WIMBLEDON COMMON WEST RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION

Chairman: Bryan Barkes, Secretary: Simon Rainey, Treasurer: John Hosking

3rd December 2005

Dear Sir,

Third Letter: Proposed CPZ VSW; Reference ES/SGE
Comments on Council’s “Recommendations” following “Consultation”

This letter sets out the representations of the Wimbledon Common West Residents Association after sight of the Recommendations issued by the Council following the recent consultation in to the proposed CPZ. The Association protests most vigorously against the recommendations made and, in particular, the manner in which the Council has sought to change completely the terms of reference of the proposed CPZ.

The starting point is the Newsletter of 30th August announcing the consultation in which (i) the Council stated that the results of its previous consultation on the Causeway showed that a clear majority of residents on the roads affected by the proposed CPZ (those roads being identified as West Side; Camp Road; Camp View; North View; West Place) wanted a CPZ in the area and (ii) the Council stated that it had therefore prepared a proposal for a CPZ covering five roads (Camp Road; Camp View; North View; West Place)  as one unified CPZ scheme to be known as VSW in response to that asserted local demand.

What was put out for consultation was ONE clearly defined scheme involving traffic management proposals for the five roads with the details set out in the plan forming part of the Newsletter and the local residents’ views were sought on THAT defined scheme.

Contrary to the wholly flawed “results” relied upon by the Council as the basis for devising that scheme in the first place, a properly conducted poll by the WCWRA of all residents affected by the proposed CPZ showed that there was a clear and decisive majority against the CPZ scheme which was then being proposed.

The Council, in the light of that overwhelming rejection, has now purported to change the proposed CPZ into a completely different “one road” scheme right in the heart of other residential roads without asking any of the local residents who will be affected for their views.

That is an entirely different scheme from the one previously proposed and the one which was put out for consultation. Effectively, the Council, having received a democratically arrived at rejection of its scheme, has decided to change the rules so as to find some colourable or pretended basis for introducing some form, any form, of CPZ rather than just give up on a flawed proposal which the great majority of local residents simply do not want.

That is both undemocratic and a wholly improper use (or more properly misuse or abuse) of the consultation procedure. If the Council has come up with a yet further new scheme for the CPZ, that scheme also must be put out for a full and proper consultation.

In any event a one-road scheme in the middle of other roads is hopelessly flawed. The Council has repeatedly stated that CPZ’s have to be considered carefully in conjunction with affected local areas and adjacent roads and that a CPZ is meant to represent a holistic approach to roads in a given area for overall traffic management. That is the very basis on which it said it had devised the original VSw scheme which residents have emphatically rejected. How can it be right to introduce a one-road scheme in the middle of a mesh of other roads for a single group of local residents contrary to the wishes of the majority of all other local residents, contrary to the wishes of all local businesses and employers, the local school and all visitors to the Common?

To make matter worse, the Council recommends this new scheme without even asking local residents what they think about it but by trying to rush it in on the back of a proposal put out for consultation which has been overwhelmingly rejected and by trying selectively to pick out of the mass of negative responses enough material to weave a patchy figleaf of democratic respectability for the new and completely unannounced single road scheme. The way in which any comments adverse to the CPZ are treated dismissively by the Council in the Recommendations paper whereas any comment in favour of a CPZ is treated in glowing terms demonstrates that the Council is coming at the topic with a clearly settled agenda of bringing in a CPZ come what may and of using only the bits of the consultation which support a CPZ.

The effects of a one road scheme will inevitably be to cause displacement. Visitors to the Almshouses are likely to use the free parking around the corner in West Place and Camp View rather than to pay for parking tickets. There is not even an assurance that residents of the Almshouses who wish to park their cars will not choose to opt not to pay for the permit and park around the corner also. The Almshouses have not considered the creation of parking spaces for their needs within their extensive grounds (as would be entirely appropriate given the understandable needs of its residents). The proposed one-road CPZ does not begin to address even their concerns because parking and access in evenings and at weekends will be unrestricted. None of these matters have been properly considered or ventilated as they would be by putting the scheme which is now being proposed out for full public consultation.

If the Council wants to go ahead with a completely new and different scheme (and that is what this is), then it must put this new scheme out for a proper, fair and democratic consultation.

As the Council itself said in the Newsletter of 30th August: “When investigating a CPZ, it is normal practice to consider the possible displacement effect that it may have on the immediate neighbouring roads. It is best to include, consider and consult than not as objections may be received in that (sic) the council did not consider the possible impact of controlled parking and did not consult accordingly.” The WCWRA could not have put it better.

Local residents can be forgiven for thinking that the Council is adamant that a paying and revenue earning CPZ will be introduced in this area come what may and whatever the overwhelming majority of local residents want or say. First, the Council misrepresents the results of a previous consultation (see our first letter) to get a CPZ off the ground in the first place. Then, when the Council is given a full poll of local residents which throws out the scheme which the Council has put out for consultation, it cobbles together a yet further and completely new scheme based on a single road out of a network which scheme it then seeks to rush in without any proper consultation.

This is a very bad example of local government and the Council should really be ashamed of the flawed way in which this whole issue is being handled.

Please ensure that this letter is placed before the Cabinet Street Management Committee for the meeting on 6th December.

Yours faithfully,

For and behalf of the Committee of the WCWRA