Agenda item

Concerns and suggestions from petitioners included the following:

• Local residents had never requested any time waiting restrictions to be introduced. Further restrictions would exacerbate the parking problem locally.
• Local residents felt that an unfair and biased survey had been conducted by officers. The accompanying letter suggested that local residents were in favour of the scheme which they were not.
• There was insufficient parking for local residents at present and parking on the footway assisted local residents.
• Being unable to park locally had created problems for disabled residents as well as making it more difficult to collect children.
• The introduction of any time waiting restrictions would have an adverse effect on property prices locally and would devalue properties due to the lack of parking provision.
• If this action were approved, it would create a greater parking problem than currently existed.
• The easiest way forward would be to permit local residents to park on the footway.
• Local residents acknowledged that the estate had become a ‘rat run’ for local traffic and amending the waiting restrictions would mean that roads would become busier and more dangerous to children living locally.
• Most residents had more than two cars and so any amendments would have a significant impact on local residents.
• A number of properties incorporated garages but these were too narrow for modern cars to use.
• Local main roads did not have any waiting restrictions.
• Local apartment developments were equipped with underground car parking facilities which were under utilised but local residents were unable to use these.
• Only a third of the development lay within Hillingdon, with the remainder being located in the London Borough of Ealing and so it was unfair to penalise Hillingdon residents.
• The Management Company which managed the estate was not sympathetic to the concerns raised by Hillingdon residents.
• The petitioner felt that Hillingdon residents did not have a voice at the Residents Association.
•  No residents from either Ballinger Way or Waxlow Way were aware of the three week consultation which had taken place.
• There was parking provision for 40 cars outside Cost Cutters, but local residents were unable to use this.

Councillor Burrows listened to the concerns of petitioners and responded to the points raised.

Councillor Burrows explained that the Council was unable to influence local private Residents’ Associations as these were independent bodies. However he suggested that the petitioner contact their local ward Councillors to see how they might be able to assist them further.

In response to the concerns raised about the consultation process and the fact that a large proportion of the estate lies in the London Borough of Ealing, officers explained that aspects of the consultation had been complex. However, residents had been fully aware of the location of their properties at the time they decided to purchase their properties and it would be reasonable to suppose that either the property purchasers or their agents would have satisfied themselves with regard to prevailing or reasonably foreseeable parking conditions. Officers agreed that Ealing also suffered from parking issues and the dilemma for officers from both Boroughs was to try and find the best compromise possible.

In relation to the point about garage size, Cllr Burrows explained that it was not unusual for developers to create properties with garages which were unable to accommodate family vehicles, but in many cases, the owner of the property used their garage for storage space only.

Councillor Burrows moved both recommendations in the officer report. He also requested that officers encourage the ward Councillors for Yeading to submit their views as part of the consultation process and similarly that the petitioners approach their ward Councillors to seek their potential support. The Cabinet Member also instructed officers to liaise further with colleagues from the London Borough of Ealing.

Resolved - That the Cabinet Member:

1. Discusses with petitioners and listens to their concerns regarding the amended proposals for “at any time” waiting restrictions in their roads.

2. Asks officers to include the petition request and the outcome of discussions with petitioners in the forthcoming report incorporating all representations received from the statutory consultation on amended proposals for “at any time” waiting restrictions in Arcon Drive, Ballinger Way and Waxlow Way.

Reasons for recommendation

To allow the Cabinet Member to discuss with petitioners their concerns with proposed “at any time” waiting restrictions that were amended following a previous consultation and petition from residents. 

Alternative options considered / risk management

These were discussed with petitioners.