Pitshanger CPZ

This is to kick off the forum section of the new Pitshanger Portal with a discussion about the proposed Pitshanger CPZ, which is currently undergoing a public consultation that ends on 26 Apr 13.

There is a hot topic section for the CPZ on the Pitshanger Portal at:


As many will know, the Council held a CPZ exhibition last Saturday at the Methodist hall in Pitshanger Lane. About 100 local residents attended, and had a chance to look at large scale plans of the proposed Pitshanger CPZ and to quiz the Cleveland Ward Councillors and Council Officers on the finer points of how CPZs work.

The exhibition sparked many interesting - and sometimes animated - discussions as the pros and cons were tossed back and forth. Although a turnout of 100 people was said by Council Officers to be much higher than usual for these events, it is of course only a small fraction of the local population.

We feel it would be beneficial for more people to have a chance to air their views and understand other people's perspectives, so we have arranged a PCA Public Meeting on Wednesday 17th April 2013 at 8pm, The Methodist Hall, Pitshanger Lane.

Come and have your say. We look forward to seeing you there.

The result of the Council's Pitshanger CPZ consultation is a decisive NO vote.  The Council has reported on this as follows:

"The overall consultation results for both the core and outer areas show the majority were against the proposals.


Yes      (189) 27%

No       (524) 73%


Yes      (177) 35%

No       (325) 65%

It is therefore not feasible to recommend controlled parking on an area wide basis.

Street by street analysis of the results show that there were several roads on the fringes of the existing zones to the south, which were in favour of controlled parking. This is a common occurrence for such consultations, as naturally these roads are the most susceptible to displaced parking from neighbouring controlled areas.

Further scrutiny of the results shows that this demand for controlled parking is not substantial and generally too insufficient to consider control in these roads. For example, while Montpellier Avenue is shown to have been 75% in favour, only 4 residents responded to the consultation. Even where this figure is slightly higher - Castlebar Hill 10 for, 5 against – this is still a minor representation of those consulted. In conclusion, we do not recommend the introduction of controlled parking in either the core, or outer areas.

However, as previously discussed, we intend to explore means to improve safety and accessibility in the area. These proposals will include the introduction of double yellow lines at key junctions and various additional no waiting restrictions on major roads to aid traffic flow during peak hours".