Street] there is enough space even on busy evenings .

• No commuter parking, no safety concerns (0 recorded collisions in 25+ years) and no problem of access.

• CPZ would halve parking, with no benefit, just higher costs and social isolation for elderly and disabled residents.

• Say: “[Our street] does not meet the conditions for CPZ under national guidance.” unless you have major non-resident parking, a bad accident record or emergency services (or similar) have access problems

On Sustainability Claims (Q8)

• Disagree: “Not at all”

• Point out:
  “Vehicle use won’t reduce – instead people will have to switch to taxis or getting things delivered. For many, walking or cycling isn’t an option due to the hill.”
  
  

On the Consultation Process (Q9)

• Say: “The questionnaire is biased and poorly designed.”

• Explain:

  • Key questions don’t allow opposition or room for comments.

  • Some are mandatory, forcing people to answer in ways that don’t reflect their views.

  • It feels designed to exclude or frustrate those who disagree with the scheme.

Additional Comments (Q10)

• Maps lack a proper key – people may not realise yellow lines = loss of parking.

• The plan seems drawn up without visiting the streets.

• Green colours used on the map for resident and meter parking are greenwashing – designed to mislead.

• “This will cause neighbour disputes, not solve problems.”

Ease of Use (Q11 & Q12)

• Choose: Very difficult

• Suggest:

  • Include neutral and opposing options in every question.

  • Make as few questions mandatory.

  • Provide clear maps, with full keys 

  • Provide a list of streets with a clickable link to the the relevant map(s).

  • Let people comment freely in every section.

“More About You” Section

• Fill in as much or as little as you're comfortable with.

• No need to provide full details if you prefer not to.