Agenda item

Richard Webb (Director of Community Safety and Enforcement), Steve Austin (Traffic, Parking, Road Safety and School Travel Team Manager), Freddie Mohammed (Parking Representations and Appeals Manager) and Jas Rattu (Parking Infrastructure Manager) were in attendance to present the report and respond to Members’ questions and requests for clarification.

The Traffic, Parking, Road Safety and School Travel Team Manager thanked Members for the list of roads identified for phase one review and explained that officers had undertaken initial observations:

For Botwell Common Road, Hayes, Members heard that most issues appeared to be between Botwell Lane and Badgers Close, where the majority of footway parking occurred. Officers had also observed some footway parking in other parts of the road but noted that the lay-bys along Botwell Common Road were generally full and were not managed through a permit system.

In respect of Clifton Gardens, Hillingdon, it was explained that the road contained numerous dropped kerbs, and from observations, residents tended to park across their own dropped kerbs during the evening due to limited space between them. The Traffic, Parking, Road Safety and School Travel Team Manager noted that formalising a scheme in this road would remove this option and severely reduce capacity, estimating that only six to ten spaces might remain if a footway parking scheme were introduced.

Regarding Windsor Avenue, Hillingdon, the Traffic, Parking, Road Safety and School Travel Team Manager referred to a previous consultation, noting that the response rate had been 31%, with 30% of respondents supporting a formalised footway parking scheme and 70% opposing it. He suggested that unless attitudes had changed significantly, similar results would likely be obtained again.

For Ryefield Avenue, Hillingdon, Members were informed that, while it might be possible to formalise footway parking near Long Lane, the complexity increased further along the road due to numerous dropped kerbs and the presence of a shopping parade where parking was already managed.

Members were informed that Colham Green Road, Brunel, could be removed from the list of roads as controlled parking had been implemented along its length, eliminating footway parking issues. Similarly, Windsor Close in Northwood had a successful parking management scheme in place, and residents were encouraging the Council to extend its operating times.

With regards to Wood End Green Road, Hayes, it was explained that there were significant lengths of single and double yellow lines. The Officer noted that many issues related to illegal parking on footways and grass verges behind these lines, which was not permitted, and suggested that some residents knowingly parked unlawfully.

Finally, the Traffic, Parking, Road Safety and School Travel Team Manager addressed North Road, West Drayton, stating that officers had developed a parking management scheme for the northern section between Porters Way and Thornton Avenue following a petition from residents. This scheme was ready for implementation once funding was identified. However, south of Thornton Avenue, residents were strongly opposed to any formalisation of parking, whether on the footway or through a management scheme.

Members referred to a recent petition for Clifton Gardens and requested that its progress be monitored. They recalled the Windsor Avenue consultation from approximately ten to twelve years ago, noting that confusion among residents about the difference between formalised parking and permit schemes had likely influenced objections. Councillors suggested reviewing the consultation material to ensure clarity that no paid service was proposed. They also queried whether the parking management schemes for Colham Green Road and Windsor Close had been implemented recently. It was confirmed that both had been in place for some years and an amended definitive list was included in the agenda. The Committee expressed concern that the previous list had categorised these roads incorrectly, indicating a need for officers to review and update lists regularly.

Members suggested that Nine Elms Avenue be considered in place of Colham Green Road, citing recent pavement resurfacing followed by residents parking on the new surface. They highlighted that the last review of Nine Elms Avenue had been in November 1990 and suggested that the Committee consider adding it to the list. Officers acknowledged the historic nature of the decision and agreed that the matter could be revisited.

Councillors raised safety concerns on Wood End Green Road, particularly near the school and allotments, describing dangerous behaviour by parents parking on pavements and even forcing pedestrians to move. They opposed any formalised footway parking in this area on safety grounds. Officers assured the Select Committee that enforcement applied behind yellow lines and confirmed there was no intention to formalise footway parking in hazardous areas. It was explained that some drivers knowingly parked illegally and dangerously, which enforcement teams continued to address.

Further questions focused on complaint handling and the Council’s responsiveness. Members asked how many complaints were required before a review was triggered and whether petitions were necessary. The Traffic, Parking, Road Safety and School Travel Team Manager clarified that a single complaint would be sufficient if it related to a road safety issue, but wider changes such as introducing formal schemes required evidence of community support to reassure the Cabinet Member. He noted that the Council received between 200 and 250 requests for road safety matters annually, which did not always result in new restrictions but could lead to other measures such as white bar markings across dropped kerbs.

The discussion then turned to suspended enforcement. Councillors asked for clarification of this term and whether vehicles parked fully on pavements in such roads would receive a penalty. Officers explained that enforcement could be carried out where vehicles were parked outside marked areas or contrary to signage, but informal schemes without signs or lines created exemptions for entire roads, making enforcement challenging. In Windsor Avenue, for example, if the location was not exempt, enforcement would apply, but exemptions typically allowed two wheels on the footway.

Councillors questioned whether increased enforcement could resolve issues and asked if all calls to the enforcement hotline were logged. Officers confirmed that calls were logged but details of complaints were not routinely recorded, acknowledging a gap in intelligence gathering. They agreed to review processes to capture more detailed data, including trends in roads where enforcement was limited.

Members asked about the impact of changes on bus routes. Officers confirmed that they held regular liaison meetings with emergency services, bus operators, and Transport for London, and acted promptly when bus routes were affected by parking issues. They cited a recent example on Station Road where temporary measures were introduced to maintain bus flow while legal processes for double yellow lines were completed.

Accessibility considerations were raised, with Councillors asking when the Council’s Accessibility Officer would be involved and whether feedback would be reported to the Committee. Officers agreed to consult the Accessibility Officer and consider site visits where necessary, noting that some roads might not present accessibility issues due to wide footways, but others could require attention. Members suggested that engagement with schools, GP surgeries, and Chambers of Commerce should also be considered, particularly for roads near schools such as Windsor Avenue, where Oak Farm School had previously raised concerns about enforcement near zebra crossings.

Councillors requested updated ward boundary information to assist with the review. Officers confirmed they would work with GIS colleagues to provide this, although it might require manual processes. Officers concluded by reminding members to encourage residents to submit petitions if they wished to see formalised footway parking schemes introduced, whether with permits or without.

RESOLVED: That the Residents’ Services Select Committee noted the evidence heard at the witness session and sought clarification as necessary in the context of its review of Footway Parking in Priority Areas.