Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Ending of Haringey Daily Visitor Permits to increase daily visitor parking charge by 164%
A parking review consultation run quietly at the start of the year seems to have been so little publicised that it attracted just 42 responses (augmented with another 58 garnered by phone).
The change it included that residents may feel most keenly is the abolition of daily visitor permits.
Currently Haringey's website gives the following prices for visitor permits:
Standard daily visitor permits are £5 and hourly are £1.20.
The "Parking Strategy and Policy/Charges Review, Appendix D: Updated parking permit policy / charges" shares the expectation that residents will henceforth be expected to make up a day's parking permit with hourly permits. For the Ladder where the CPZ runs from 08:00 to 18:30, this will require eleven hourly permits to make up a full day. If the hourly charge remains at £1.20, this will mean a total daily cost of £13.20, an increase of a mere 164%. The cutting below is extracted from that Appendix.
It's not clear to me why hourly permits should be less open to abuse than daily ones, but I'm all ears. If the primary motivation for this change was indeed to counter permit abuse, one would have thought it a fairly easy matter to protect residents from the affects of standing up to the abuse by simply putting a cap on daily charges like London Transport do. As far as I can make out, this hasn't happened.
At section 4.1 of the background papers (attached below), the Council has gone to the trouble of benchmarking the cost of daily business visitor permits. That's helpful. They looked at Camden, Islington, Ealing, Greenwich and Waltham Forest.
For some reason, no benchmarking was done on the cost of daily resident visitor parking costs. I've done my best to fill that gap. I've used the same boroughs and added Hackney since that was a missing neighbouring borough.
The current cost for a visitor to park in CPZ of those six boroughs for a day are as follows.
Camden: £8.79
Islington: £7.20 - £8.00 (on my calculationat £0.90 and £1.00 per hour)) discounted to £2.80 for 60+
Greenwich: Tradesmen £18.50 per week, and £9 per 10 vouchers (no information on time period validity)
Waltham Forest: £8.00 (at £1.00 per hour)
Hackney: £5.30.......................
...................vs Haringey: £13.20
....unless of course I'm misunderstanding Haringey's policy - only too happy to be set straight.
As part of the review, an Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) was run. As a part of that assessment, equality as it relates to socio-economic status was considered. In the case of the daily parking permits, the situation roughly divides the east of the borough, with all its indicators of deprivation, from the much wealthier west. In the west, two-hour CPZ predominate: in the east >8 hour zones are the rule. The shift from daily to hourly permits will barely affect the west of the borough, whereas it will have a significant impact on the east. The only outcomes noted under the socio-economic section of the EIA are "Positive", "Positive" and ... er ... "Positive". The unequal nature of the daily parking charge was not even considered. So the EIA as it relates to socio-economic status is badly flawed.
The change was part of a wider Parking strategy review that was passed by the Council last week. The recommendations of the review were adopted without dissent (see minute 48:30 of meeting on YouTube).
This change is unlikely to affect me personally but I fear that it may have an impact on some who are not is a strong position to absorb the increased charges.
Tags for Forum Posts: daily parking permits, parking, visitor parking, visitor parking permits
- Attachments:
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Shar on
-
Hi all
I've created a Google doc as a ready reference for talking points that everyone can refer to and tweak to taste for including with their own responses to the consultation: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_-A2CMoRj6WVe2XR9V91BQ2Q_0AOzHy...
I've done this in good faith and with no political agenda, and would request others to engage in the same spirit.
-
Permalink Reply by Caitlin on
-
My objections are attached, and i have also attached the analysis i have shared previously if the significant financial impact this will have on the poorest areas of the borough.
Haringey%20Parking%20Consultation%20Objections.pdf
FINAL_Haringay%20Proposed%20Daily%20Parking%20Costs.pptx
-
-
Hi Caitlin
Just wanted to say thanks again for your analysis and your submission. I ended up using it as the basis for my own representation with only a few tweaks.
-
-
Hi Shar - just cheking, did you also add questions to the google sheet? If so, you also need to email them to: "making.your.voice.heard@haringey.gov.uk, and make sure to include your name, addess & which member of the council the question is addressed to.
Worried my previous instructiosn were not clear :)
-
-
Hi all,
Is anyone here a lawyer/barrister/solictor, or know one, who could provide a quote for drafting a legal opinion on issues with the parking proposal & form a view on ways of challenging it?
Or if they would like to work pro-bono for the good of the people/eternal glory, that would also be amazing :)
-
-
The residents association around Braemar Ave has been intensely studying this and they have legal people. They recently twice managed to fight off a development application centred around a local church hall. I could ask my friend there if you like....❤️
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
TO be polite, the visitor-permits change has been mishandled.
Even if the goal were to reduce car-use or car-ownership, this tinkering was misconceived. And even if the goal were revenue raising, why punish visitors?
The change would have been dreamt up at the (metaphorically) remote council HQ by an employee, then recommended by one of the 40+ council staff who are paid between £100,000 and £220,000 and finally, rubber-stamped at Cabinet level.
No Cllr. dares to speak up on behalf of residents, for fear of Whip action or worse, Suspension.
The recent parking strategy was yet another lengthy glossy empty municipal publication. It wrote all around the subject, but the one glaring omission was … any strategy, let alone a clear or meaningful one. It was a poor piece of work and another waste of time and effort.
According to the linked Council list, Cabinet responsibility (among other things) for Parking, Highways and Resident Experience, falls on Cllr. Chandwani.
-
Permalink Reply by Nigel
-
Chadwani presently declines to be lobbied:
"Hi Nigel
Parking Consultations have to be Statutory Consultations under legislation.
It means that I cannot discuss or give views prior or whilst the Statutory Consultation is live.
I’m on the Cabinet paper as the Cabinet Member involved in final decision and therefore cannot show predetermination and have to remain neutral whilst the Statutory Consultation is active.
I have to consider all comments with an open mind.
The only thing I can think it’s like, is Jury Service or Planning Committee."
Quite how discussing a matter with anyone beforehand prevents her keeping an open mind is beyond me. Nor does she state any binding rule or law preventing her from doing so.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton
-
Plainly Cllr Seema Chandwani is mistaken to use Jury Service as an exemplar. If she has served on a jury then she has forgotten the rules.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/...
Nor is it the same as predetermination by Planning Committee members. (Harringay Online members can easily find helpful material under these headings online.) Is it sensible for Cllr Chandwani to avoid an appearance of bias or predetermination while the public consultation is underway?
I'd have thought so. For the obvious reason that it shows respect to and willingness to learn from what local electors say. It would also suggest that she still has an open mind on the issue. Even views which can be partly or substantially changed in the light of further evidence and reasoned argument. Isn't that what we want from our elected councillors?
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
