Agenda item

The Committee considered a report of the Corporate Director, Regeneration and Economic Development regarding objections made to a proposed traffic regulation order in Wolsingham (for copy see file of Minutes).

The Strategic Traffic Manager informed the Committee that the County Council were committed to regularly reviewing traffic regulation orders to ensure that the restrictions held within them were relevant and appropriate.  As a result, the Council had held a well-attended consultation event earlier in the year at Wolsingham Library whereby comments were invited as to how waiting restrictions in the town could be improved.  A number of suggestions were put forward by those attending the event and added to the initial plan drafted by County Council Officers for consultation.

Initial consultation letters, plans and response cards were delivered to all properties directly affected by the proposals in April 2014.  Following this a request was received for additional restrictions covering the junction of Holywell Lane/Uppertown and was added to the overall proposals.  The full scheme was advertised on site between 18 June to 19 July 2014.

Two objections were received to the advertised order which both related to the A689, Front Street and were summarised for the Committee.

The Committee then heard from one of the objectors who raised the following issues:

·         the consultation documents that appeared in January 2014, contained no proposal to have double-yellow lines outside his property;

·         there had been very little publicity for the consultation event;

·         the resident had no rear access to his property;

·         when people park properly there was good visibility and the Council installed low bearing paving so that traffic could park on the pavement;

The Strategic Traffic Manager responded to the issues raised by the objector and reiterated that the consultation had been held in the local library and there had been no ‘secret meetings’.  The Council were always keen to talk about such proposals and discussions were held over a period of time.  The Strategic Traffic Manager also pointed out that vehicles were allowed to legitimately load or unload outside the resident’s property.  The Council also had to ensure that the safety of pedestrians was not compromised and didn’t wish to encourage people to park on paved areas.

Councillor Shuttleworth informed the Committee that he had lodged an objection almost two years ago regarding traffic regulation in Wolsingham, based on his own public consultation where had delivered 625 letters, 401 which were returned objecting to the plan and 13 were in support.  Since that time, Councillor Shuttleworth had been anxious of the implementation of restrictive parking. Councillor Shuttleworth was concerned that the County Council’s consultation mentioned nothing about the cost of the scheme or how many people had attended the consultation event or the reason for the consultation.  Councillor Shuttleworh felt personally, that it would have detrimental effect on businesses in the town and felt that his own consultation gave a true view of the people of Wolsingham.  Councillor Shuttleworth explained that he had real difficulty in accepting the statement made in paragraph 4.1 of the report that ‘officers do not feel the restrictions would have detrimental impact on the local economy in this case’, and the business owners appear to support this, yet those people were not referred to in the report.

Councillor Shuttleworth also placed on record his support for the resident present at the meeting regarding his objection to the no waiting at any time restrictions adjacent to the Black Bull Public House and Doctors Surgery.

Councillor Wilkes was unclear on what restrictions were already in place, what was being proposed and asked how many spaces were being lost, how many accidents had been reported in the last 10 years and how many complaints had the Council received.

The Strategic Traffic Manager explained to the Committee that he did not have the information that Councillor Wilkes had requested and commented that the scheme had been brought about in conjunction with local residents, the local area, the parish council and demonstrated that the Council were reflecting local needs and in accordance with people’s wishes.

Councillor Kay speaking as a keen cyclist felt that other road users needed to be considered at this particular location which he viewed as being particularly dangerous.

Councillor Temple felt a degree of sympathy with the local resident who objected to the scheme given that the restrictions directly affected access to his home.  He also reminded the Committee that the resident had no vehicular access to the rear of his property and felt it was a step too far in placing parking restrictions outside of his property. Councillor Temple commented that the Committee had heard that there were no proposals of this type in January for this particular area and queried where the proposal had emerged from.

In response the Strategic Traffic Manager reiterated that the scheme was borne out of the wishes of the local community and through consultation, hence the reason why the parking restrictions in the area had been reviewed.

Councillor Stradling felt that the consultation exercise, together with the explanation of the scheme provided enough information to enable him to come to a view regarding the scheme and felt that it should go ahead, on the proviso that it be reviewed in six months’ time in terms of its effectiveness and operation, given the concerns expressed by the resident.

Resolved

That the Committee endorse the proposal as outlined in the report and that the operation and effectiveness be reviewed and reported back after six months of operation.