Agenda item

To receive a deputation regarding the proposed extension of the Enfield Town Controlled Parking Zone.

In particular, the deputation will represent residents of Uvedale Road, Walsingham Road, Park Crescent, Whitethorn Gardens and Amwell Close.

(7.05 – 7.25pm)

Councillor Stafford welcomed the deputation members to the meeting. 

The topic of the deputation was the proposed Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) for Uvedale Road, Walsingham Road, Whitethorn Gardens, Park Crescent and Amwell Close.  It was sponsored by Councillor Glynis Vince. 

Steve Rowe presented the deputation to Cabinet and spoke on behalf of the deputees, a summary of which follows:

• Although they had been pleased that 38 roads had been removed from the scheme, the deputees’ main concern was the way that the consultation and the proposals had been handled by the Council.

• He felt that the response to the Council’s consultation exercise had been poor.  When he and neighbouring residents had visited door to door and explained the impact of the proposals, 80% of the residents in the five roads had signed the petition against them. 

• The Council had not made clear the full impact of the proposals to residents: it had only indicated that the signing might be unsightly.  He thought that the consultation papers should have been more transparent and should have included information such as the price of the parking permits, the reduction in the number of parking spaces in the roads affected, that visitor permits would be required for both morning and afternoon sessions.

• Because of the limited amount of information in the documents, he felt that the analysis was flawed and the judgements arising from the consultation weak.   He saw no link between the conclusions and the preferred option.  The report identified possible problems in outer zone roads on one day only and yet an all day all week solution was proposed.  This was the least popular option. 

• In the consultation papers, no information was available on the reasons behind the parking congestion or other possible strategies for addressing the problem.

• In response to freedom of information requests, council officers had asserted that no policy recommendations or position papers have been written to interpret the consultation findings, and that no officer reports or emails exist.  He felt that there should be many reports and if not, proper scrutiny of the proposals had not been carried out.

• In conclusion he felt that the consultation process was flawed, weak data obtained, specious conclusions made, too few options considered and the consultation options put forward were not those supported by residents.  He finally suggested that the real purpose of the CPZ was to raise revenue for the Council. 

Councillor Bond, Cabinet Member for Environment, responded

• The deputation had raised valid points which would be taken into consideration.

• The consultation process had been undertaken on the understanding that if residents were not in favour of CPZs, then they would not be imposed.

• Proposals had been developed following on from the outcomes of the 2009 Parking Review carried out by the previous administration.

• He felt that the Council had listened to what had been said and would be coming back with full recommendations for decision on the wider CPZ proposals for the Enfield Town Area.  In the meantime 38 roads, where there had been strong opposition, had been removed from the area being considered.  These roads, including the 5 roads under discussion, would not be included in the CPZ. 

• Consultations of this type do tend to have a poor response rate and the rate received was in line with similar consultations.

• In other parts of the CPZ, where residents had responded expressing views opposed to the proposals, streets had been removed at an earlier stage. 

• New methods of consultation would be considered in the future. 

Councillor Bond thanked the deputation members for attending the meeting. 

NOTED that

1.                  Ian Davis, Director of Environment, said that the process had been put in place to explore ways of managing parking congestion in the Enfield Town area.  The problems and concerns expressed were valid; officers were open to suggestions and would be looking at ways of improving consultations; rethinking how they worked with residents in future. 

2.                  Councillor Vince’s concern that the initial information sent to residents had not explained clearly what was happening or what could happen as a result of the installation of a CPZ in those streets. 

3.                  Councillor Neville’s comment that he was aware there was a need to review CPZs on a regular basis, but that 2009 report had been a general report on parking, investigating possible means of resolving parking problems as a whole across the borough. He felt that the deputation had been very well researched and presented, the best he had seen, and he hoped officers and members would take note of what had been said. 

4.                  Gary Barnes, Assistant Director Highways and Transportation, drew members attention to a paper he had circulated.  This set out details of the consultation and explained that following consultation, 38 roads where residents had expressed an overwhelming rejection of the proposals, had been withdrawn from the proposals.  Further analysis would take place before decisions were taken on the remaining roads and a report bought forward on the whole proposal.

5.                  Gary Barnes offered to meet Mr Rowe and other objectors to discuss the proposals.  He added that it would be very expensive for the Council to undertake a detailed door to door/face to face consultation with every resident in an area, but that officers would seek to improve current methods.

6.                  A resident added that he did not feel that the Council would be justified in spending council tax money on more research.  

7.                  Councillor Laban’s view that the whole process had been flawed as residents had not understood it properly.  Some residents would prefer a one hour midday restriction which had not been offered.  Others wanted a reduction in all council parking charges.