Content

9.1

The Committee
considered a report of the Executive Director-City Futures
detailing the receipt of
objections to a proposed Traffic Regulation Order (TRO)
for
the
introduction ‘no waiting at any time’ restrictions as
well as shared use permit
and
parking bays in Kelham Island and Neepsend. The report also set out
the
background to the Kelham Island and Neepsend parking
scheme, other
consultation comments and the Council’s response to
the representations
received.

 

 

9.2

RESOLVED
UNANIMOUSLY: That the
Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee:
 

• Consider the objections to the proposed Traffic Regulation Order
with particular regard to how they relate to the proposed double
yellow lines included within the parking scheme;

 

• Having considered the objections, decide to make the Traffic
Regulation Order (as amended) in accordance with the Road Traffic
Regulation Act 1984, specifically;

 

• Approve the implementation of the proposed pay and display
(P&D) parking

scheme in Kelham Island, including ordering the
P&D machines – but not in

Neepsend at this time due to a desire to undertake
additional work – focussing on businesses - to see how the
effects of the originally proposed scheme could be
mitigated;

 

• Approve the implementation of the ‘no loading and no
waiting’ restrictions

within Kelham Island and Neepsend; and

 

• Note that there will be additional engagement within the
Neepsend area –

focussing on businesses - to see how the effects of
the originally proposed permit scheme could be reduced. The pay and
display/permit scheme in Neepsend will not be implemented until
after this engagement has taken place. Any future recommendation to
implement a pay and display/permit scheme in Neepsend would be made
via officer or Committee decisions as appropriate and per the
requirements of the Council’s constitution;

 

• Note that the Council’s Traffic Regulations team will
inform all consultation

respondents accordingly;

 

• Note that a review of the scheme will be carried out after
around 12 months of the approved scheme being active;

 

• Note the advertising of additional restrictions on Douglas
Road/Wallace Road to help reduce the effect of potential displaced
parking, especially for larger vehicles

 

• Note the use of a Temporary Traffic Regulation Order to help
facilitate the

implementation of the scheme (if approved), using
‘tow away’ powers if necessary

 

Note that the recommendations being implemented were
subject to funding being
confirmed.

 

 

9.3

Reasons for Decision

 

 

9.3.1

The proposed Kelham
Island and Neepsend parking scheme should:
 
• Improve
conditions for local businesses residents by ensuring the
availability of convenient parking spaces for residents, business
and visitors and giving them a greater level of priority where
appropriate through issuing permits;
 
• Improve
access through the area and loading and unloading opportunities for
all vehicles (especially larger ones) by removing parking at or
near junctions; and
 
• Improve
conditions for sustainable travel modes – the Kelham
Island/Neepsend parking scheme includes restrictions that enable
improved facilities for walking and cycling, as well as ensuring
that public transport is not impeded by inappropriate
parking.
 
• Following the
initial consultation, not implement the pay and display element in
Neepsend at this time due to a plan to undertake additional work
with businesses in Neepsend to see how the effects of the original
scheme could be mitigated.

 

 

9.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

 

 

9.4.1

Consideration was
given to limited waiting, without charging (e.g. 4 hours, no return
within 2 hours), with permits considered where appropriate.
However, this was discounted for the following reasons:
 

•      
Enforcement of the restrictions are more
resource intensive and time consuming;

•      
Puts pressure on existing enforcement
resources as limited extra income through enforcement may not cover
additional costs;

•      
Lack of consistency of approach with
other areas of the City;

•      
Residents and businesses could feel that
they are being charged to park in the area where visitors (and
potentially commuters) may not; and

·      
There is anecdotal evidence from schemes
around the City that suggest that people may move their vehicles
part way through the day to avoid the 4-hour
restrictions.

 

 

9.4.2

Consideration was
given to implementation of the whole scheme as initially
advertised. However, this was discounted for the following
reasons:
 
•      
Doesn’t take account of the
differential parking demands and needs between Kelham Island and
Neepsend
•      
Following the initial consultation, it is
planned to undertake additional work with businesses in Neepsend to
see how the effects of the original scheme could be
mitigated

 

 

9.4.3

Consideration was given to cheaper all day parking
tariffs. However, this was discounted for the following
reasons:

•      
Demand must properly be managed through the setting
of appropriate tariffs. Otherwise, parking capacity for local
businesses, residents and visitors could at times be
inadequate

•      
Cheaper tariffs could also increase the occurrence
of traffic circulating searching for car parking spaces, leading to
increased traffic movements.
•      
Lack of integration
with local and regional strategies.