25 June (Part 1) - Public Realm report : Round 3
If
Cheryl Bacon had not chosen to take Bexley council
down the road to ridicule again
the public would have learned what her husband’s
Strategic Parking Review had come up with. However, as is far too often the case, Bexley council
decided to break the law by holding a public meeting in what Cheryl called ’closed session’. She
refused to allow any member of the public to attend it, not even reporters, i.e. me.
In law she has to rerun the meeting, but don’t hold your breath. Upholding the
law of the land is not what Bexley council generally does. In the circumstances,
if Bexley’s residents are to learn anything of what may be in store by way of a
new parking regime, the only way forward is to report some of the highlights of
what was in the Agenda here.
A sub-Committee had been set up consisting of
councillors Brian Beckwith, Munir Malik, Howard Marriner, June Slaughter,
Michael Tarrant and chaired by John Waters. A strange mixture of the wise and
the slightly mad. Their aim was to “further the economic prosperity of the
borough” and representatives of both Richmond and Westminster councils’ parking
departments attended some of their meetings; what one might call the good and
the ugly extremes of enforcement.
The sub-group’s final recommendations were as follows…
• Clear consistent signage.
• Priority for Bexley residents in an attempt to exclude Kent commuters.
• Retain phone parking (the report referred to its unpopularity) and retain cash and
credit card payments in car parks.
• The 10 pence surcharge for phone parking should be scrapped but recouped
through increased SMS and extension charges.
• The weakness of the local economy should be considered when setting
charges near shopping areas.
• Short parking, e.g. 10 minutes, should be allowed in marked bays for low
or zero charge close to shops.
• A ‘finer grained’ payment structure should be considered near shops.
• CPZ boundaries near stations should be reviewed.
• A residents’ parking payment card should be actively pursued.
• The council should continue to operate the car parks.
• Civil Enforcement Officers should be trained in sympathy and consistency.
• Any Free Parking at Christmas should be notified in advance.
• Disabled bays in car parks to remain free.
• Residents’ bay operation times should align with nearby car parks to
avoid displacement from one to the other.
What the Scrutiny Committee thought of that may never be known
thanks to councillor Bacon’s law breaking. It is interesting to note that
councillor Craske’s policy of absolutely no change to CPZs may be looked at
again. It may also be interesting to Craske watchers that the Review begins
with the words “The council has a statutory responsibility to provide adequate
parking for Bexley residents”. Only the evening before the purple pygmy told the Finance
Committee that there was
no legal obligation to provide car parks. Purple prat?
There is no Agenda reference that I can find to what the public may have said in
the Consultation, but Bexley never takes any notice of them so why waste the
paper and ink?
Public Realm report : Round 1
Public Realm report : Round 2