Agenda item
Car-Free Development Schemes and Parking Permit Arrangements
To receive the Member presentation and determine whether the Overview and Scrutiny Committee should request further scrutiny of this matter.
(Time allocated – 20 minutes).
Minutes:
The Chair asked Councillor Tim Archer to outline the reasons for his request for a review of car-free development schemes and related permit arrangements.
Councillor Archer stated that the Committee had heard from the residents of Gaverick Mews and he was not requesting a review of all car-free agreements. However, there were other examples in the Borough of such arrangements not being properly implemented. The way the Council responded to such issues was what needed to be addressed. It was not right to expect residents to come to Council or Overview and Scrutiny Committee meetings to have complaints considered piecemeal. Now that the problems were understood, it was likely that other similar situations would emerge. The matter should be examined proactively across the Borough and the Committee could undertake a piece of work to look at what had gone wrong and how the position could be remedied. He was not looking to unpick all car-free agreements in the Borough but social housing tenants had been misled. All Gaverick Mews households were social tenants and had held Council parking permits for up to eight years. It was not now right to say that permits would be refused after one final year and was not a mature or sensible way to proceed. He had much sympathy for the tenants, who felt annoyed and let down.
Councillor Archer expressed suggestions to correct the problem by stating that there should be a holistic review of the car-free policy, together with arrangements for correcting any errors. Where residents had held parking permits for years this should be acknowledged and honoured, although any new tenants entering the development would not be allowed to have parking permits – this could be undertaken proactively across the Borough. He added that he was aware of the problems of over-supply of permits but was not asking for any additions, just for the error to be admitted and a resolution found. Some people based their livelihoods on owning a car and it was not right to effectively put them out of work.
The Chair then invited questions from Members to which Councillor Archer replied that:
· There was a high likelihood of similar cases across the Borough and a piece of work was necessary to identify and address the situation.
· The position regarding communications with East Thames Housing Association eight years ago was unclear but the Council had been at fault since then for issuing permits to residents, who were now effectively caught between the two agencies.
· There did not seem to be parking problems in the area around Gaverick Mews but there was always competition for parking spaces in the Borough. However, allowing residents of the Mews to retain their permits would not cause any additional problems.
Councillor Francis referred to his earlier statement and added that any legal agreement that existed could not simply be ignored and had to be enforced. The solution, if the Council was at fault would be to invite the Housing Association to apply for a variation to the S106 agreement. Other similar cases were known and steps would be taken to address the problems but responsibility lay principally with the relevant housing associations and developers.
Mr B. Jones, Service Head Environmental Control, stated that residents claimed not to have been informed of the car free agreement by their landlord but the agreement had been signed by Ballymore, the Council, Toynbee Housing Association and other agencies. The document made it clear that the housing association had responsibility to inform its tenants. S106 funding had been provided to pay for a traffic management order to create the car free zone and there would be legal problems if attempts were made to undo this.
Further discussion ensued during which Members made points relating to the rights of residents who had been issued with parking permits for several years; the likely timescale for the procedure for varying a S106 order; the position of the Council in taking a degree of responsibility to remedy the Gaverick Mews situation.
Councillor Francis added that he had requested Officers over the next month to locate advertisements showing how the car free zone had been originally publicised, to determine any degree of fault that might have occurred on the Council’s part and possible remedies would be considered. Updates would be sent to all affected residents after the matter was investigated.
The Chair Moved and it was:
RESOLVED
That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee in the Municipal Year 2010/11 be recommended to undertake a review of Car Free Developments and Parking Arrangements, to look at the issue on a Borough-wide basis.