Hillingdon Council Cabinet Member and Officer Decisions
Objection Report – Formal Consultation on a Proposed Parking Management Scheme in Dawson Close, Hayes
Report Document
Can't see the PDF? Download Report
Decision / Minutes Document
Can't see the PDF? Download Minutes
Text extracted from PDFs
View Report Text
Democratic Services Location: Phase II Ext: 0185 DDI: 01895 250185 CMD No: 731 To: COUNCILLOR JONATHAN BIANCO CABINET MEMBER FOR PROPERTY, HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORT c.c. All Members of th e Property, Highways and Transport Select Committee c.c. Aileen Campbell – Place Directorate c.c. Perry Scott – Corporate Director of Place c.c. Ward Councillors for Wood End Date: 08 March 2023 Non-Key Decision request Form D OBJECTION REPORT – FORMAL CONSULTATION ON A PROPOSED PARKING MANAGEMENT SCHEME IN DAWSON CLOSE, HAYES Dear Cabinet Member Attached is a report requesting that a decision be made by you as an individual Cabinet Member. Democratic Services confirm that this is not a key decision, as such, the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 notice period does not apply. You should take a decision on or after Thursday 1 6 March 2023 in order to meet Constitutional requirements about publication of decisions that are to be made. You may wish to discuss the report with the Corporate Director before it is made. Please indicate your decision on the duplicate memo supplied, and return it to me when you have made your decision. I will then arrange for the formal notice of decision to be published. Liz Penny Democratic Services Officer Title of Report: Objection Report – Formal Consultation on a Proposed Parking Management Scheme in Dawson Close, Hayes Decision made: Reasons for your decision: (e.g. as stated in report) Alternatives considered and rejected: (e.g. as stated in report) Signed ……………………………………………………… Date……………………. Cabinet Member for Property, Highways and Transport Cabinet Member Report – 8 March 2023 Page 1 Part 1 - Public OBJECTION REPORT – FORMAL CONSULTATION ON A PROPOSED PARKING MANAGEMENT SCHEME IN DAWSON CLOSE, HAYES Cabinet Member(s) Councillor Jonathan Bianco Cabinet Portfolio(s) Cabinet Member for Property, Highways and Transport Officer Contact(s) Aileen Campbell - Place Directorate Papers with report Appendix A – Plan of the formal consultation area Appendix B – Tabulated summary of the comments received during the statutory consultation period. HEADLINES Summary To inform the Cabinet Member of the outcome of the formal consultation on a proposed Parking Management Scheme in Dawson Close, Hayes. Putting our Residents First This report supports our ambition for residents / the Council of: Be / feel safe from harm This report supports our commitments to residents of: A Green and Sustainable Borough Financial Cost There are no direct financial implications associated with the recommendations to this report. Relevant Select Committee Property, Highways and Transport Select Committee Relevant Ward(s) Wood End RECOMMENDATIONS That the Cabinet Member for Property, Highways and Transport: 1) Notes the responses received to the formal consultation on a proposed Parking Management Scheme in Dawson Close, Hayes. 2) Instructs officers to take no further action in implementing a Parking Management Scheme in Dawson Close, Hayes due to the apparent lack of support from residents. Cabinet Member Report – 8 March 2023 Page 2 Part 1 - Public Reasons for recommendations The recommendations reflect the responses received to the consultation with residents. Alternative options considered / risk management The consultation with residents offered the option to maintain the current parking arrangements. Select Committee comments The petition, timely received during the statutory consultation on this matter , will be formally considered as part of this decision report, rather than a separate petition hearing, as advised by Democratic Services. This ensures the Cabinet Member can take all views into account. SUPPORTING INFORMATION 1. The Cabinet Member will recall a petition submitted to the Council signed by 21 residents of Dawson Close, Hayes requesting a Parking Management Scheme. This was to help prevent non-residential parking primarily associated with people using the road to park for free for long periods of time. Following the petition hearing, the former Cabinet Member for Public Safety and Transport instructed officers to carry out informal consultation with residents in an area agreed in liaison with local Ward Councillors on whether they would be supportive of a parking scheme in their road. 2. Residents in Dawson Close, South Walk and adjacent properties in Middleton Road were sent a consultation pack which included a questionnaire, information leaflet and reply -paid envelope. This asked residents if they would be supportive of a parking scheme or if they would prefer no changes to be made to the current parking arrangements. The questionnaire also asked which days and times residents felt a scheme should operate providing various options for residents to choose from. Out of 81 informal consultation packs delivered, 26 responses were received. Overall, 16 of these residents advised they would support a possible parking scheme and 10 advised they would prefer no chang es to be made. In regards to operational hours, the majority of responses indicated support for ‘9am to 10pm’ and ‘everyday’. The results were shared with local Ward Councillors and the Cabinet Member, and the decision was made to progress the proposal to statutory consultation, where residents would have another opportunity to express their views. 3. The 21-day statutory consultation was undertaken in the usual manner. Public notices were displayed on site and the proposals advertised in the local newspaper with details on how to comment on the plans. Residents in Dawson Close, South Walk and Middleton Road who would be included in the proposed scheme , as seen on the plan attached as Appendix A, were sent a detailed plan and a letter explaining how residents c ould comment on the proposals. The formal consultation started on 30 th November and ended on 21 st December. Comments were still accepted however until the first week into 2023 due to the unavoidable delay in residents receiving their letters due to postal strikes. Cabinet Member Report – 8 March 2023 Page 3 Part 1 - Public 4. During this time, eight responses were received; one asked how a free parking permit could be obtained, six outright objected and one expressed concern about a scheme being introduced in Dawson Close. 5. A petition with five pages of signatures w as also received during the formal consultation titled: ‘The resident signatures below represent objection to the proposed parking management scheme in Dawso n Close, Hayes; and the request to withdraw the current proposal for a possible parking management scheme in Dawson Close, Hayes. Ref: AC/7.14.’ This petition was signed by 12 residents of Dawson Close, 17 residents of Middleton Road, 13 residents of South Walk as well as two properties on Uxbridge Road and two carers. Some residents in South Walk may be unaware that they are included in the proposed scheme and would be entitled to permits and visitors vouchers. Nevertheless, this petition against a Parking Management Scheme in Dawson Close shows the concerns not only of those who are included in the parking scheme, but also of those located just outside of the scheme who could be impacted by displaced parking. 6. Displacement of parking was one of the most common concerns highlighted in the responses to the formal consultation. One resident stated that “residents will not pay for the additional permits, they will park in Middleton Road or Melina Close for free” and that a scheme here would have a “ knock on effect for Rosedale”. Another resident agreed, advising that Middleton Road is “the nearest immediate road for residents to migrate parking to if permits are introduced, causing congestion and concerns for residents along the length of Middleton Road – Not from non -residents, but residents displaced”. The fact that 17 residents of Middleton Road signed the petition against a scheme portrays the concern that residents have as to how a parking scheme would not only change the parking dynamic in Dawson Close, but also for the surrounding area. 7. As the Cabinet Member will be aware, within a Parking Management Scheme where the adopted highway is not covered by a parking bay, there must be a single yellow line or double yellow line where it is deemed unsafe to park. Whilst on site designing the scheme, bays were placed where cars were already parked so that parking availability could be maximised. Many of the comments have advised that ‘their parking place’ would be no longer available as it would be covered by a single yellow line, therefore considerably reducing parking availability. A couple of the comments particular ly from residents of South W alk advised that Dawson Close actually has “ample parking” and that “at no time have we ever seen any problems with parking”. Some residents even said that they often opt to park in Dawson Close if there is no parking available in Middleton Road. However, the feeling amongst residents that a permit holder only scheme would not be beneficial in the road is apparent. 8. Within the plan are sections of blue hatched areas labelled as ‘private’. These areas are not a part of the adopted public highway and in fact are managed by the Council’s Housing Team. The Council’s Parking Enforcement Team are unable t o enforce vehi cles parked in these areas including those not having a valid permit or visitor voucher active. Some residents believed that these areas would be no longer available for residents to park and considered this in the lack of parking availability the proposed scheme would create. It should be noted Cabinet Member Report – 8 March 2023 Page 4 Part 1 - Public that these areas would still be available for parking, and the plan is used to display where the parking scheme could be enforced. 9. Another reason given by residents who objected to the proposed scheme was the operational times. Many of the residents felt that the times of ‘9am to 10pm everyday’ were unnecessary for the parking issues the scheme was requested to resolve. The proposed operational times were based on the results of the informal consultation where the majority of residents who responded to the consultation indicated a preference for ‘9am to 10pm’ and ‘everyday’. Some residents suggested operational times of ‘9am to 4pm’ or even just in the evenings where the problems occur, and from ‘Monday to Friday’. If in the future residents feel that a scheme would be beneficial then they are invited to petition the Council with specific operating hours. 10. Furthermore, the objections expressed apprehension at the possible cost to residents if a parking scheme were to be implemented in the road. At the time of the consultation, the first permit remains free of charge as well as 10 visitors vouchers per year. Residents advised that “when the cost of living is still rising sharply ”, some residents could simply not afford to have visitors, resulting in decreased “current living arrangements and standards” and “the potential to cut people off from much needed visitors”. 11. T here is a strong consensus amongst residents that a Parking Management Scheme would not be suitable for a road such as Dawson Close at this time. All the responses and the petition in objection to the proposed Parking Management Scheme have been shared with local Ward Councillors and the Cabinet Member for Property, Highways and Transport who is minded not to progress this scheme any further. Financial Implications There are no direct financial implications associated with the recommendations to this report. RESIDENT BENEFIT & CONSULTATION The benefit or impact upon Hillingdon residents, service users and communities To change the parking measures requested by residents following consultation and discussions with residents, local Ward Councillors and the Cabinet Member. Consultation carried out or required Residents were formally consulted to see if they would support a proposed Parking Management Scheme in Dawson Close, Hayes. If the recommendations to this report are approved, then officers will take no further action in changing the parking arrangements in Dawson Close. Cabinet Member Report – 8 March 2023 Page 5 Part 1 - Public CORPORATE CONSIDERATIONS Corporate Finance Corporate Finance has reviewed the recommendations to this report and concurs with the financial implications as set out above. Legal Legal Services confirm that there are no legal impediments to agreeing the recommendations set out in this report, which are in accordance with the outcome of the statutory consultation. Infrastructure / Asset Management None at this stage. Comments from other relevant service areas None at this stage. BACKGROUND PAPERS NIL. TITLE OF ANY APPENDICES Appendix A - Location plan of formal consultation area. Appendix B – Tabulated summary of the comments received during the statutory consultation period. Object I am writing in opposition to the planned parking restrictions for Dawson Close. We have lived here over 30 years and at no time have we ever seen any problems with parking. As all of South Walk have no access to parking outside our properties or the option of off street parking, this will cause a great deal of problems for us, as we are not residents of Dawson Close. Currently we all park in Middleton Road but occasionally if someone has a party etc, and there is no parking, we always know there are lots of places in Dawson Close if we need to. It is never the case that you drive in there and can't find places to park. Where would we stand as residents of South Walk regarding being included in the scheme? If the restrictions go ahead, residents will not pay for the additional permits, they will park in Middleton Road or Melina Close for free, but causing problems with residents of these roads. Also you say that "currently the 1st permit is free" which surely means that they may also be chargeable in future and again, people may think it's better to save some money by parking in Middleton or Melina. Visitors to Dawson will also park in Middleton or Melina to save using permits and causing problems with residents of these roads. Again you say "current parking charges are £1.05 per day but could be subject to change" so this will definitely mean that their visitors will park for free in Middleton or Melina. I would also say that lots of vehicles, especially delivery vans, get sent to Dawson Close when putting in the post codes for South Walk, this could lead to vehicles entering by mistake. Also lots of people get deliveries from Amazon, Evri, food shopping etc, they are not going to give them permits, so again, they will park in Middleton and walk through. Why are the hatched areas marked "extent of private road", these places are used by residents to park, why are these then being taken out of use? Why are the operational times so long and extended to weekends as well? Why are most residents in Middleton Road, Melina Close, and Rosedale Avenue not included in the consultation when they are going to be highly impacted? Can you let us know how many residents petitioned the Council? I cannot see that this is the majority of the residents as there really is no problem parking in Dawson. If you bring in this scheme it will cause massive problems in Middleton Road and Melina Close. If you subsequently then have to bring in restrictions in Middleton and Dawson this will cause big problems for me and my neighbours, l t f h ld l d l i it f f il Alth h I i 50 I h h d hi l t th t South Walk Considered in the body of the report. Redacted for data protection purposes Object I am writing to you to object the possible parking management scheme for Dawson Close, Hayes. Please find attached 5 pages of signatures (46 objection signature) from South Walk, Dawson Close, Middleton Road and the Uxbridge Road. While the formal proposals were only sent to South Walk, Dawson Close and 4 residents on Middleton Road, this proposal impacts the whole of Middleton Road and Uxbridge Road too. Plans have been shared with them by residents who were sent the proposal. All signatures represent objection to the proposed scheme and the request to withdraw the proposal. In Summary: This proposal has been brought forward by a minority of residents on Dawson Close, which impacts residents on surrounding roads who did not request the proposal. The current proposal will remove more parking spaces for residents rather than increase availability, increase costs for residents through permit charges, restrict visitors to residents and move congestion to surrounding roads. there is a lack of data, evidence and due diligence on the proposals under formal review and a large number of residents in surrounding roads have been excluded from the consultation. I strongly oppose to the current proposition and believe this should be halted from further progression. The signatures attached support this objection. Please see below a list of concerns about the current proposal and further reasons for objection. Lack of response from residents: - The original request from residents on Dawson Close for a PMS came from only 21 residents out of a potential 57 households on Dawson Close. Therefore the initial petition was launched by only 36% of residents. - Only 28% of Dawson Close residents responded to the informal consultation. Of those, only 22% of residents are in support of a PMS. This is a minority not a majority. - A larger percentage response of 45% was received from South Walk residents and they objected to the PMS with 30% response. A larger proportion of residents responded and objected compared to Dawson Close. Exclusion of residents: - This proposal only went to Dawson Close, South Walk and 4 households on Middleton Road. - While point 3 on the report says that Middleton Road was included in the consultation, this only went to 4 households and therefore excluded the majority of Middleton Road and excluded their views from the consultation - An incredibly important point to note, as this is the nearest immediate road for residents to migrate parking to if permits are introduced, causing congestion and concerns for residents along the length of Middleton Road - Not f id t b t id t di l d from non-residents, but residents displaced. - Point 5 of the report assumes South Walk and Middleton may be less supportive due to the position being slightly further from the Uxbridge Road - This is not the case - I am a South Walk resident and I am not supportive because I believe the proposals are excessive, with minimal support and there is no evidence non-residential parking is present. I do not believe residents of South Walk or Middleton are being heard. - While the argument in the report states that this should go to formal consultation as the majority of overall responses were from Dawson Close, I do not believe consideration has been taken into how accessible the consultation was for all residents, therefore there could be a number of people underrepresented here. It also doesn't take into consideration the larger percentage response in opposition from South Walk. - It appears unreasonable to have not included a survey/ questionnaire and prepaid envelope for residents to respond to this formal consultation like it was when we were communicated to during the informal consultation. We are in the middle of a cost of living crisis. Considering the formal element of the consultation, this feels like an attempt to move the proposals quicker with less residential feedback. I have already had 2 neighbours come to be confused as to what the letter was telling them and they didn't know how to respond. Reason for request: The request from Dawson Close states non-residents/ commuters causing parking concerns - However it has been noted that congestion concerns are on evenings and weekends - This does not support the argument that non- residents/ commuters are the cause of parking concerns for residents. This contradicts the initial request from residents of Dawson Close. Lack of evidence/ data: - No surveys have been carried out to assess whether non-residential parking is happening or a cause for concern down Dawson Close. - No surveys are planned to assess if the PMS would support residents parking or impede it by removing too many parking spaces. - No assessment has been carried out to verify that the proposed parking scheme will provide enough spaces for residents and improve the parking situation. - No assessment will be carried out to verify that the proposed parking scheme will not negatively impact residents in surrounding roads. Cost of living: South Walk Considered in the body of the report. Cost of living: - I do not believe the ULEZ expansion is being taken into consideration with these proposals - A concern as some residents will be subject to daily charges in just over 8 months time. - Some households have no choice but to have more than 1 vehicles due to work, this along with paying for visitors permits will hit residents' pockets when the cost of living is still rising sharply. - The "Everyday" and "9am-10pm" proposal is excessive and has the potential to cut people off from much needed visitors, especially older residents with lower incomes in need of family support. Implementing a scheme such as this will have a detrimental effect on surrounding residential roads as residents impacted by permit parking will migrate there naturally (E.G. Middleton Road or Melina Close). While you charge currently charge £105 for a second permit I imagine this won't remain the case year on year. Removal of current parking in this space will remove 5 currently used spaces and cause parking issues. Have you taken into consideration the ULEZ implementation planned in August 2023 and if this will reduce the number of vehicles in this area, mitigating the need for this parking management scheme? While I appreciate parking can sometimes be a challenge, the current proposals go too far. Removing too many required parking spaces, with a longer than necessary operating time, during a cost of living crisis, with ULEZ on the horizon. Hurting not only residents pockets, but their wellbeing, their current living arrangements and standards and pushing further stress and congestion to surrounding roads. If there is to be a management scheme in the area - these private areas must be added into the proposal to make parking fair as this will displace a large number of South Walk residents when other residents from surrounding roads use this area. I don’t believe a scheme is necessary at all and there is no evidence provided to support this. The everyday recommendation also does not combat the reason for the petition which is non-residents parking for commuting. If this was a serious reason and petition Dawson Close residents would have selected Mon-Fri as their recommendation. The current proposal has the potential to cut a lot of people off from visit from friends and family specially at the weekends family, specially at the weekends. The main concerns at the moment is the yellow hatched areas and how many cars will be displaced by yellow lines and there not being enough space to accommodate anyone. This will undermine the introduction of a permit scheme in the area. I estimate 10 spaces in total will be lost for permit holders if these are left free for people to park in. This will have a detrimental impact on residents of South Walk and Dawson, but mainly South Walk as residents of Dawson will relocate here rather than pay for 2nd permits, visitors will also end up using this space impacting again on South Walk residents. Will there not be a risk assessment carried out on the proposed changes and surrounding roads before implementation is considered as this could block roads and cause safety and access concerns. It doesn't seem right that safety and risk are not taken into consideration in this way. I think the consultation should be delayed and residents should be re-consulted after ULEZ is introduced to allow people to re-assess feasibility on their finances and whether it is required to or not. People need friends and family more than ever and having to pay for the privilege to visit someone in this area is almost insulting during a time of such austerity. I would have expected a more date driven approach to the feasibility of this to ensure Council money is not wasted on implementation of permit parking areas where it could have been invested somewhere else. Not all residents understand the proposals. How many more don't understand or know how and the importance of responding?
View Decision / Minutes Text
Executive Decision Notice – 16 March 2023 Page 1
This notice is a public document also available to view on the Council's website www.hillingdon.gov.uk
OFFICIAL EXECUTIVE DECISION NOTICE
PUBLISHED BY DEMOCRATIC SERVICES
Notice is hereby given that the following decision(s) have been made today by
Cabinet Members at the London Borough of Hillingdon:
Title of decision
OBJECTION REPORT – FORMAL CONSULTATION ON A
PROPOSED PARKING MANAGEMENT SCHEME IN
DAWSON CLOSE, HAYES
Reference No. 731
Date of decision Thursday 16 March 2023
Call-in expiry date Thursday 23 March 2023
Relevant Select
Committee
Property, Highways and Transport Select Committee
Relevant Wards Wood End
Decision made
Cabinet Members
making the decision
Councillor Jonathan Bianco – Cabinet Member for Property,
Highways and Transport
Approved
That the Cabinet Member for Property, Highways and
Transport:
1) Noted the responses received to the formal
consultation on a proposed Parking Management
Scheme in Dawson Close, Hayes; and
2) Instructed officers to take no further action in
implementing a Parking Management Scheme in
Dawson Close, Hayes due to the apparent lack of
support from residents.
Reason for decision The recommendations reflect the responses received to the
consultation with residents.
Alternative options
considered and
rejected
The consultation with residents offered the option to maintain
the current parking arrangements.
Classification Part I – Public
Link to associated
report
Here
Relevant Officer
contact & Directorate
Aileen Campbell – Place Directorate
Any interest declared
by the Cabinet
Member(s) /
dispensation granted
N/A
Executive Decision Notice – 16 March 2023 Page 2
This notice is a public document also available to view on the Council's website www.hillingdon.gov.uk
Implementation of decision & scrutiny call-in
[Internal Use only]
When can this
decision be
implemented by
officers?
Officers can implement Cabinet Member decision in this notice
only from the expiry of the scrutiny call-in period which is:
5pm on Thursday 23 March 2023
However, this is subject to the decision not being called in by
Councillors on the relevant Select Committee. Upon receipt of a
valid call-in request, Democratic Services will immediately advise
the relevant officer(s) and the decision must then be put on hold.
Councillor scrutiny
call-in of this
decision
Councillors on the relevant Select Committee shown in this
notice may request to call-in this decision. The request must be
before the expiry of the scrutiny call-in period above.
Councillors should use the Scrutiny Call-in App (link below) on
their devices to initiate any call-in request. Further advice can be
sought from Democratic Services if required:
Scrutiny Call-In - Power Apps (secure)
Further information These decisions, where applicable, have been taken under The
Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and
Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012.
This is the formal notice by the Council of the above executive
decision, including links to the reports where applicable.
If you would like more information on this decision, please
contact Democratic Services on 01895 250636 or email:
democratic@hillingdon.gov.uk.
Circulation of this decision notice is to a variety of people
including Members of the Council, Corporate Directors, Officers,
Group Secretariats and the Public. Copies are also placed on
the Council’s website.
Democratic Services
London Borough of Hillingdon
Civic Centre
High Street
Uxbridge
UB8 1UW