Agenda item

[Report of the Director for Housing, Regeneration and Planning. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal.]

This report describes the issues with the current out-sourced Estate Controlled Parking Scheme and the plans to replace the scheme with a new more effective in-sourced solution. The report seeks permission to consult residents on the proposal.

Cllr Bull and Cllr Chandwani declared personal interests on this item as leaseholders living in the borough.

The Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal was proud to introduce the proposal to bring the estate controlled parking scheme inhouse, making this consistent with the Council’s parking service which was the only borough Parking Service not outsourced in London. She added that bringing this estate service back inhouse was important to residents living in estates run by Homes for Haringey as some were currently subsidising a service that they were not using. It was appropriate for Homes for Haringey to consider this value for money option.

It was noted that the new scheme would deliver an improved service to over 280 estates across the borough which are home to over 12500 Tenants, Leaseholders and their families.

Improved parking controls would ensure that those estate residents who need it most will get the benefit of the available parking, especially the most vulnerable. A new estate parking management scheme would provide the powers and income needed to achieve wider strategic aims around promoting active travel choices, reducing the use of carbon emitting vehicles and achieving channel shift to digital options.

In response to questions from Cllr Barnes, the following was noted:

• The scheme will not be an all-encompassing as parking issues will be different per ward. The intention was consult on the wider scheme and to ensure any final policy proposal is reflective of local needs the consultation results will be analysed by estate/ward and by diversity strands.

• The aim was to pilot the scheme in July 2020 subject to any learning, and to fully roll out by the end of that financial year.

• In relation to the financial contributions of the current scheme, from considering financial data in 2016, there was a surplus of £44k and this had reduced to a deficit figure by 2019.

RESOLVED

1. As set out in section 8 of the report, to approve the development of a new estate parking management scheme with the preferred option being a Traffic Management Order based scheme. This is in accordance with the powers provided to Local Authorities under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.

2. As set out in section 9, to approve the proposal to consult all affected residents on the development of a new estate parking management scheme.

3. As set out in paragraph 9.6, to delegate finalisation of the consultation pack to the Director of Housing, Regeneration & Planning and Managing Director of Homes for Haringey in consultation with the Cabinet Members for Housing & Estate Renewal and Neighbourhoods.

4. To note the intention that consultation results will be considered by Cabinet in January 2020, informing a proposed new estate management parking policy for approval and adoption.

Reasons for decision

In relation to recommendation 1

The current Estate Controlled Parking Scheme (ECPS) is no longer financially viable or enforceable. As a result, residents subsidise the scheme, via the Housing Revenue Account, regardless of whether they use a vehicle or live on an estate with parking controls which is unfair. The ECPS cannot be improved to address the financial and enforcement issues within the current legislative framework for parking control on Council land. A Traffic Management Order based scheme using powers under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 has been selected as the preferred option because it is the only option that satisfies all of the aims, outlined in paragraph 7.1, as well as being the Department of Transport’s recommended solution and a tried and test option in operation across various London boroughs.

In relation to recommendation 2

The adoption of a new estate parking management scheme will trigger the requirement for a formal consultation of Secure Tenants under Section 105 of the Housing Act 1985. Best practice is to consult all affected residents (i.e. Leaseholders and non-secure tenants) before changing a core housing service to ensure any improvement meets their needs, where possible. This approach supports the Your Council priority of the Borough Plan 2019-23 by ensuring both Haringey Council and Homes for Haringey engage effectively with residents and design services based on their needs.

In relation to recommendation 3

The consultation pack will be designed in accordance with the requirements of Haringey Council’s Section 105 arrangements and outline the issues with the current scheme, the proposal to develop a new scheme including the preferred option, the alternative options, what is sought from residents in response and how their responses will be used to design the final proposal for Cabinet approval.

In relation to recommendation 4

This approach supports the Your Council priority of the Borough Plan 2019-23 by ensuring both Haringey Council and Homes for Haringey engage effectively with residents and design services based on their needs. Adopting any new estate parking management policy will affect more than 2 wards in the borough and is therefore considered a Key Decision requiring Cabinet approval to proceed.

Alternative options considered

An alternative to conducting consultation has not been considered. Unless a decision is taken to retain the current service unchanged a formal consultation of all secure tenants under section S105 HA85 will be a statutory requirement. In addition, consulting residents to understand their needs in order to develop an effective service offer supports the Your Council priority of the Borough Plan 2019-23. Please see comments of the Assistant Director of Corporate Governance in paragraph 11.2 for further details of the statutory requirements.

The option to discontinue all parking controls has been considered and discounted for several reasons 1. Residents have consistently presented their expectation (through complaints, enquiries and other feedback) that parking will be managed for their benefit, 2. Failure to control parking represents a health and safety risk as emergency access routes cannot be maintained and 3. This option would not support the Place priority of the Borough Plan 2019-23 to implement Controlled Parking where residents want controls or promote low emission vehicle use and modal shift to zero emission transport options.

The option to do nothing and continue with the current Estate Controlled Parking Scheme (ECPS) has been considered and discounted. Continuing the current arrangements would require residents to subsidise an ineffective service via the Housing Revenue Account regardless of whether they use it or live on affected estates, which is inequitable. In addition, this option would not support the Place priority of the Borough Plan 2019-23 to promote low emission vehicle use and modal shift to zero emission transport options.

The option to adopt housing roads as part of the public highway may have to be used on a small number of roads which cannot be classified as off-street parking places. However, it is not a viable option borough wide as it requires Secretary of State Approval as well as significant capital investment to adjust the land to public highway standards. In addition, this option would still require the implementation of controlled parking zones to deliver the parking controls that residents have indicated they expect.

The option to replace onsite enforcement by officers with remote or automated controls has been considered and is deemed of limited application. Automated controls such as barrier gates and CCTV recognition are only viable on a small number of sites with entrances that could allow access to be controlled in this manner. It is, therefore, not an option that can be considered borough wide and can only support a wider system of on the ground enforcement. In addition, the level of investment required to deliver each installation is prohibitive. This option will be reconsidered for specific sites that are deemed suitable if the new estate parking management scheme generates a surplus for reinvestment.