Hatch End Parking Scheme
- Meeting of Moved from 20 June 2012, Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel, Thursday 21 June 2012 7.30 pm (Item 126.)
Report of the Divisional Director, Environmental Services.
The Panel received a report of the Divisional Director Environmental Services, which set out the results of the public consultation undertaken to introduce Pay & Display parking in the Hatch End Broadway area. An officer advised that in 2005/06 Hatch End traders had requested the implementation of Pay & Display charges in local service roads as they had concerns about long term parking in those roads, which was proving detrimental to local shoppers.
The officer stated that 1500 properties in the area, Hatch End Traders’ Association (HETA) and Hatch End Residents’ Association (HERA) had been consulted about the proposals. However, the results of the public consultation not shown overall support for the introduction of parking charges, and the Panel therefore had the option of taking forward parts of the Scheme and requesting further consultations or abandoning the scheme and assigning funds available to another scheme in 2012/13.
The officer added that the introduction of parking controls was part of the Council’s overall strategy of demand management and standardising parking charges across the borough. Parking charges were also a cost effective method of controlling the length of stay of vehicles. The proposed charges were nominal and would cover enforcement costs.
The officer highlighted the following aspects of the consultation results:
· 44% of respondents had identified parking issues in the area and some felt that there were too many disabled parking bays in service road, which led to congestion;
· some respondents had flagged up the unfairness of free commuter parking in the vicinity of Hatch End station;
· officers had received a petition from residents of Anselm Road, Hatch End, which raised concerns about displaced parking in roads surrounding the area of the proposed parking controls;
· 8.6% of respondents felt that local trade would be adversely affected. 7.5 % of respondents were in favour of a 1 hour parking restriction during the day to discourage all day commuter parking;
· some respondents had suggested a free period of between half to one hour. However, this would not be permitted under the Council’s current parking charges policy, but the current borough-wide review of parking charges was considering the viability of concessionary levels of charge in smaller commercial centres.
An adviser to the Panel stated that it was the Council’s policy to be guided in its decision-making by the majority views of respondents and pointed out that the majority had been against the proposed parking charges. He suggested that the introduction of parking charges in the bays in the service roads and maintaining free parking in the Grimsdyke Car Park would encourage shoppers and benefit local traders.
A Member of the Panel stated that Hatch End was becoming an increasingly difficult area to park in. She had received a number of complaints from residents in Dove Park who were concerned that parking charges would lead to displaced parking in surrounding streets. She added that traders would suffer if shoppers could not park in the vicinity of shops and therefore felt that abandoning the Hatch End Parking Scheme was not a viable option.
An adviser to the Panel stated that the main priorities in Hatch End were to keep traffic flowing whilst making it easier for shoppers to park in the area. He pointed out that the Grimsdyke Car Park was empty in the evenings as drivers tended to park along the High Street, which should not be permitted and that there was an issue with all day parking in the service roads which had a negative impact on trade.
A Member of the Panel agreed that the Panel should respect the majority views of respondents, as this was both the Panel’s and the Council’s policy. A back benching Member expressed the view that the Panel should take into account the views of those residents who had presented public questions, deputations and petitions at the meeting and feedback the consultation results to all residents and traders affected by the proposals.
Three Members of the Panel stated that they did not agree with the introduction of parking charges in the Grimsdyke Car Park, and therefore did not agree with the first recommendation in its entirety and abstained from voting on this item.
Resolved to RECOMMEND: (to the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety)
That the following elements of the Scheme listed below be taken forward and further consultation undertaken:
(1) undertake a statutory consultation on making Grimsdyke Car Park become Pay & Display - Mon-Sat, 8.00 am – 6:30 pm at a charge of 20p per hour;
(2) undertake a statutory consultation on making Uxbridge Road parking bays (near Hatch End station) become Pay & Display – Mon-Sat, 8.00 am – 6:30 pm at a charge of 10p per 20 minutes and £4 for parking stays in excess of 6 hours;
(3) develop revised proposals for residential streets surrounding the Hatch End Broadway area, including Anselm Road, and undertake a public consultation.
Reason for Decision: To control parking in the Hatch End Broadway area.
- TARSAP Report - Hatch End CPZ - Jun 12, item 126. PDF 137 KB
- TARSAP Report - Hatch End CPZ - Appx A - Jun 12, item 126. PDF 599 KB
- TARSAP Report - Hatch End CPZ - Appx B - Jun 12, item 126. PDF 107 KB
- TARSAP Report - Hatch End CPZ - Appx C1 - Jun 12, item 126. PDF 3 MB
- TARSAP Report - Hatch End CPZ - Appx C2 - Jun 12, item 126. PDF 507 KB
- TARSAP Report - Hatch End CPZ - Appx C3 - Jun 12, item 126. PDF 575 KB
- TARSAP Report - Hatch End CPZ - Appx D - Jun 12, item 126. PDF 75 KB
- TARSAP Report - Hatch End CPZ - Appx E - Jun 12, item 126. PDF 347 KB