Here's the zoomed in map of Kingsdown. The church between the 50.4 and the 40.5 zones is the one at the top of St Michael's Hill, the curving road to the right of it is Cotham Road. The church above the 51.7% zone is St Matthews, on Cotham side. Below the 50.4-51.7 section is a 50% vote zone, which includes Alfred Place and Henrietta Street. According to this ward-by-ward map none of these areas voted for it.
While we've all be analysing our copy of the map, round the city, the Evening Post gets an official briefing, which it sticks up online at some point during the day. And this is where it gets interesting.
When the EP article went up it listed the roads and the hours of this zone. It said weekdays, 9-5 and listed the streets.
Cotham Road, St Michael's Hill, Highbury Villas, StThat's an interesting list, because all the roads listed in bold are not actually in the zones that voted over 50% for it. Alfred Place and Henrietta street are in an area that came in at exactly 50%, but if they were left out you'd have a free to park zone between the central CPZ and new ones. As for Cotham Road, well, when the council did what pretends to be pedestrian safety improvements a few years back, they pretty much marked it out ready for a CPZ. Its time has arrived.
Michael's Park, Little Paul Street, Alfred Place, Marlborough Hill,
Portland Street, Cotham Road South, Cotham Side, St Matthew's Road,
Kingsdown Parade, Kingsdown Parade Back, Somerset Street, Dove Street,
Henrietta Street, Clevedon Terrace.
Polling someone who lives in one of those fringe streets, they seemed fairly happy, primarily because of the 9-5 weekday hours rather than 7x24 they were were told they'd get. That and the limited number of free tickets mean some visitors can be handled, though the number is limited enough you don't want to resell them at a profit. Because the hours start at 9, it will make school dropoffs better. No commuters, you park near the school, then get home. Excellent!
Anyway. It gets more interesting. If you go to the Evening Post article now, it doesn't list the streets or the hours. It says
Sometime between 1800 and 2200 on Friday, the story changed. The specifics on streets -more than just the areas with over 50% of responses positive- and the the hours -less than orginally demanded- vanished. Why? Were the results of the second community consultation accidentally published before that consultation took place?
Kingsdown and Brandon Hill were two of the areas with the most positive feedback – more than 50 per cent in both cases.
These areas are now set to have further public consultation as to the exact proposals: which roads the zone would extend to, hours of operation and so on.
Furthermore is it ethical for a newspaper to change its stories without noting it? The New York Times does.