Is HOP being ripped off by TfL?

I have done a rudimentary Google maps search and plotted the average distance from Lewisham Train station to the following stations in Zone 1: London Bridge, Charing Cross, Kings Cross, Baker St, Paddington and Victoria. I also threw in Charing Cross as I seem to remember that the station there is regarded as the centre of London for some purposes.

The average distance is 6.7 miles. The station is in zone 2.

Using the same methods with Honor Oak Park, the average distance is 6.6 miles, yet it is in Zone 3.

There is a distinct swerve up in the zone on the map so as to include HOP in zone 3:

image970×617 96.7 KB

Does anyone else agree that HOP should be in zones 2&3? It would be fair and save residents a fortune.

I have yet to do the distance checking thing for other places, but I bet Stratford International (Zone 2&3) is even further away than 6.6 miles… and other places too.

I have a plan to get this on the agenda at TfL if there is support for this. What do you all think?

I could be wrong, but I seem to remember that when I first moved here, Honor Oak Park was designated as “Zone 2/3”, which meant cheaper fares each way. Can anyone else remember this better?

That’s really interesting, @Paul_Hyu - good investigating! I’d obv enthusiastically support your efforts to get this changed - why would we NOT want to be in Zone 2?!

From wikipedia:

zone 2 was created on 22 May 1983 and extends from approximately 2 to 5 miles (3 to 8 km) from Piccadilly Circus.

This is interesting because East Putney is 8.2 miles from Piccadilly Circus. Zone 2&3

HOP is 6.7 miles to same location. Zone 3!

I have nothing against East Putney (though I bet more decision-makers there than in HOP), but it’s simply a question of fairness. Either put it and other further-out places in zone 3 or pull HOP into zone 2. Zone 2&3 would equally serve.

It’s a simple argument of fairness, which I will make to our MP and to the board of TfL.

HOP and it’s residents are being treated unfairly.

A petition would be something to start with. How does one do this?

Absolutely add it to the list! I’ve lived in HOP most of my life and with the station only being 3 stops from LB, makes sense for it to be in zone 2/3 as it’s only 5.4 miles.

I moved here in 2005 and I think it was Zone 3 then (no Overground then of course, just the train - think I had a zone 1-4 travelcard as I don’t think they did 1-3 then, but that last part might be wrong…)

I’d be delighted if it was a 2/3 but it seems like it might be difficult - good luck @Paul_Hyu

This might be of interest

It should definitely be a zone 2/3 boundary station.

I’d support a zone 2/3 reclassification. Makes up for not being Forest Hill.

(ducks and hides)

The relevant info from the FoI request is:

In instances of new stations or changing existing stations there is no
fixed approach. Essentially the operator of the station concerned decides
in the first instance, having regard to the expected revenue impacts and
the zones(s) in which nearby stations are located. The proposal must then
be agreed by the train operators and the Department for Transport.

This means it might take time but it’s not impossible, not unprecedented and I think we have a very good chance of success, based on fairness. The main hurdle is the fact that the savings for residents equals a loss to the station. But this is so palpably unfair that anyone could easily make the argument and it would take a hard politician to deny it.

Might make up for having to go to a different station to buy certain tickets when the ticket office closes. TfL can use any savings to reduce ticket prices - everybody’s happy (apart from people living on local roads which suddenly become a major car park for zone 3 commuters).

I usually drive to work near Honor Oak Park station. I work unsociable hours and the journey back to zone 5 and beyond is a pain late at night. It’s slightly cheaper for me to drive as well. I am aware that this does nothing for my environmental credentials and I have thought about using public transport both for environmental reasons and for saving wear and tear on my elderly car. A move to zone 2 would leave me resolved to continue driving but 2/3 and I might reconsider.

Come 2022, I’ll have my 60+ travel card when I’ll forego comfort to save money.

By 2020 don’t you need to be 65?

The freedom pass kicks in at 65, I understand. But there’s a 60+ travelcard that Boris (spit) introduced and for a small fee you get the same concessions in London that over 65s get. Maybe that’s changed since I last looked into it.

A quick look at TFL tells me that this is still the case.

What gratitude…

Am sure it is revenue that is behind the fare zones. On this basis it is not a runner IMO to compare wee HOP with the mighty interchanges that are Lewisham and Stratford. The passenger volumes there are such that operators will have been happy for TfL to band them in zone 2, to improve their usefulness as an interchange, as the number of sales this generates would make up for the lower price. Am sure you can find other examples though and the idea does sound attractive. So let’s consider some possible consequences:

1. Fares to central London would be 80p per day cheaper;
2. The cachet of being in zone 2 would not be lost on Estate Agents, house prices would go up;
3. As a result of 2, there would be more developer interest in Honor Oak so more development, residential and commercial;
4. As a result of 3, business rates would increase and so would lease values so more pressure on small businesses;
5. As a result of 3, more people would be living in the area;
6. As a result of 1 & 5 more people would be using HOP station;
7. As a result of 6, more congestion on the Overground, less likely to be able to board a train in the morning (a bit like Brockley);
8. As a result of 6, more Park and Ride and so even less chance of getting a parking space.

A case of be careful what you wish for?

You could argue that a lot of these things will happen anyway but if we were to lobby TfL about priorities for the area, I would prefer getting a more accessible platform 1 and improving the local transport links to mitigate the Park and Ride problem.

TfL issue a Freedom Pass to 60+ residents. It costs £20 for the original card issue and you have to pay for replacements caused by loss or damage.

Works on almost everything except isolated routes and at certain times eg you still have to pay for a morning rush hour trip on train from Forest Hill to LBG up until 9:30am. Not that this constraint makes any sense of course.

Whether Lewisham is a big hub for numbers is irrelevant when you take the example of East Putney being in Zone 2&3. EP is over 8 miles from the “centre” and nearly 2 miles further away from it than HOP. That will be the basis of the argument, the point being exacerbated by the fact that Lewisham, further away also, is also Zone 2 and there is a contrived and visible swerve to include HOP in 3.

Make HOP 2&3 just like East Putney!

I stand corrected. Thank you.

Love this idea.

It’s a tough go. When I lived in Kennington I was part of a campaign to reclassify Kennington Station from zone 2 to zone 1 or 1/2. It made sense. It’s one stop south of Waterloo. And where the Northern line branched to the City and Charging Cross.

Lots of general agreements on this plan all round. Nothing came of it.

So good luck.

It can be done - but needs local Government input. For example, Mayor of Newman and role with rezoning of Stratford High Street, Stratford International DLR station, West Ham, Canning Town, Star Lane and Abbey Road etc. Agree with sentiment - however suspect depends on political agenda / plus risk of increase in use of station etc.

Please bear in mind that the map you are saying this about is diagrammatic. There is a geographically accurate version here:

Note how close to zone 1 East Putney is. If you just use Charing Cross as the centre then most of North London is in a contrived zone and am sure revenue drives that too.

This is a very good point. Shouldn’t the logical argument for zone definition be about distance be ‘distance to zone 1’? (I’ll admit it could also be about ‘cost to Tfl to zone 1’ or ‘track miles to zone 1’ etc).

I don’t use Charing Cross as the centre of London personally!

It happens that the zones were originally measured as being from Piccadilly Circus (aka very close to Charing Cross) and they mostly haven’t changed since that original random decision was made in the early 80s. London uses it!

It’s about time that was challenged for HOP, especially given its distance from the City, which arguably should be considered the central point.

I think the mid point between Bank and Charing Cross should be taken as the mid point of London, making it approx Blackfriars, by which distance HOP is 5.9 miles and East Putney 6.7 miles.

The disparity is as big as the unfairness.

East Putney to zone 1 (@Earls Court) = 4.29 miles
HOP to zone 1 (@ London Bridge) direct = 4.75 miles

Data sources:

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/timetabling/electronic-national-rail-timetable/

I suspect it’s a lot more to do with load and demand than it is to do with physical proximity to a random spot in “the centre” of London.

Are you sure?
I did some measuring on Google Maps and the distance from Piccadilly Circus to Honor Oak Park is 5.6 miles and the distance from Piccadilly Circus to East Putney is 4.8 miles.
Stratford is closer to Piccadilly than HOP, but this is an exception rather than the rule. It looks to me like HOP is reasonably positioned in zone 3.

I can’t see why it should be. Isn’t it supposed to be run for the benefit of users? Why should one person be charged more just because others want to make a similar journey? It’s no more expensive to provide that service.

It’s all about the revenue peeps! Witness what happened with Shoreditch High Street:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/mindthegap/2010/04/the_curious_case_of_moving_sho.html

You are right. I was using the walking measurement on my phone app to get a rough distance, but the crow flying distance tool on the PC shows you to be right! This makes a difference to the argument of the center being the arbitrary Picadilly Circus but still holds up compared to Lewisham, which is 6.08 miles from Piccadilly Circus and in Zone 2&3 whereas HOP to Piccadilly Circus is 5.72 miles out and in Zone 3.

However, I think the nuanced argument is as follows:

I think it would be fair today to categorise The City and the West End equally as the twin centres of Central London and hence I have taken Blackfriars, being as it is the midwaypoint between Picadilly Circus and Bank as the crow flies to make my following case.

The distance to Blackfriars as the crow flies (not walking) from Honor Oak Park is 4.93 miles. Zone 3.

The distance to Blackfriars as the crow flies (not walking) from East Putney is 5.89 miles. Zones 2&3.

Or to make the differences more stark, we could put it this way: The banker working in the city traveling from East Putney to Bank pays £131 x 12 = £1572 per annum to travel 6.45 miles - yet your banker constituents, traveling from Honor Oak Park to the exact same station pay £153.60 x 12 = £1843.20 per annum to travel only 4.77 miles - a shorter distance by 73%, yet paying £271.20 more per year. SE London bankers pay 17.25% more to travel 27% less far than SW London bankers!

I have some sympathy with your argument but please try to avoid the reverse snobbery…

The vast majority of people that work in and around Blackfriars are not bankers. Working for or in a bank does not necessarily make you a banker.

Of course it is for the benefit of the users, but the TfL network isn’t one fluffy vanilla thing that is the same everywhere. The job of managing different levels of demand throughout the whole network has to be enormously challenging. They have a limited budget and have to decide where to spend it, and where they can’t spend money right now they have to do other things to manage demand. That’s just reality. If everything is the same and costs the same to run, then for example why is TfL spending hundreds of millions of pounds extending Bank Station?

Making HOP zone 2 vs zone 3 will have a measurable impact on how many people use that station, that is simple supply and demand economics. Surely you can see that there are many knock-on effects from that (as Brett eloquently put it). Or to put it differently, it’s not quite as arbitrary as “it is 3.7654 miles from the 2nd lion in Trafalgar Square, therefore it is zone 3” (at least I hope not!).

It is interesting that “Banker” seems to have become a pejorative term and nobody, even those working in banks, wants to be associated with it!

Let’s not get distracted from the point. Apologies to anyone who might be mistaken for a banker! To all bankers, “Everyone hates you!”

I am making the simple point that traveling to Bank (hence Bankers) is even more unfair than traveling to Blackfriars if you are from HOP as opposed to East Putney.

As it goes, the difference in a Zone 1-3 travelcard and a Zone 1-2 travelcard is less than I expected. But it still adds up to over £250 per commuter more per year.

Ok, my statement was an oversimplification. What I should have said was I don’t think pricing should be used to manage demand (maximise revenue) where capacity is not an issue. Obviously a lot of the time capacity is an issue, so managing demand here, subject to providing alternative routes etc, is probably necessary. I’d also agree that sometimes they will do things to generate revenue, but this doesn’t mean it’s ok to do so.

But that’s where the money for investment comes from! And as for demand, have you been on the Overground during rush hour?

So with the Shoreditch example - the zone change was implemented to increase revenue, and was a condition of the financing. I would suggest it might have been fairer to base the financing on revenues from across the transport system instead.

Yes. Should I infer that you think HOP is already at capacity so perhaps it’s zone 3 status is a bid to manage demand by keeping it expensive?

No, but making it cheaper certainly won’t improve the capacity situation (hint, it will make it worse), so I jolly well hope that whoever makes these decisions is factoring in more than just the straight line distance from “the centre of London”.

agreed!

I skimmed the article (I wasn’t aware of this particular case), but I don’t see the issue. Shoreditch High Street required a very big investment, and the area has benefited enormously from that station. Why shouldn’t the users of the service pay a little bit more? Things cost money, someone has to pay for them, why not make it slightly more expensive for the direct users of that particular service? And as a non-user of Shoreditch High Street I’m glad they didn’t jack up the prices across the whole network. Or did I misread the article?

I think you read it right.

if they did that everywhere we saw improvements then fair enough, but thats not the case. For example London Bridge had a much bigger investment but users fare levels didn’t increase.

There is a nuance in this. If you travel through Shoreditch you will pay a central zone fare too.

Good work, @Paul_Hyu!

That was quick! Strictly speaking, I haven’t contacted TfL yet! But it’s good that it’s gathering momentum. I am pleased he used Lewisham as the comparator and not my own red herring of East Putney.

The argument is simpler and more effective using a neighbouring station.

What I have done so far apart from speak to the journalist:

1. contacted the local MP and the relevant Councillors to see what support if any will be forthcoming and

2. have discovered who in TfL should be contacted when and if we agree to proceed to a formal case.

You might also want to speak to people in Crofton Park and Balham and Tooting and Tulse Hill, because if HOP is moving to zone 2, then I think these places probably deserve to be in zone 2 too.

image1280×900 294 KB

I am just interested in HOP but you are welcome to do the same for these other places if you feel that way. Especially as you seem to be a get up and get it done sort of person.

What I can see from your map, (which is quite unhelpful as doesn’t show the overground line in question, nor the stations you mention, nor the comparable zones 2&3 that I am arguing for) is that zone 2 extends quite some way out East, but doesn’t include many stations in it. I can see that stations in zone 2 far East, such as Canning Town (6.14 miles) West Ham (6.12 miles) and North Greenwich (5.97 miles) are further away than HOP (5.63 miles) from the designated “centre” of Piccadilly Circus. This is the basis of the argument and this makes it easier to argue. Many stations are further away and in a nearer zone. I think it would be fair to redesignate HOP as Zone 2&3. QED!

In fact, I think if HOP were on your map a designer could easily make a nice swoosh that would include HOP. And Crofton Park is 5.68 miles, so you were right! I might add this one into the argument to make it about the entire area. Thanks!

This isn’t perfect but it is closer to what you requested:

image1485×999 559 KB

There possibly a better map below which shows that Crofton Park certainly belongs in Zone 2/3.

but it also shows that the shape of the boundaries are fairly arbitrary. Zone 1 accurately reflects something called Central London. Zone 3 (boundary with zone 4) is more or less circular (unlike the South and North circulars), but zone 2 edge does not map out a line equidistant from zone 4 and zone 1.

And why no Boris bikes in Camberwell, Rotherhithe, Peckham, and Brixton?
And why is the ULEZ planned for the north and south circulars when when is twice as far out as the other, and one is a trunk road and the other is a local road?

I completely agree that the Boris Bike scheme is pretty much a north of the river affair.

I also think that it will be hard work to get even an official response from TfL as to why the zoning is as it is, even though they have apparently stated there are no plans to change anything currently on the table. I think if there is enough public support for it, then that could change but it depends on how people feel, in what numbers and whether we get support from our local MPs and Councillors.

I will pick my battles for now, stick to the HOP and Crofton Park vs other Eastern stations (& Lewisham) argument - and am still waiting to hear from our hardworking representatives that they even received my email let alone have thought about it! There are probably a lot of people living further away that will think this is a petty thing to be campaigning on, given that the difference in cost is relatively small. It is smaller than I thought it would be myself. But the argument is still valid. If there is general apathy, especially from our elected reps, then it will be hard to get an official answer let alone a decision in our favour.

Hi Paul - great work so far. Keep in mind the use of HOP by South Eastern, who may have a contract to use HOP at Zone 3 pricing and compensation payments as a result of this.

I think there are indeed much bigger forces and issues at play here than sheer distance from Piccadilly Circus, but I will continue until there is at least an official pronouncement on the matter from someone.

Also, it’s a good test of our so called representatives’ power, skill and willing.

I think TfL, Railtrack, Overground and other bodies would all have to agree to this, which is a long way off.

I suppose in the grand scheme of just how much we the public are being ripped off in Britain as a whole for terrible public transport, particularly outside of London, then this is a completely minor matter on a line that is much more reliable and regular than anything Northern Rail (for instance) can deliver.

If something is unfair on the face of it, which this matter seems to be, it would be satisfying for a change to get someone in an official capacity to explain why the status quo exists and at least answer their so called “customers” or “constituents”.

Indeed - as always more of a financial issue than locational. TFL can hardly afford another hit to their budget and they would also need to foot all compensation payments to other network users. It is very tricky. In saying that - its been done before so, why not HOP for the reasons you have set out. If you do not ask…

The area’s MP Vicky Foxcroft has now written to TfL to ask for an explanation.

Councillor Chris Barnham has replied to my email and is being supportive.

Two other councillors have not yet deigned to acknowledge receipt of my email, let alone reply, which being as it is over two weeks seems a little slow.

I will sporadically post here how this pans out.

(I have a feeling that the side issue of how well our representatives in the area serve us and whether we need the CLP to select new ones on our behalf might be as interesting to some people as we go further down this road).

To be fair to our councillors they aren’t paid, have a lot of stuff to consider and I would hope prioritise the most needing in our society.

While I regularly want to question the priorities of elected representatives I always have to stop and remember that I’m not prepared to stand for election and do it myself.

The councillors are paid, actually, but it’s not much money at all and they have a pretty thankless task.

Just checked it out and yes, more than I thought but not really enough for anyone to be there ‘for the money’ in my opinion.

It’s not enough pay. I agree.

The low pay means that if someone is relying on councillors’ votes for, say, planning permission for a multi million pound development it’s no surprise that the pages of Private Eye are full of instances of “FIFA,-style” shenanigans.

I use this analogy because our HOP Councillors (with the honourable exception mentioned above) have so far done Sweet Football Association!

They will of course shortly be in touch, as soon as they realise they are being discussed here. But 17 days and counting to acknowledge an email is pretty poor by any standards, especially someone whose job it is to represent the person.

Have you thought about attending any of the councillor surgeries? They will all be at Crofton Park library this Saturday.

I regualrly contact councillors about a range of issues and usually receive a reply from one of the three. Generally a response from one speaks for all (when they are all in the same party) and particular issues will be taken forward by one of the three acting for all rather than requiring responses from each.

You may also wish to contact the HopCroft forum which could make changes to the station part of their neighbourhood plan. There are other local residents that would be worth contacting - such as the former chair of London TravelWatch.

This topic has been bumping along for 3 months during which time I contacted my MP, Vicky Foxcroft.

People may be interested to learn that she contacted Sadiq Khan on my behalf and he has replied.

He writes, “I have no plans for zoning changes. This is largely due to revenue impacts and concerns raised by National Rail Train Operating Companies and the Department for Transport, who would need to agree to any changes”. He mentions his manifesto commitments to freeze TfL fares blah blah etc and that the existing zonal map has its roots in the 80s. “It sought to place stations into concentric zones, fitting into the geography of London rather than distance from the centre”.

Sadiq’s letter also mentions that the most recent instance of re-zoning was the Stratford stations, which was considered a key element to secure the Olympic legacy because of the increased value of land.

The upshot is that unless a big campaign were to get organised and had broad support from SE23 locals and councillors (both of which is unlikely) then the unfair distance situation is just going to have to be an anomaly that we live with and we will not get to enjoy similar increases in land values.

If someone can get a group together to fight this, get in touch with me. But I fear apathy is the real problem here.

Surely apathy could be overcome if everyone’s house prices were going to rise by 10%!!

They have already done that & by a lot more than 10%!

But they’d jump another 10% if we moved to zone 2 so that’s surely good reason for people to get on board with it?

It would be even more difficult to get on board a train in the morning as many people would go to the station for cheaper journeys into town.

Perhaps we could then introduce residents’ parking?

Residents’ parking is something completely different but equally important and equally unfair. HOP is the only station so close to zone 1, where people can just rock up and abandon their cars 20m away with impunity. I know people do this on their way to Gatwick in the summer, leaving their car for 2-3 weeks.

All we need is a 1 hour time slot when parking around the station is checked, say 12-1pm for the commuters and holidaymakers to stop abandoning their cars around the station.

If anyone is interested in this, lives close enough to the station to have a legitimate interest, please contact me and I’ll start another thread and we can lobby for it.

The council asked residents if they wanted permit parking about 5 years ago and it was firmly rejected

That was in response to my asking for one and it wasn’t firmly rejected. It was rejected without satisfactory research, possibly because one of the councillors lives outside the area in question and was against being able to drive her car 500m to access the station. Since then, the residents have changed a lot on my road, the main one affected, with older people having moved out and younger ones in and this year we are eligible to ask again. My hunch is that the tipping point has been reached.

The argument that it is unfair to residents compared to every other station of comparable proximity to central London is strong and wasn’t made last time.

It becomes a council cash cow which is why I always reject this proposal having seen the cost escalate elsewhere

2 posts were split to a new private message

May I suggest that you should be grateful to even have received such a detailed response to your request, and let the matter go. Not only would it prevent energy being wasted barking up the wrong tree, but also let the public sector workers getting on with the actually important work they’re doing on all of our behalf.

Lewisham are actively carrying out a democracy review as they want more participation in local democracy. I think we should be grateful when people take time out to do something for their area even if we don’t agree with it. The councillors and public sector works are there allegedly to serve us and if things have changed in 5 years then it is reasonable to revisit it. Interesting to see the idea that there is this big gap between the old and the young in their opinion on an issue that you would expect would unite people who live on the same road.

6 houses on my road have changed hands (that I know personally) and in all 6 cases the sale was an older person retiring selling to a young family and in each case the vote has swung from not wanting parking control to wanting it. Very few people who pay £700k+ for a house would object to paying £150 a year to park outside it.

My response was in relation to a comment on Oyster fare zones, not the parking. Interesting that local democracy is mentioned though - surely there has to be some careful consideration as to what sensible choices are for the public to have a direct say on. The colour of the bin lorries would probably not fall into this category. And neither would, imho, fare zones.

The parking permit problem is actually an interesting one. Firstly, if there are that many commuters who park locally to catch a train, then surely the parking pressure can’t be that high as otherwise they would have long given up and looked elsewhere. Secondly, I suspect that the difficulty of finding a parking spot differs from one street to another, with hypothetically the busiest streets being the ones closest to the station. Assuming that this is indeed a pressing issue here, and that there is a majority of streets further afield where there isn’t a lack of parking at all, I wonder whether a plain democratic approach would actually be fair to the minority that is affected. There is a further point, which is that I fear that introducing parking permits may convince more to replace flowers and hedges with concrete paving - something we appear to strongly condemn in another topic.

These suppositions about commuter behaviour are not well made. Commuters don’t have to have driven from Tunbridge Wells to park here! For those of us who live in the affected area, I can assure you it’s an issue, that we can’t park outside our houses with children in prams, shopping etc. I happen to know that people who live literally 400m away will drive, especially in bad weather, to park nearer the station.

The area that was “consulted” last time was I seem to remember an area within a 300m radius from the station. I would say the initial consultation area should be 150m circle. My house lies within that threshold and I can hardly ever park anywhere near the house.

There is a large majority amongst the residents I know to have a CPZ implemented for reasons explained elsewhere. But to be fair I do know mostly new house owners.

_{* I have actually done this… twice}

Problem is it doesn’t stay.at £150/year, when I moved within 150m of the station the parking issue was apparent so it was considered in my decision making.

The process off how the decision is taken is indeed laughable due to its lack of transparency. I will do my best to make sure it’s as fair as can be this time.

What happened last time is a few leaflets were distributed to some houses, there was a councillor involved who declared to me a vested interest, and the results were counted in secret. This is not acceptable.

It must be seen to be impartial and accepted by everyone as such.

Is HOP being ripped off by TfL? No.

If passengers really want to save a few quid in HOP on their travelcard, they can commute from Brockley instead, a short bus ride away from Stondon Park.

If in the unlikely event HOP ever got Zone 2, then Forest Hill will want it and then Sydenham and so on.

With TfL’s finances not exactly great at the moment thanks to the Crossrail delay and the fares freeze until 2020 on TfL based fares, reducing revenue from HOP isn’t the answer. Honor Oak Park and Forest Hill have benefited from being on the East London Line and cheaper pay as you go fares since May 2010.

We can actually get relatively cheap train fares compared to most north Londoners by purchasing a train only ticket without access to the tube. This works well for people working in London Bridge, Blackfriars, Canon Street, Waterloo, possibly even Kings Cross, and areas close to main line stations. For commuters to Canary Wharf.you can by a travelcard avoiding zone 1. These are two ways to pay less for you travel without the need for rezoning.

I realise that parking very close to HOP station can be difficult, and i do have sympathy. But if HOP was in zone 2 I would personally be very tempted to drive from Forest Hill to park there. Financially it would be crazy for me not to do that and would avoid walking up a hill every evening. The only question then is whether i would walk 150m or 300m after parking my car close to the station - it is just about how much i want to save money. The only thing that stops me doing this in East Dulwich is they have worse train services than Forest Hill.

Moving HOP to zone 2 makes a lot of sense for people in Forest Hill. Less commuters parking in our roads and we can drive to HOP where there are loads of residential streets to park close to the station, allowing for cheaper travel to London.

Imposing a CPZ would need to be quite large in such a situation and people in HOP would need to pay more to prevent me enjoying the same cheap travel that they would from the most remote zone 2 station other than Stratford.

There seem to be two topics on this thread now - is it worth splitting them into one on a micro-CPZ near Honor Oak Park station and another one on potentially re-zoning the station?

This should remain about rezoning and whether the unfairness of the station being closer than some others, yet in a more expensive zone, is worth fighting or, as I suspect, residents are too apathetic to care about for what is a mere £300/year saving (though it would be more if you did not get monthly travelcards).

This wouldn’t translate to a massive uptake in house prices, is my feeling. The issue is more just a question of fairness is how I see it.

Some residents are not apathetic, but just don’t find the argument convincing.