Our response to three consultations

On behalf of Quinta Village Green Residents Association (QVGRA) and Underhill Residents Group (URG), we write to register our strong opposition to all three Controlled Parking Zone proposals currently under consideration in our area:

1. Underhill South CPZ Parking Engagement (SCR652) – which closed 28 July 2025 (to which we have already submitted a formal objection).

2. Chipping Barnet D CPZ Statutory Consultation (ref: SCR634)  – closing 14 August 2025.

3. Barnet Hospital Experimental CPZ Extension (Ref: Experimental BH CPZ Extension) – closing 24 August 2025.

Our objections are set out below:

Non-compliant Consultation Process

Under the Local Government Act 1972 and the Traffic Management Act 2004, public consultations must be timely, accessible, and transparent. This process has fallen short:

• Incomplete notifications – Many directly affected residents received no formal notice. In some cases, letters arrived only after repeated complaints, and with inconsistent deadlines (some given until 4 August despite the consultation closing 28 July).

• Seasonal disadvantage – Launching consultations during the summer holidays reduces engagement as many residents are away and some businesses, such as the barber shop are closed.

• Inconsistent treatment – Following complaints of non-receipt of the consultation letter, some roads (e.g., Cedar Lawn Avenue) were told that the letter distributor “could not access letterboxes” despite them being clearly accessible. No extended deadlines were then offered.

• Multiple overlapping consultations – Three simultaneous overlapping CPZs creates confusion and risks suppressing meaningful public participation and inadequate engagement, contrary to Department for Transport (DfT) “Guidance on the Procedures for Traffic Regulation Orders” (DfT, 2016), which recommends clear, sequential consultations to avoid public confusion and ensure informed participation.

Disproportionate Measures

• The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) advises that parking controls should be proportionate and evidence-led. Introducing CPZs, paid parking, and yellow lines around six small shops and a community centre is excessive, risks economic harm, and does not reflect the area’s actual parking stress.

• Such measures will deter local shoppers, harming the viability of these businesses.

Lack of Evidential Need and Broad Opposition

Under Regulation 9 of The Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996, proposals should be supported by relevant data. No parking stress surveys have been published for any of the three schemes, which are all at different stages of the consultation process. Our evidence from residents shows:

Our members and wider community engagement confirm the proposals are:

• Unnecessary – There are no widespread parking issues in these areas that justify such schemes.

• Misguided – The Council appears to be pre-emptively imposing CPZs to deal with possible displacement from Barnet Hospital and the High Barnet station high density overdevelopment, rather than tackling root causes (e.g., insufficient hospital parking, lack of parking provision in new developments).

• Financially harmful – Residents would bear new permit costs during a cost-of-living crisis.

• Unjustified – No published evidence supports the need.

• Unwanted – Feedback across all three consultations shows strong opposition, with residents consistently rejecting CPZ imposition.

Transparency and Intent

• Freedom of Information requests submitted by residents (including QVGRA) for parking stress data, consultation responses, complaint statistics, briefing notes, and financial projections were refused on the grounds of “incomplete data.”

• This refusal, combined with unpublished parking stress surveys at every stage, undermines public trust in both the process and the Council’s stated rationale.

• This undermines the principles of openness set out in the Local Government Transparency Code 2015

• In the case of the Barnet Hospital Extension CPZ, the Council has proceeded despite the majority in the engagement stage opposing it.

Questionable Use of Past Consultation Results

• The July 2023 “Underhill and Surrounding Area” CPZ results, now being used to justify the Chipping Barnet D CPZ statutory consultation, are inadequate and misleading.

• The claim that “only 15% objected” is meaningless without stating the percentage who supported a CPZ.

• References to “25% wanting traffic issues investigated” are unrelated to parking and cannot be used to justify a CPZ.

Call for Strategic, Joined-Up Solutions

Rather than imposing CPZs to manage anticipated or existing displacement, we urge Barnet Council to adopt measures in line with the DfT’s Manual for Streets and NPPF by:

• Working with Barnet Hospital for the provision of a multi-storey car park for staff and patients.

• Ensuring new developments include adequate on-site parking provision.

• Exploring alternative measures to manage any genuine, evidenced parking pressures.

• Using targeted, evidence-led interventions instead of blanket CPZs.

These are the kinds of long-term, joined-up solutions that prevent the displacement problem from being passed to nearby residential streets — and from imposing ongoing financial penalties on residents for the Council’s lack of strategic planning.

Without transparent, robust evidence of need, these CPZs are inconsistent with statutory duties, government guidance, and good practice in traffic management. Without clear and published evidence of a genuine parking problem, these schemes cannot be justified.