Hillingdon Council Cabinet Member and Officer Decisions
Informal Consultation on Extending Northwood Hills (NWH) Resident Parking Scheme
Report Document
Can't see the PDF? Download Report
Decision / Minutes Document
Can't see the PDF? Download Minutes
Text extracted from PDFs
View Report Text
Democratic Services Location: Phase II DDI: 01895 250692 CMD No: 2026/1791 To: COUNCILLOR WAYNE BRIDGES CABINET MEMBER FOR RESIDENTS SERVICES c.c. All Members of the Residents Services Select Committee c.c. Dan Kennedy, Corporate Director of Residents Services c.c. Gordon Hill, Residents Services c.c. Ward Councillors for Northwood Hills Date: 20 August 2026 Non-Key Decision request Form D Informal Consultation on Extending Northwood Hills (NWH) Resident Parking Scheme Dear Cabinet Members, Attached is a report requesting that a decision be made by you as an individual Cabinet Member. Democratic Services confirm that this is not a key decision, as such, the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 notice period does not apply. You should take a decision on or after Friday 28 August 2026 in order to meet Constitutional requirements about publication of decisions that are to be made. You may wish to discuss the report with the Corporate Director before it is made. Please indicate your decision on the duplicate memo supplied and return it to me when you have made your decision. I will then arrange for the formal notice of decision to be published. Ryan Dell Democratic Services Title of Report: Informal Consultation on Extending Northwood Hills (NWH) Resident Parking Scheme Decision made: Reasons for your decision: (e.g. as stated in report) Alternatives considered and rejected: (e.g. as stated in report) Signed ……………………………………………………… Date…………………….. Cabinet Member for Residents Services Executive Decision Report Cabinet Member Thursday, 20 August 2026 Classification: Part 1 Public Page 1 Informal Consultation on Extending Northwood Hills (NWH) Resident Parking Scheme Cabinet Member Lead Cabinet Member for Residents Services (Cllr Bridges) Consulting Cabinet Members Chief Officer responsible Corporate Director of Residents Services Report author Gordon Hill, Parking Engineer Report classification and reason Public For General Release Relevant Committee Residents' Services Electoral Ward Northwood Hills 1. Executive Summary Following a resident petition, a 21-day informal consultation was undertaken to gauge support for extending the Northwood Hills parking scheme. Consultation packs were delivered to all properties in the proposed area, and a 29% response rate was achieved, which is typical for this type of exercise. The overall outcome showed clear support for the extension, with 39 responses in favour and 14 against (excluding one void response). Support was strongest in Middleton Drive and Joel Street. Middleton Drive recorded 26 responses, of which 21 supported the proposal and 5 opposed it. Joel Street had 10 responses, with 9 in favour and 1 against. Elsewhere, responses were fewer and less decisive. Beatrice Close returned three responses (1 in favour, 2 against), Reid Close had one response against, and Wyevale Close recorded four responses split evenly. These results indicate weaker or inconclusive support, particularly in Beatrice Close and Reid Close, where opposition outweighed support. Given this, there is insufficient support to include Beatrice Close and Reid Close at this stage, although residents may petition again in future. Ward Councillors raised no objections. It is recommended that a formal consultation proceeds for Chamberlain Lane, Joel Street, Middleton Drive, and Wyevale Close, recognising that some nearby roads may still experience displaced parking. 2. Recommendations Executive Decision Report Cabinet Member Thursday, 20 August 2026 Classification: Part 1 Public Page 2 That the Cabinet Member for Residents Services: 1) Notes the responses received during the informal consultation; 2) Based on the results of the informal consultation, that a statutory consultation on a detailed design be undertaken in Chamberlain Lane, Middleton Drive, Joel Street and Wyevale Close, as shown in Appendix C , and a scheme be implemented if supported; 3) Proposals be deferred in Reid Close and Beatrice Close. 3. Reasons for decision These recommendations match the views of local residents. 4. Proposal 1. Initially, a petition with 22 signatures, representing 19 properties, was submitted to the Council, from residents mainly living within the vicinity of the Joel Street junctions with Norwich Road and Middleton Drive under the following heading: "The residents are petitioning for parking restrictions on part of Joel Street due to build up of traffic, safety for those coming out of drive, pedestrians/children going to school.” The petition requested the following outcome: “Permit holder bays between 9- 10am and 1 -2pm on house side road. Double yellow opposite where there are no house. No parking for HGVs and large lorries either side.” 2. This part of Joel Street is mostly residential with a builders’ supplies yard at the northern end. Further north, before the Northwood Hills Town Centre, there is a faith centre, which some residents suggest causes parking and traffic issues at certain times of the week. 3. The section of Joel Street between Middleton Drive and Norwich Road can experience some traffic congestion due to the width of the carriageway compared to the rest of Joel Street, and HGVs waiting to access local businesses. 4. In response to this petition an informal consultation took place where the residents indicated support for the scheme to be extended southwards towards the junction with Middleton Drive. The results of this informal consultation were reported to local war d councillors and the Cabinet Member, who instructed officers to prepare a detailed design for further formal consultation. 5. During this formal consultation a further petition was submitted by residents of Chamberlain Lane, Joel Street (south of Middleton Drive) and Middleton Drive, requesting that the proposed scheme be extended further to cover their properties. Rather than hear the petition it was decided to treat it as a response to the formal consultation. Executive Decision Report Cabinet Member Thursday, 20 August 2026 Classification: Part 1 Public Page 3 6. This petition was shared with local ward councillors and the Cabinet Member who agreed in principle of consulting with residents on a further extension depending on if/when the current consultation was implemented. 7. Since the extension to the scheme was implemented in Joel Street it has been reported by residents that the parking has got considerably worse south of the junction with Middleton Drive. 8. Middleton Drive and Chamberlain Lane are residential roads with limited parking on one side of the road only due to the carriageway width although most properties having access to limited off street parking. Part of Chamberlain Lane is private and not part of the public highway. 9. Once the previously proposed extension was in the process of being implemented an informal consultation was carried out in the area shown in Appendix A. 10. A 21-day informal consultation pack was prepared, and a letter and questionnaire sent to every property within the consultation area, asking if they would support the existing Northwood Hills scheme being extended further . A reply -paid return envelope was also supplied, and residents were given three weeks to respond. 11. The headline results are 39 in favour, and 14 against the extension to the parking scheme which represents a response rate of 29%. There was also one void response that was not counted. 12. In Middleton Drive 21 indicated support and five were against the proposal , whilst in Joel Street 10 responses were received (nine in favour and one against). 13. The responses from the other roads were, Beatrice Close (one support, two against), Reid Close (one against) and Wyevale Close (two support and two against). 14. In Wyevale Close, even though there is a balanced response both for and against a scheme, considering this road will be surrounded by a possible scheme extension, should it go ahead, it would be prudent to include the road in the next stage of the process and provide residents a further opportunity to express their views. 15. Beatrice Close and Reid Close, both indicated that they did not support a scheme, and whilst they may be affected should the scheme expand, there isn’t a mandate to include these roads based on the responses received at the present time. 16. These results and the comments (Appendix B) were shared with the local ward councillors who did not express any views on the consultation results. 17. Therefore, based on these results and the initial petition it is recommended that a formal consultation be undertaken on a detailed design in Chamberlain Lane, Joel Street, Middleton Drive and Wyevale Close. This formal consultation will cost about £2,000 and will be funded through an allocation from the Parking Revenue Account. If a scheme is support ed and Executive Decision Report Cabinet Member Thursday, 20 August 2026 Classification: Part 1 Public Page 4 subsequently proposed for installation, then funding for that will be subject to a separate report. 18. Beatrice Close and Reid Close, both indicated that they did not support a scheme, and whilst they may be affected should the scheme expand, there is no mandate to include these roads based on the responses received. Should residents of these roads change their mind then they are invited to petition the Council at a future date. 5. Corporate implications Financial (mandatory) Y Equalities impact assessment Legal (mandatory) Y Workforce Alternative options (mandatory) Y Public Health Risk management (mandatory) Y External partners Asset Communications Procurement Committee comments Planning Digital Climate Change Other a) Financial The estimated cost associated with the recommendations to this report, which is to proceed to formal consultation on proposals, is estimated to be £2,000 which will be managed within existing revenue budgets for the Transportation Service. As is usual practice, the required notice of intent will be combined with other Parking Management Schemes which are at the same stage and will be subject to the Council’s Spend Control Panel approval processes. Following formal consultation, a further Cabinet Member report will be required to consider the responses that are received. At this next stage a funding source will need to be identified to implement or propose further amendments. b) Legal The Council’s power to extend the Northwood Hills (NWH) Resident Parking Scheme is set out in the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. The formal consultation and order -making statutory procedures to be followed before any such extension to the Parking Management Scheme are set out in Schedule 9 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and the Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedures) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996. Any consultation must also meet the standard set by established common law principles in public law, namely fairness and adequacy. If the decision is taken, following formal consultation, to make an order extending Northwood Hills (NWH) Resident Parking Scheme, Part 5 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and the Traffic Executive Decision Report Cabinet Member Thursday, 20 August 2026 Classification: Part 1 Public Page 5 Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 set out the signage requirements, which must be observed. In exercising any of the powers under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, section 122 of the 1984 Act requires the Council to consider its statutory duty to secure the expeditious, convenient and safe movement of vehicular and other traffic (including pedestrians), and the provision of suitable and adequate parking facilities on and off the highway. These powers must be exercised so far as practicable having regard to the following matters: (a) the desirability of securing and maintaining reasonable access to premises; (b) the effect on the amenities of any locality affected and the importance of regulating and restricting the use of roads by heavy commercial vehicles, so as to preserve or improve amenities of the areas through which the roads run; (c) the national air quality strategy; (d) the importance of facilitating the passage of public service vehicles and of securing the safety and convenience of persons using or desiring to use such vehicles; and (e) any other matters appearing to the Council to be relevant. Moreover, the Council has various statutory duties in relation to road safety, such as under section 39 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and section 16 of the Traffic Management Act 2004, which are relevant when deciding on road traffic measures. Pursuant to established public law principles on consultation, the decision maker, when coming to a decision regarding progress of the proposed extension of Northwood Hills (NWH) Resident Parking Scheme must be satisfied that all consultation responses, including those that do not accord with the officer's recommendation, were conscientiously taken into account . To this end, the appendices and content of the report should be referred to. In this report, it is highlighted that the consultation responses helped to inform the recommendation within this report to proceed to a statutory consultation in relation to including Chamberlain Lane, Middleton Drive, Joel Street and Wyevale Close within the Scheme, as shown in Appendix C, whilst not including Reid Close and Beatrice Close. The Council must also be continuously mindful of its public sector equality duty under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010. c) Alternative options Alternative Options Rationale for rejecting option Continue with proposals in Beatrice Close and Reid Close Residents did not indicate that they supported a scheme in these roads. Do nothing That will be against the wishes of our residents as set out in the consultation findings. d) Risk management Executive Decision Report Cabinet Member Thursday, 20 August 2026 Classification: Part 1 Public Page 6 Risk Mitigation Proceeding with the scheme may lead to objections from residents in areas with weaker support, potentially delaying implementation. There is also a risk of displaced parking affecting nearby roads, which could result in further complaints and pressure to extend the scheme. This risk can be mitigated by ensuring clear communication throughout the process, including targeted engagement with residents in less supportive roads to address concerns early. Monitoring parking conditions after implementation and retaining flexibility to extend the scheme, where appropriate, can also help manage displaced parking and reduce the likelihood of ongoing complaints. Failure of communities to engage If local residents fail to engage during the formal consultation then they may not get a scheme that they feel is the best option. 6. Consultation & engagement The overall response rate was 29% which is a normal response rate for an informal consultation. The headline results were 39 in favour, and 14 against the extension to the parking scheme. There was also one void response that was not counted. In Middleton Drive 21 indicated support and five were against the proposal. In Joel Street 10 responses were received (nine in favour and one against) The responses from the other roads were, Beatrice Close (one support, two against), Reid Close (one against) and Wyevale Close (two support and two against). 7. Timetable for implementation Upon the recommendations of this report being approved subject to call-in, a survey of the roads will be undertaken and an extension to the existing Resident Parking Scheme will be developed. Once this design is completed, it will be subject to a statutory formal consultation period to assess the level of support from reside nts. The results of this formal consultation will determine any further actions, such as implementing the scheme. List of appendices attached Appendix A – Area plan and Consultation Area Appendix B – Comments During Informal Consultation Appendix C – Area of Proposed Formal Consultation List of Background Papers NIL. Road Comment Chamberlain Lane Support (if scheme is extended further along Joel Street) I do feel you should get one permit per household free, should be a right to park by your house, not an additional charge. Support Could you please be aware that Chamberlain Lane is a private road and only restricted traffic i.e. deliveries should have access. Also please be advised that all emergency vehicles should also have access. Object We the residents of this property strongly object to the residents parking scheme being extended to Chamberlain Lane. Support The northwood hills Resident Parking Scheme to the junction with Middleton Drive. This has led to unfortunatley cars now parking on both sides of Joel Street when the road is already at its narrowest, making it extremely dangerous to turn left or right out of Middleton Drive - as oncoming traffic in both directions. Please can you enact parking restrictions on Joel Street to at least Reid Close. The road becomes wider here so if cars do park after this point, but is still more safe than at present. You have cars and Grant & Stone lorries parking immeadiatly behind the bus stop and buses cannot get to that bus stop without swinging out to the other side of the road. It's very dangerous for residents of Middleton Drive and Chamberlain Lane - this part of Joel Street is the only part with cars parked on both sides, it has only led to our part of Joel Street being clogged up with parked cars. We need to have the current parking restrictions extended on Joel Street as you turn left out of Middleton Drive. Support The extension of the scheme will cause chaos on the roads just outside the scheme, including Middleton Drive, Joel Street and Chamberlain Lane. These side roads are already crowded with resident vehicles, given the vast majority of these cars are commuters or worshipors, the operating times need to be a sufficient deterrent to this. Object As a resident, I would not be able to afford such expensive permit charges. Support Mon-Fri 10-11am & 3-4pm Joel Street Support Very regular occurance that people park across our drive so anything that discourages that would be welcome. We welcome the mosque making the area more vibrant but this has exacebrated parking issues, and the new scheme has already displaced the problem further. Presumably the new develpment in Haydon Drive will only increase parking issues, so agree that parking conrols in the proposed area would assist. Support Please take the bus stop lines further back opposite Middleton Drive, also further back so drivers can get a clear view when turning onto joel Street, it's so dangerous. Support The bus stops make it difficult for residents to leave driveways so ideally double yellow lines should be placed opposite them, stopping cars parking to avoid passing cars on both sides as it’s a busy road. Support Speed cameras. Operating Mon-Fri 7am-7pm, Saturday 10am-4pm. Support Parking on both sides of Joel Street often causes traffic problems on what is a main route and major bus road. Ideally only one side of the road should have parking to help traffic flow. Support The amount of cars parked on Joel Street make it difficult and accident prone for Joel Street residents to drive out and join traffic, due to lack of visibility created by parked cars. Parked cars often block resident dropped kerbs. Support Why stop at Hayden Drive? There are few houses between there and Southill Lane which could be included. We personally have had no problems with cars parked outside, but I think it's only a matter of time. The volume of traffic has increased tremendously since we have lived herem but especially since ULEZ Middleton Drive Support A scheme operating between 1-2pm on Mon-Thurs is reasonable enough. However, the mosque in Joel Street directly opposite the allotments generates ridiculous parking on Friday afternoons often blocking the free flowing of buses, trucks etc. As such, th Friday times probably need to be 1-3pm. Support Since the parking restrictions were introduced on Joel Street, this has had a negative impact on Middleton Drive residents. Non-permit holders parking on the road and on Joel Street impair visibility when driving in and out of the road. Object Joel Street is a nightmare on Fridays from 1.30pm to 4pm. The traffic is gridlock, this is due to the mosque holding event every Friday and cars are parked on both sides of the road. Should be double yellow lines on Joel Street. Should be double yellow lines on Joel Street to the roundabout in Northwood Hills. No problem for parking in our road Comparitively. Object Not needed, do not want to pay for parking permit, also inconvient for visitors. Object I don't believe there is a problem with commuters in our road. We have two cars, one of which has to be on the road and rarely had a problem parking it. Permits would be an expense that we can't afford. Our children will soon be of driving age and I wouldn't want to burden them with the additional cost in the future either. Object Do not want to pay to park in my road. It is very expensive and no guarantee I will be able to park outside my house. Support Hopefully signs displaying restricted times etc could be fixed to existing structures such as street lights so no extra poles are needed on the footway, and adequate space left for existing dropped kerbs. Currently cars park on the 'odd' number side of the road, leaving the 'even' side clear for parking. Support There are employees of Joel Street Vets that park on our road despite having a huge car park and I would give attention to that first, looking at why they can't use that car park. Use your resources to address pressing issues including the traffic at busy times on Tolcarne Drive due to the narrow carriageway as a result of cars parked both sides and too wide a pavement. And secondly the restricted view when crossing Joel Street opposite the nursery when coming out of the footpath by the stables, wery dangerous for parents/school kids etc and completely overlooked. Support If the scheme only operates between 1-2pm it can be abused and people can find a work around. It should be more than one hour. It could also include weekends, but Mon-Fri is the priority. Support We already get people parking in the road who are not residents e.g. vet staff. Support Would really support the scheme extension down Joel Street and particularly in Middleton Drive. The volume of traffic, congestion and parking problems have increased since the church is used more and especially on Fridays. It's a bottleneck and we constantly have excess parking in our road so the residents can't park. This is also the case with local businesses using our road, and parking across driveways. We think that introducing this scheme would certainly help local residents. Support I suggest that the restriction should be Monday to Saturday more than a few hours in the morning and a few hours in the afternoon because the vet hospital staff will be able to park in the afternoon if on the later shift if the restriction is only one hour, like the Council have done on Joel Street, Support Does this mean that you cannot park outside your own house with a dropped kerb? Unsure I was not made aware of this. There are a lot of people in the area who won't be able to afford this. This scheme should be targetted at those attending the mosque. If you had put yellow lines down Joel Street this would not be an issue. Residents who may have 2+ cars or any car should be exempt, and have a different sort of permit. Reid Close Object not everyone in our close has a drive or a garage. It would be unfair to charge people to park outside their own home. Wyevale Close Object This parking scheme would not work for properties without a driveway on Wyevale Close and would unfairly penalise/tax them. We would suggest it if the permits were available for free to the residents. Support Yes, please take it seriously as it is getting harder to drive on the road while cars are parked irresponsibly and blocking the view. As we near Northwood Hills Station, commuters as well parking their vehicles. Support I feel extending the parking scheme could help with minimising commuter or people attending the mosque on Joel Street. I've noticed a large increase of cars being parked not only in my road but the main road also, it causes so many problems.
View Decision / Minutes Text
Executive Decision Notice – 28 August 2026
This notice is a public document also available to view on the Council's website www.hillingdon.gov.uk
OFFICIAL EXECUTIVE DECISION NOTICE
PUBLISHED BY DEMOCRATIC SERVICES
Notice is hereby given that the following decision(s) have been made today by
Cabinet Members at the London Borough of Hillingdon:
Title of decision Informal Consultation on Extending Northwood Hills (NWH)
Resident Parking Scheme
Reference No. 2026/1791
Date of decision Friday 28 August 2026
Call-in expiry date Monday 07 September 2026
Relevant Select
Committee
Residents Services Select Committee
Relevant Wards Northwood Hills
Decision made
Cabinet Members making
the decision
Councillor Wayne Bridges – Cabinet Member for Residents
Services
Decision Agreed
That the Cabinet Member for Residents Services:
1. Noted the responses received during the informal
consultation;
2. Based on the results of the informal consultation,
that a statutory consultation on a
detailed design
be undertaken in Chamberlain Lane, Middleton
Drive, Joel Street and Wyevale Close, as shown
in Appendix C, and a scheme be implemented if
supported;
3. Proposals be deferred in Reid Close and Beatrice
Close.
Reason for decision These recommendations match the views of local residents.
Alternative options
considered and rejected
Continue with proposals in Beatrice Close and Reid Close –
Residents did not indicate that they supported a scheme in
these roads.
Do nothing – That will be against the wishes of residents as
set out in the consultation findings.
Classification Part I – Public
Link to associated report Here
Relevant Officer contact
& Directorate
Gordon Hill – Residents Services
Any interest declared by
the Cabinet Member(s) /
dispensation granted
N/A
Executive Decision Notice – 28 August 2026
This notice is a public document also available to view on the Council's website www.hillingdon.gov.uk
Implementation of decision & scrutiny call-in
[Internal Use only]
When can this
decision be
implemented by
officers?
Officers can implement Cabinet Member decision in this notice only
from the expiry of the scrutiny call-in period which is:
5pm on Monday 07 September 2026
However, this is subject to the decision not being called in by
Councillors on the relevant Select Committee. Upon receipt of a
valid call-in request, Democratic Services will immediately advise
the relevant officer(s) and the decision must then be put on hold.
Councillor scrutiny
call-in of this
decision
Councillors on the relevant Select Committee shown in this notice
may request to call-in this decision. The request must be before the
expiry of the scrutiny call-in period above.
Councillors should use the Scrutiny Call-in App (link below) on their
devices to initiate any call-in request. Further advice can be sought
from Democratic Services if required:
Scrutiny Call-In - Power Apps (secure)
Further information These decisions, where applicable, have been taken under The
Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access
to Information) (England) Regulations 2012.
This is the formal notice by the Council of the above executive
decision, including links to the reports where applicable.
If you would like more information on this decision, please contact
Democratic Services on 01895 250636 or email:
democratic@hillingdon.gov.uk.
Circulation of this decision notice is to a variety of people including
Members of the Council, Corporate Directors, Officers, Group
Secretariats and the Public. Copies are also placed on the
Council’s website.
Democratic Services
London Borough of Hillingdon
Civic Centre
High Street
Uxbridge
UB8 1UW