Why is this being proposed? Haven’t we rejected this idea once before?

    It was interest from within the community that first prompted the Council to consult the public on parking controls in Holtwhites Hill and Holtwhites Avenue. A stage-one consultation to assess the general level of interest was undertaken in 2015. This generated 59 responses to the question of whether parking controls (operational period not specified) would be welcomed. At this time 36 households (61%) said yes; 23 households (39%) said no. Responses indicated that a 7-day, 9am to 6pm zone would be the most popular option.

    A second consultation followed in 2016 in which respondents were asked whether they favoured the introduction of the 7-day, 9am to 6pm zone. This time the 55 responses were split between 23 (42%) saying yes, and 32 (58%) saying no. Many of those saying ‘no’ cited not agreeing with the days or hours proposed, rather than disagreeing with the principle in general. 

    In light of the conflicting results, the proposal was shelved for a period, but correspondence supporting parking controls has continued to be received. In addition, the Council sees a wider benefit to encouraging better travel habits amongst commuters who might switch to more helpful modes of travel for their routine journeys if free on-street parking space near local centres and train stations is curtailed.

    There may exist a natural difference of opinion between those living at either end of the area of interest. Towards the bridge, residents may have greater concern with parking associated with station users at Gordon Hill and believe short period controls will suffice. Towards Chase Side, residents witness short-stay parking across the day for the nearby outlets, and perhaps longer-term parking for Enfield Town beyond, and favour all-day controls.

    The Council’s latest proposal is to introduce controls to match the nearby Gordon Hill zone, weekdays, noon to 1pm. Short control hours typically prove effective in deterring parking by station users, freeing up kerbside space within the area of interest. The single hour control in the middle of the day should also deter parking by at least some of those tempted to park here when visiting Enfield Town. With regard to the nearby shops, it should interrupt the parking habits of staff leaving cars parked in Holtwhites Hill across the day.

    While it may do little to deter the evening parking or short-stay day-time parking of customers, the Council feels this is the component of present parking activity we should be most accepting of, as it contributes to the vitality of the outlets and is not the type of parking we expect to be fully deterred by zonal controls in any case, even if operating all day.

    The Council does not claim that any parking scheme can suit everybody, nor that it guarantees there being as much space as residents might wish for. Any scheme has its drawbacks and limitations. However, regardless of the type of parking activity that applies, any form of control tilted in favour of residents will tend to allow them greater opportunity to dominate the most conveniently placed on-street spaces, relative to non-residents.

    The borough has 20 such parking zones in place, some dating back many decades. What is clear, when looking at the large volume of correspondence the Council receives on the subject, is that requests to add or extend zonal controls are very numerous, while requests to have pre-existing controls removed are rare if not non-existent.

    Residents should consider this carefully before rejecting the opportunity of parking controls or labelling a proposal as pointless merely for not being able to offer everything to everyone.


    The Council is simply trying to impose a scheme to introduce parking charges, right?

    The Council is responding to long-standing requests from the community for parking controls. It also sees a wider benefit to encouraging better travel habits amongst commuters who might switch to more helpful modes of travel for their routine journeys if free on-street parking space near local centres and train stations is curtailed. However, it has many other interested neighbourhoods where it might focus resources and will not introduce controls here if a clear majority feel they will offer little benefit.



    Why do permit prices depend on engine size? Why are they not free?

    Charging for permits reflects the ongoing costs of scheme administration and additional enforcement activity. It also reflects that providing parking schemes to favour residents is an additional service, rather than part of the Council’s core duties. None of the government-controlled costs associated with car ownership – such as annual vehicle tax – convey upon the motorist an entitlement to preferential parking. The charging regime applies across the borough and is based, broadly, on the concept that vehicles with larger engines will occupy the greatest amount of space and be the most polluting. Should residents dislike the pricing regime, they may oppose the parking scheme.

    How will this tackle nuisance evening parking for nearby pubs and restaurants?

    With regard to the nearby shops, it should interrupt the parking habits of staff leaving cars parked in Holtwhites Hill across the day. While it may do little to deter the evening parking or short-stay day-time parking of customers, the Council feels this is the component of present parking activity we should be most accepting of, as it contributes to the vitality of the outlets and is not the type of parking we expect to be fully deterred by zonal controls in any case, even if operating all day. Regardless of the type of parking activity that applies, any form of control tilted in favour of residents will tend to allow them greater opportunity to dominate the most conveniently placed on-street spaces, relative to non-residents.

    How will this tackle nuisance parking associated with the school run?

    The Council does not claim that zonal parking controls are effective at deterring the sort of ultra-short-stay ‘fly parking’ seen around schools. This sort of nuisance behaviour is widespread, and the Council continues to pursue various channels to tackle it.

    How will this tackle nuisance parking associated with events at the sports centre?

    The proposal offers limited benefit in deterring this element of parking activity. Regardless of the type of parking activity that applies, any form of control tilted in favour of residents will tend to allow them greater opportunity to dominate the most conveniently placed on-street spaces, relative to non-residents.

    Won’t nearby housing developments only make parking space scarcer?

    Across the borough, and the wider region, housing density continues to grow with the rising population. Zonal parking schemes do not offer a guarantee that residents will be left with as much parking space as they would like. Nor does such an aspiration match overarching transport policy given the issues of climate change, congestion across the wider network and low levels of physical activity. All agencies need to work towards a future where households own fewer cars and use them less frequently. However, controls do offer residents an advantage over non-residents in finding spaces convenient to their homes.

    Why should Trinity Street be excluded from the proposals?

    Why should Trinity Street be excluded from the proposals?

    The proposals are focussed on Holtwhites Hill and Holtwhites Avenue as it has been residents of these streets that have contacted the Council in recent years to request parking controls. The Council could consider extending the proposals to Trinity Street but, hitherto, has seen little evidence that its inclusion would be supported. The public highway is a communal resource and zonal parking controls are not generally intended to favour one group of residents over another. Given that the proposed controls only apply for one hour in the middle of the day, they would not stop drivers living on Trinity Street from seeking overspill parking space on Holtwhites Hill when domestic demand is greatest, which is typically overnight.

    What about speeding and road safety on Holtwhites Hill? Why not add a zebra crossing? Wouldn’t a speed camera generate revenue?

    The most recent speed survey data captured on this road found that speeds amongst the main body of drivers were reasonably well controlled. The provision of speed cameras does not fall under the Council’s remit, and this site is unlikely to be deemed suitable in any case, as its recent road safety history reveals few injury collision incidents. Hindrance to the progress of buses, and to passenger comfort, is one drawback of providing traffic hump style measures on roads such as this. Zebra crossings and similar can be considered but are best provided where there is a reasonably high number of crossing movements focussed around the proposed position of the crossing. A zebra crossing that was seldom used might find local drivers ill-prepared to stop on the rare occasions when a pedestrian stepped out expecting to enjoy priority. For that reason, zebra crossings tend not to be used primarily as a slowing feature.