Wanstead parking plan ‘will cost £93k’

A typical parking scene, as captured by Google Streetview
A typical parking scene, as captured by Google Streetview

The controversial but little debated plan to introduce pay and display parking to Wanstead High Street will, Wansteadium understands, cost council tax payers £93k in ticket machines and signage, despite officially being an experiment.

The scheme which extends residents parking and introduces fees to several streets, as well as bringing pay-and-display machines to the high street area for the first time is to be introduced in the New Year despite deeply divided opinions on the matter in Wanstead and no chance for public debate.

Earlier proposals by the council were discussed at open public meetings, but this scheme is being introduced as an ‘experiment’ and is permitted to sidestep requirements for public consultation. After 18 months the council will be able to decide if it has been a success, though it has not disclosed what its measures for success will be.

Drop-in sessions for residents who wanted further information were held last week, and were reportedly very busy. But the council is not responding to demands on social media and elswhere that the senior councillors and officers take part in public meetings to present their proposals and take questions.

Cllr Sue Nolan, a Snaresbrook councillor and member of the opposition Conservative group on Redbridge Council, has called an unofficial public meeting on Friday 13 January at 7.30 at the Scout Hall on Hollybush Hill.

An online petition started last week demanding public consultation over the proposals has now been signed by more than 500 people.

30 thoughts on “Wanstead parking plan ‘will cost £93k’”

  1. Of course it’s not an “experiment”, once it’s there, it’s there for good, they’ve just found a way to side-step the regulations. It is a revenue-raising measure, no more no less, nothing to do with road safety or “fair” parking, whatever that may be.

  2. I am 100 percent in favour of the extended parking zones which will stop the commuters parking here to use the nearby underground trains. I welcome the trial period and look forward to the streets returning to rrsidrnts to park near their house once more
    The parking meters are necessary to give our high street back to the local shoppers and stop the long term parking that occurs every day here

    1. However, there are not enough of us to keep our lovely high street going. We already have a number of empty shops & this will only make matters worse. I live in Wellesley Rd & yes we do get commuters but so what, they’re working & paying tax. We also get lots of people coming & going meeting friends for lunch & shopping in our individual shops who I’m guessing will meet in South Woodford instead & park in one of their 3 supermarkets free of charge for 2 hours.
      Don’t buy into this revenue making exercise.

  3. I spoke with two council employees on Saturday at the drop in sessions and was told the cost of signage etc would be £95k.
    No environmental survey had been done to assess any potential impact if people in the area that is about to become a RPZ pave over their gardens on the grounds that people now have to use permeable materials (so the environment doesn’t much matter?).
    There are no metrics at all to measure the success or failure of the ‘trial’, which the officials I spoke with didn’t seem to think was an issue not even when it was pointed out to them that the ‘consultation’ the council thinks it has held was laughable. The trial’s success/failure will be measured by feedback although neither person could say how that feedback would be gathered.
    They had no idea how much running costs of this fandango will be.
    Finally, I have had no reply from the council on any of the questions I have sent to John Howard and our local councillors about the introduction of this parking scheme.

    1. Cllr John Howard will only reply concerning press misquotes. He hasn’t answered any of my questions. The press are more important than Wanstead residents in the eyes of Redbridge council.

    1. If this is about having a higher turnover of parking on Wanstead High St then a very simple way to solve this would be to make it a 2 hour maximum stay zone – if you stay in the same spot for over 2 hours you get a penalty charge notice. That way there is no need for machines etc The proposed method of RinGO will be very difficult for some people to use.

      1. In theory yes. But if nobody is around to enforce it then nothing will change. Remember the shock on this website when someone got a ticket parking where they knew they shouldn’t? The 2 hour turnaround will be as adhered to as the double yellow and disabled parking i.e. not at all. The cost for wardens to monitor it in the proposed will no be offset by the parking charges and fines from those that think the rules don’t apply to them. If there are no charges there will be no wardens therefore bugger all adhering.

  4. Spot on Jimbob; turnover could easily be created by a max stay limit.

    But not revenue, which I suspect is one of the fundamentals of the scheme.

    Also, I wouldn’t be surprised if the uptick in Council Revenues, over Council Tax, is at least 10% higher in RPZ areas, for example.

    Whilst paying to park on High Streets and Residents Parking Zones are commonplace in London we should only make these changes when absolutely justified.

    Did anyone ask why so much actual/proposed control to the west of the High Street and so little to the east? Just one of the aspects of the proposal which suggests it lacks rigour.

      1. I use my car reasonably. I use public transport near enough exclusively and get my shopping delivered by Ocado/Waitrose/Sainsburys. I don’t drive during the week but they want to charge me £42 to leave the car where it is. Bad enough paying car tax for the bit of tootling around I do (mainly visiting family who don’t have good public transport links to Wanstead) without this as well.

    1. Kids playing in the park doesn’t pullute, injure or kill people quite like our over dependency on cars.

      Badly parked and badly driven cars is the worst part of using our high street in which the majority use without cars.

      1. At the junction of Overton Drive/St. Mary’s Avenue/Langley Drive there is a crossing which you rely on driver consideration. I thank all of those drivers who have stopped down the years for me and my shambolic brood to cross safely. However some speed over the bumps in Langley Drive, through the crossing and then spend a minute or two squeezing through the width restriction into Overton Drive. Also cars are parked so close to the crossing thanks to the lack of yellow lines, that some cars can’t get through without going over the kerb of the crossing. Maybe some of that £93,000 could be spent on a nice Zebra crossing that would be far more useful.

  5. I have received an email response from Cllr Cummins with LBR Leadership copied in and can advise the following:

    ‘You may already be aware from the press and social media, that councillors are holding a public meeting at the ROVSCO Scout Hall at the corner of the High Street and Hollybush Hill on Friday, 13th January 2017 at 7.15pm to discuss and hear residents views on the proposals.

    In addition a deputation will be made to Council at the Council Meeting on Thursday, 19th January at the Town Hall at 7.15pm. A number of questions to the cabinet member Cllr John Howard will also be tabled by the public. Should you wish to ask one, please contact the joint Head of Constitutional Services, Tony Prescod on 0208 708 2204 or e-mail him at tony.prescod@redbridge.gov.uk by 3rd January’.

    I have replied back asking for clarication about attending meeting on the 19th in person to allow members of our community to (1) make deputation and (2) ask questions of Cllr Howard, (3) speak at the meeting. My understanding according to the information on the LBR website is we (public) are certainly allowed to do (1) and (3). Watch this space for futher updates… I also read press intervew from Athwal today, ambiguous, vague and disappointing, further reinforcing community concerns that this a stitch up of the community.

    1. Cllr John Howard won’t be there. Re: press intervew from Athwal today – He says he will not wilt under pressure from local residents like the Tories. Is this just political point scroring? Why are Wanstead residents been treated like a political football? Athwal comes across as a meglomaniac who won’t consider any views outside his narrow political sphere. We are the ones who live in Wanstead and will be directly affected by this, surely our views should be taken into consideration before any parking scheme is implemented.

    1. If you read the Redbridge Parking Strategy (https://www.redbridge.gov.uk/media/1218/redbridge-parking-strategy.pdf), the first value is Transparency and Collaboration. There has been no transparency nor collaboration.

      I saw no mention of not wilting under pressure from local residents in the Redbridge Parking Strategy, which in my opinion is the opposite of collaboration, yet Cllr Athwal states this as if it is something to be proud of.

      Like the Orwellian Ministry of Truth, the Parking Strategy bears no relationship to the actions of Cllr Athwell and Cllr Howard. If only they were aliens from Mars, they could inflict their double speak on the Martians.

Comments are closed.