Agenda item

The Committee considered a report of the Corporate Director of Regeneration, Economy and Growth which advised of the proposed changes to the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) in Seaham, Dawdon and Deneside and requested that they consider the objections made during the informal and formal consultation period (for copy see file of minutes).

The Traffic Management Section Manager gave a detailed presentation which included site location plans, aerial photos and photographs of the sites and details of the following restrictions;

·        To introduce introduce ‘no waiting at any time’ restrictions (double yellow lines) in the pedestrianised area of Church Street to address obstructive parking, and improve safety for pedestrians.  Five objections were received in the informal consultation phase from local businesses who expressed concerns with loading and un-loading.

·        To introduce ‘no waiting at any time’ restrictions (double yellow lines) at the junction of Gregson Terrace and Seaton Lane which had been requested by residents to address visibility and road safety issues where a number of cars parked and narrowed the width of the road. Two objections had been received during the informal consultation phase from directly affected frontages.

·        To introduce ‘no waiting at any time’ restrictions (double yellow lines) at the junction of Hazel Dene Way and Hill Crescent and on the west side of the carriageway of Hill Crescent. These amendments were requested by Durham Constabulary to address visibility and road safety issues where cars parked on the grassed verge and on the junction of Hazel Dene Way and Hill Crescent. One objection was received in both the informal and formal consultation phase from the same resident who claimed they would be forced to park further down the road, away from their property.

·        To introduce ‘no waiting at any time’ restrictions (double yellow lines) on Admiralty Way in Fox Cover Industrial Estate as requested by local businesses. The proposals were to address issues with visibility and road safety at the accesses to units 3 and 4. One objection was received in the informal consultation phase which stated that this was not an area for concern.

Councillor Bell referred to the photographs of Church Street and asked whether the bollards pictured would remain open.  The Traffic Management Section Manager advised that bollards were difficult to enforce as they were often removed, local businesses managed to get a key to remove them and it was difficult to enforce access restrictions.   The bollards had to be removable for emergency services and street cleaning and therefore this proposal would allow the Council to take enforcement action.

In response to a question from Councilllor Bell, the Traffic Management Section Manager advised that the business owners who had objected did have access to the rear of their premises.

Councillor Boyes asked details of the number of businesses that would be affected by the proposal.  The Civil Engineering Technician advised that of around forty businesses on the strip, only would be affected.

Councillor Boyes referred to the current road markings at Gregson Terrace and asked what difference the proposal would make if the keep clear markings were currently being ignored.  The Traffic Management Section Manager advised that keep clear was an advisory marking enforced by police whereas double yellow lines were enforced by the Council.  The area would be patrolled and fixed penalty notices could be issued after a five minute observation period and this discouraged people more.

With regards to Hazel Dene Way, Councillor Bell queried whether this was a new development site and if so, why weren’t double yellow lines considered at the time.  The Traffic Management Section Manager advised that it appeared to be a modern site but he was unaware of the reasons it wasn’t proposed at original planning stage, but only summise the Officer did not expect there to be any issues at the time.

Councillor Bell asked whether there was a history of complaints and the Traffic Management Section Manager advised that Durham Constabulary had requested action to keep the junction free as they were concerned that traffic was being pushed into the central line.  The Civil Engineering Technician advised that the concerns were along the stretch of Hill Crescent and he was not aware of any requests, the proposal was a request from the police.

Resolved

That the proposal in principle to proceed with the implementation of the Seaham, Dawdon and Deneside Parking and Waiting Restrictions Order 2021 be endorsed.