Agenda item

The Committee considered a report of the Corporate Director, Regeneration and Economic Development regarding objections received to a consultation about a proposed traffic regulation order which if implemented would see the introduction of permit parking on Bullion Lane (for copy see file of Minutes).

The Strategic Traffic Manager informed the Committee that requests had been received from residents of Bullion Lane asking if the County Council would give consideration to the introduction of residents parking permits because of the difficulties they were experiencing in trying to park near their properties during the day.  Residents were claiming that these problems were being caused by long stay parking by non-residents, most notably commuters using the nearby railway station.

In relation to Bullion Lane, 12 residents were in favour of the proposals and 4 were against. Nine did not respond.  The response rate for the Station Lane/View was less than 50% and therefore, did not meet the criteria to progress any further.

Six objections were received which were summarised for the Committee.

The Committee then heard from a local resident who was not in favour of the proposals and was a resident of Bullion Lane. Her objection was summarised as follows:

·         parking had never been a problem for her personally

·         concern about the problem being moved elsewhere as had happened at the opposite side of the railway station

·         other roads in the area were narrower

·         the introduction of residents parking would likely to move the problem elsewhere

·         as a long term resident she had no real problems with parking

Councillor Wilkes felt that the objections detailed in the report had provided a balanced view.  The potential overspill and transferring of the problem in and around neighbouring streets was extremely concerning.

The Strategic Traffic Manager explained to the Committee that the issues raised were not particularly a highways problem but more of an issue of inconvenience to residents and that the consultation had been carried out at the request of local residents.

Councillor Wilkes felt that the Council would be doing unnecessary work, spending unnecessary money and setting an expensive precedent of potentially being faced with having to devise another scheme for neighbouring streets in 6-12 months’ time to deal with traffic displacement.

Councillor Allen commented that the scheme was an attempt at solving an issue which residents perceived to be a problem and felt that there was very little evidence to support the scheme.

Resolved

That Committee reject the proposal for parking restrictions detailed in the report