Forum

The meeting last Tuesday evening arranged by the Alexandra Ward councillors to discuss the abandoned extension of the Alexandra Park Station area CPZ attracted enough people to fill a large conference table fairly tightly. Two officers who deal with traffic and parking, and the Council cabinet member for environment were there as well. The officers explained the background to the scheme which was recently cancelled. The result of the public consultation on extension of the existing CPZ area was negative by about 2 to 1, but while this meant that the idea of a scheme covering the area consulted was rejected, the Council recognised that a lot of people just outside the existing CPZ had severe parking problems. A number of these badly affected residents had been making representations to the Council for some time, and working with officers on potential solutions. The council therefore tried to develop a less extensive scheme to alleviate the difficulties where they were most serious.
    The decision to abandon the extension was therefore not actually overturning the result of a consultation, but withdrawal of an effort to find an alternative, which might get local support, to try to improve parking for the worst affected areas. On what basis exactly the decision to withdraw the scheme was reached remains unclear (at least to me).
    The officers and councillors present acknowledged that there had been mistakes in the handling of the whole CPZ implementation, and that communication of the results of the consultation, and notification of the withdrawal of the scheme after many people had bought permits, had been inadequate.
    The conclusion of the meeting was that the Council will now do a parking survey in the area to try to establish who is parking and when, and hope to have results by mid-October, when another meeting with residents will be held.

You need to be a member of Alexandra Park Neighbours to add comments!

Join Alexandra Park Neighbours

Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • For those who haven't already received it, please see the e-mail of 25 November 2016, below, for the Council's latest thinking regarding parking issues in the roads surrounding the Alexandra Palace CPZ.

    Dear residents,

    I am writing to update you on parking matters in and around the Alexandra Palace area.

     

    Alexandra Palace CPZ Background

     

    July 2013 - Alexandra Palace CPZ introduced following requests and the receipt of a petition by residents.  The council promise to review the CPZ 6 months post implementation.

     

    2014 - A review of the CPZ - which also included adjacent displacement roads - was carried out early in 2014.  Within the existing CPZ 85% of respondents said that the CPZ had solved the main problem of commuter parking. In the outer or displacement roads, 67% objected to the CPZ. Thus the 2014 review showed that the existing CPZ was working well but that those outside the zone did not want parking controls.

     

    June 2015 – Following requests from residents and councilors, a proposed extension of the CPZ was consulted on again - the response from the overall area was 29% (150) in favour and 66% (343) against – the CPZ extension into their roads.

     

    March 2016 – Works Notice sent to advise residents that while there was no overall support from the consultation area as a whole, there was support in roads or part of roads closest to the station.

     

    June 2016 – Information Letter sent to residents saying during implementation stage of the scheme and following discussions with Cllrs, support for the implementation of the CPZ extension had diminished and the scheme was to be abandoned. The Council was able to do this because all consultation to this point had been ‘informal’ and the legal Traffic Management Orders which underpin parking controls had not been advertised.

     

    16 August 2016 – Meeting with residents from the proposed Alexandra Palace extension to discuss next steps for the area.

     

    Following on from the meeting of 16 August, the Council committed to undertake parking surveys to identify and quantify parking demand in the uncontrolled roads adjacent to the existing Alexandra Palace CPZ.

    The parking surveys could only take place after the summer holiday period in order to give a truer reflection of the parking conditions and so the surveys were undertaken on Saturday 8th and Tuesday 11th October. The survey was carried out in all public highway roads within the proposed Alexandra Palace CPZ extension. It is usual to carry out such surveys on a weekday and weekend in order to identify any changes in demand on a ‘working’ day - when we may expect to see more commuter parking - compared to a weekend.

     

    Please see below a summary of the survey results from the weekday surveys:

     

     

    Road Names

    Total Spaces

    (Capacity)

    Vehicles Parked at 5am*

    (Occupancy)

    Vehicles Parked at 5pm (Occupancy)

     

     

    Albert Road

     

    43

    (42) - 97%

    (36) - 83%

    Crescent Rise

    66

    (58) - 87%

    (61) - 92%

    Albert Close

    23

    (19) - 82%

    (19) - 82%

    Princes Avenue

    96

    (93) - 96%

    (87) - 90%

    Outram Road

    92

    (85) - 92%

    (81) - 88%

    Clyde Road

    79

    (72) - 91%

    (63) - 79%

    Harcourt Road

    65

    (57) - 87%

    (56) - 86%

    Clifton Road

    74

    (58) - 78%

    (51) - 68%

    Victoria Road

    252

    (241) - 95%

    (234) - 92%

    Alexandra Park Road

    96

    (84) - 87%

    (81) - 84%

    Crescent Road

    120

    (95) - 79%

    (107) - 89%

    Dagmar Road

    90

    (78) - 86%

    (71) - 78%

    Durnsford Road

    37

    (19) - 51%

    (26) - 70%

     

    *Assumed to be residents

     

     

    The total spaces is the number of potential parking spaces in a road (avoiding junctions, dropped kerbs etc).

    Vehicles parked at 5am are usually assumed to be resident vehicles.

     

    It is usual to then assess the results in terms of a % occupancy of the vehicles parked compared to the capacity of the road. For example, in Albert Road there are 43 parking spaces and at 5am 42 vehicles were parked giving a % occupancy of 97%. But at 5pm this dropped to 83% occupancy.

     

    In summary, what the results above show is that there is significant parking demand across the entire Alexandra Palace area, including roads furthest away from Alexandra Palace Station. The results are not surprising and this is why the council consulted residents on the introduction of parking controls last year. What is therefore surprising is why the results of the consultation were so against the introduction of parking controls - the response from the overall area was 29% (150) in favour and 66% (343) against – the CPZ extension into their roads. It should also be noted that this was the second time the area had been consulted and the second time the response was against the introduction of parking controls.

     

    Following the meeting with residents on 16 August 2016, it is noted that there is support for the CPZ from some residents; however officers and Councillors are not confident that if we consulted the area again, the result would be significantly different from 2014 and 2015. Furthermore, it could be seen that the council was simply seeking to force a CPZ on residents who didn’t want one.

     

    However, as a council we are keen to resolve the parking problems in the area but we must to do this without seeming to be ‘consulting until we get the response that we want’ as we have been accused of by some residents during the last consultation.

     

    We therefore propose to carry out a ‘perception survey’ in the area and ask all residents if they want their road to be consulted again and we will use the responses we receive to determine any future consultation boundary. We will make it clear that if the response from a road is no - but is yes from an adjacent road - this may mean that they are not consulted and could be excluded from a future CPZ extension and that this may result in parking displacement. We will also point out that the council is within a programme of introducing 13 parking schemes across the borough between now and May 2017 and that other factors such as Alexandra Palace Station increasing services, may also result in increased parking demand in uncontrolled roads.

     

    We have received reports that some residents had not received previous consultation or works notification documents. We are therefore proposing to undertake the perception surveys via an on online system. This will be done by information leaflets being posted and notices placed on street, directing residents to the online survey site. Residents who do not have access to the internet will also be able to request a hard copy of the survey.

     

    The results of the survey will then be used to decide whether and what roads are consulted again on the introduction of parking controls.

     

    As mentioned above, we are within an extensive programme to implement 13 parking schemes where residents have shown support during consultation. We therefore cannot commit to start the perception surveys in Alexandra Palace until spring 2017. The council therefore appreciates your patience in this matter.

     

    Kind regards,

     

     

    Fred Fernandes

    Parking Schemes Manager (Interim)

     

    5th Floor, Alex House, Wood Green, London N22 7TR

     

    T. 020 8489 1000

    E. frederico.fernandes@haringey.gov.uk

  • Elii - Last Sunday, 16 October, I wrote to Anne Cunningham and Fred Fernandes at Haringey Council, copied to Councillors James Patterson and Peray Ahmet, reminding them of this commitment and asking them for an update. I have not yet received a reply, but I will post details here if/when I do. Of course, it wouldn't do any harm for others to also drop the Council an e-mail, just to remind them that the problems created by the original CPZ are still with us and to ask what, if anything, it proposes to do to help residents (and voters).

    • Elii - On 31 October 2016, I received a reply from the Council to my e-mail, asking for an update on the actions it plans to take to address the ongoing parking issues in the roads surrounding the CPZ. The Parking Schemes Manager told me that "... I can advise that parking beat surveys have been undertaken in the uncontrolled roads adjacent to the existing Alexandra Palace CPZ and we have recently received the raw data. The surveys are being analyzed and in the next week or so we will discuss the results with local Councilors. I will be happy to update you on the outcome of such discussions as soon as I am able to". In other words, the Council has missed its own deadline. I have written back to ask when it now expects to be able to deliver on its commitment.

    • Thanks for letting me know - so we wait and see
    • Thanks for the update.  Has anyone on here been involved in these 'parking beat surveys'? I dont' know anyone who has been asked anything??

    • My understanding is that they check how many cars are parked in the roads at different times and then process the number plates to see whether they are residents' or others' cars. So people wouldn't be interviewed
  • I believe we were due to have a meeting to find out about the parking survey by mid October- has anyone heard when it is?
  • I have been in correspondence with the Council about the CPZ. I asked the following questions and received the associated replies:

    (i) (in a previous e-mail to me, the Council stated that) “… Ward councillors have noted that the level of support for the new controls has diminished demonstrably…” I would be grateful if you would provide me with details of what this evidence is – as it is “demonstrable”, I assume that there is some form of documented quantification that shows how many meetings councillors have had with residents; the numbers of people who have raised this issue; and the evidence that has been provided that support for the scheme has fallen?;

    In reply, I was told that: “The decision not to proceed with the extension of the Alexandra Palace CPZ was taken following discussions at councillors’ roving surgeries between ward councillors and local residents.  Council officers are not aware of any quantitative data that may have been collated during the period the surgeries were being held” – Haringey Project Engineer, 8 August 2016;

    (ii) I asked the Council to “… please specify all steps that the Council now proposes to take to address the parking issues that it has created in my part of Outram Road by the creation of the Alexandra Palace CPZ and which my neighbours and I were led to believe that the proposed extension would address”;

    In reply, I was told that: “The Council through will assess (sic) the level of support for controls in the area as a whole before deciding what our approach should be” - Parking Schemes Manager, 5 August 2016.

    In a separate e-mail, I was also told that “Prioritising parking for residents over commuters and other non-residents can only effectively be done by the introduction of a CPZ.  No other measures are available to us as the Highway Authority to prioritise parking for residents” – Haringey Project Engineer, 8 August 2016;

    (iii) I also asked the Council “What the cost to Council Tax payers has been of the extended discussions, consultations and all other matters, relating to the proposed extension of the Alexandra Palace CPZ. Please explain in detail the calculations you have undertaken to arrive at this figure”.

    In reply, I was told that: “the cost of printing and distributing the documents pertaining to the extension of Alexandra Palace CPZ is £1,235.  All other costs can be ascribed to officer time”- Parking Schemes Manager, 5 August 2016.

    I also attended the recent meeting, held at the Council’s offices. My recollection of the key outcomes of the meeting were that the Head of Traffic Management and the Parking Schemes Manager argued that removing the existing CPZ – which many people at the meeting seemed to view as the cause of many of the current parking problems – is not possible. My notes record that they agreed to look in to what alternative solutions might be deployed and report back with practical solutions by mid-October 2016.

    • Thanks to AP for the added details. I suppose that if the Council decided that what they had put forward for the CPZ extension was not workable in some way, than that is more or less that, whatever it was that persuaded them.

      At the meeting the officers made the point more than once that how they were approaching the CPZ question was consistent with what other boroughs were doing. One resident present said he thought some creative thinking was required, which would need some ideas going beyond standard practice. A practical suggestion made was that some form of access for badly affected residents to use the CPZ might be arranged. The people worst affected seemed to be those who need to use cars several times during daytime, for things like school runs, and return to their homes, when they would find all the space taken, while there was space in CPZ areas which they couldn't use. Some form of special access would therefore seem to make sense for them - perhaps there could be some sharing arrangement with people in the CPZ.

  • Hello

    I'm so glad you posted this. I'm on holiday so couldn't attend. This seems to be a new angle used by the council. To say that the consultation wasn't overturned is a complete lie in my opinion. This argument has only just been concocted as I have been asking for weeks and no one would give a straight answer. Pathetic! So the are going to undertake another parking survey at more cost just to dis regard the results like they did with the consultation. It's a disgrace. I also was under the impression that the results of the consultation clearly stated that residents were in favour of extension? I must look out the paperwork. All in all a public shambles and now the cover up begins. Thanks again for posting, I was very curious as to the outcome.
This reply was deleted.

Advertisements

Click on an advert for more info.