 |
News | Login |
|
|
|
|
||||
|
||||||
|
|
News detail In the council documentation 'new developments' aka Holland Gardens is identified as part of the problem, along with the recently introduced £10 per day parking in the Travelodge car park. As residents here we have spent some time with the Managing Agents trying to establish alternative parking arrangements for peak periods - Christmas, summer parties etc - to no avail. It is recommended you state your objections to the current popular planning mindset that sees 1 car park space per apartment approved without thought for occupants per property - 1 park for a three bed apartment is just not enough. If you don't have the inclination to write to the council then email the Secretary @ Holland Gardens .org with your comments. Extract from the Hounslow Council Planning Meeting:
Isleworth and Brentford Area Committee (Planning) North Road Brentford parking petition (78k pdf). See report by Head of Street Management & Public Protection, Agenda Item 13. Councillor Kirton declared an interest on this item, on the grounds that the residents had presented him with the petition to be submitted to the Council. Jay Gopal, Traffic & Developments, spoke to the report and indicated that a wide consultation exercise would be necessary, due to the likelihood of traffic displacement onto Pottery Road. Members’ questions and comments were invited. Referring to the proposed consultation area, Councillor Kirton indicated that, as a CPZ would not be enforceable within the Haverfields Estate, consultations would need to be initiated with Hounslow Homes. In response to Councillor Carey’s queries as to whether sufficient funding would be available for its implementation and whether a single road could be classed as a CPZ, Jay Gopal confirmed that the currently available funds were insufficient for the implementation of a full scheme. He acknowledged that a single road zone would only lead to the displacement of traffic to neighbouring streets. Referring to the Ferry Quays S106 monies (4.2 of the submitted report), Councillor Lamey requested clarification as to whether this funding was time-limited. She highlighted the distance between the proposed CPZ site and the Ferry Quays development and suggested that using these funds would adversely impact any future plans for a CPZ in the Ferry Quays area. Councillor Cadbury suggested an incremental approach towards the introduction of CPZ such as introducing the scheme in two parts, which would allow the consultation phase and the work plan to take into account the realities of the situation in North Brentford. Councillor Cadbury reiterated Councillor Kirton’s suggestion of working with Hounslow Homes on off street parking issues on the Haverfields Estate and requested that the Pottery Road residents be made aware of the traffic displacement issues. In response to Councillor Smart’s question on whether the planning approval for the Travelodge had included any conditions relating to parking charges, Paul Draper, Planning Manager, confirmed that no additional conditions had been imposed on the developer. He indicated reports from the hotel that the charges had been introduced to deter non-residents from using the facility. He acknowledged suggestions that there were other methods of achieving this without imposing charges and indicated that an effective way of preventing this situation in future might be to include planning obligations under legal agreement. Councillor Kirton noted his disappointment at the fact that alternatives to a CPZ did not appear to have been considered, particularly as the residents’ petition had asked for help and advice and had sought a CPZ only as a last resort. He proposed that the matter be deferred so that alternative options could be fully researched and suggested that officers liase with the Music Museum on possible amendments to the current literature and similarly with the Travelodge so that steps could be introduced to ensure that drivers did not park there by mistake. Councillor Cadbury seconded this motion. Councillor Lamey noted her opposition to the scheme and proposed that it be rejected on grounds of the lack of funding to complete the proposal and the uncertainty around the Ferry Quays S106 monies and whether it might be needed in the future for a CPZ in that area. She requested evidence on the North Road residents’ wishes. Councillor Carey seconded Councillor Lamey’s proposal on grounds of the lack of funding. Members took a vote on the first proposal to defer the item for further investigation and consideration and agreed unanimously that the item should be deferred to a future meeting. Resolved:
That any recommendation on the item be deferred for the following reasons: End of extract.
Related Links
Tell us what you think.
If you have a view about something we have said here, tell us what you think.
|
||
|
