Agenda item

a   Durham City (North East) - Parking and Waiting Restrictions,    Traffic Regulation Amendment Order 2024

 

b   Durham City (North West) - Parking and Waiting Restrictions,   Traffic Regulation Amendment Order 2024

 

c   Durham City (South East) - Parking and Waiting Restrictions,   Traffic Regulation Amendment Order 2024

 

d   Durham City (South West) - Parking and Waiting Restrictions, Traffic Regulation Amendment Order 2024

 

e   Durham City - On Street Parking Places - Permits and Tariffs,   Traffic Regulation Amendment Order 2024

 

The Chair thanked those in attendance and asked the Lawyer (Planning and Highways), Neil Carter to explain the process in relation to the items on the agenda.

 

The Lawyer (Planning and Highways) reminded Members that they were not the decision makers, rather were providing a guide for the decision maker as set out within the Council’s Constitution, the Corporate Director of Regeneration, Economy and Growth.  He noted that there were several similar proposed Traffic Regulation Amendment Orders and that a joint presentation would be made for all those proposed Order, with Members voting separately on each of the Traffic Regulation Amendment Orders in turn after the presentation, address by registered speakers and Committee debate.

 

The Committee considered five reports of the Corporate Director of Regeneration, Economy and Growth which advised Members of objections received to the consultation concerning changes to the five Traffic Regulation Amendment Orders and requested that they considered the objections made during the informal and formal consultation period (for copy see file of minutes).

 

The Strategic Traffic Manager Dave Lewin, provided a detailed presentation including maps indicating the location of the proposals, aerial photos, photographs of the sites, and details for the following:

 

•      all relevant on-street bays within Durham City such as loading, disabled parking, permit parking, taxi parking be amended so that they operate on a Sunday between 8am and 6pm.

•      income from extending the charging regime to include Sundays and increase of charges by 20p/hour will allow us to extend our Park and Ride operation to provide a Sunday service to facilitate our visitor economy:

•      helping visitors access Durham and make trips more attractive, encouraging future visits.

•      reduce congestion and emissions

•      bring us in line with private sector parking providers in the City.

 

The Chair thanked the Strategic Traffic Manager and asked the Local Member for Elvet and Gilesgate, Councillor D Freeman to speak in relation to the proposals.

 

Councillor D Freeman thanked the Chair and Committee and noted that Durham City was unlike any other town or village in the county, having on-street parking within residential areas and some drivers parking all day, presenting an issue for residents parking.  He added he supported the increase in charges, to help encourage the use of Durham County Council (DCC) car parks or private car parks, or the Park and Ride.  He noted the proposals would also help to tackle air quality in the city centre, and he felt that was positive and largely supported by residents within the city, being a win-win in terms of air quality and increased Park and Ride provision, including Sundays.  He reiterated that he supported the proposals, hoping they would help prevent all day parking within residential streets within the city.

 

The Chair thanked Councillor D Freeman, noted there were no registered speakers from the public and therefore he would ask the Committee for their comments and questions.

 

Councillor D Wood noted he only heard one Local Member representing one of the areas effected speak, and not in terms of changes to Sundays and asked what the response had been from the other Local Members.  He noted the reference to savings and revenue generated and asked how relevant that was, given that in other reports they were not given.  He asked if relevant in this case, he could not see specifics within the report.  Councillor D Wood noted reference to reduction in carbon emissions and asked what the environmental cost would be in terms of all the required alterations to signage across the area.  He noted that the report referred to a meeting of the Cabinet held in September 2023 which set out proposals to extend parking controls, however, he could not see which agenda item was being referred to from that meeting.  He noted page 146 of the Cabinet papers from September referred to passenger numbers on the Park and Ride remaining below pre-COVID levels and noted no reference to free parking after 2.00pm and Durham City within those minutes.

 

The Strategic Traffic Manager noted the Cabinet report covered various interventions and had asked that policy be reviewed to manage parking and provide better services. 

He noted that included charges and tariffs, and the Park and Ride.  He added that in respect of updates to signage, they would be done via a sticker to be placed on to existing signage. 

 

He explained that all Local Members impacted were consulted, and there had been no objections from Durham Members, and while they had not submitted objections, they had not noted their support, other than Councillor D Freeman who had registered to speak at the meeting.  He added that in terms of finances, if there had not been an increase in tariffs and introduction of tariffs on Sunday, then the operation of a Park and Ride service on Sundays would not have been possible.  He explained that if there were any surplus, it would be ringfenced for traffic within County Durham.

 

The Chair noted the Cabinet Member, Councillor E Scott wished to make a point of clarification.  Councillor E Scott emphasised that the decision was not one made by Cabinet, rather it was a delegated decision to be taken by the Corporate Director, having considered the comments from the Highways Committee.  The Lawyer (Planning and Highways) reiterated that the decision was delegated to the Corporate Director, with the Highways Committee offering guidance, and was not a decision for Cabinet.  Councillor D Wood noted that Cabinet had recommended that this report come forward and asked again in terms of whether savings and revenue could be considered as being material.  The Lawyer (Planning and Highways) noted that Government guidance on parking schemes required them to be self-financing, with the Officer’s report noting the increase from these tariffs would enable the improvements set out to be brought forward.

 

S Drummond, a member of the public present, noted that the increases proposed represented a disproportionate increase in terms of the lower charges.  The Strategic Traffic Manager noted the flat increase was a practical consideration, noting if a percentage increase had been applied this would have represented fractions of pence, impractical to charge or collect.

 

Councillor J Howey asked if there was going to be more emphasis on advertising the Park and Ride services, and asked if any surplus could be spent upon maintenance of parking areas and bays.  The Strategic Traffic Manager noted the Park and Ride service was advertised and the Council would always look to strengthen the promotion of the services available.  He added that the benefits would be further than in terms of the positive impact upon parking, there were benefits to air quality and reiterated that Government noted that revenue must first be used to pay for a service, then any surplus ringfenced for traffic schemes, not for other purposes.

 

Councillor D Oliver noted he felt the proposals were broadly positive, with residents being able to weigh up the Park and Ride cost against parking charges and make a decision basis upon those. 

 

He noted the focus on air pollution and asked what the main challenges were in that regard locally, in the context of the Council having declared a Climate Emergency.  Councillor K Robson noted he was not a Member representing the city centre, however, he often used the Howlands Park and Ride and asked if the existing facilities were reaching capacity.  The Strategic Traffic Manager noted that Howlands was at around 50-60 percent capacity, numbers not having rebounded post-COVID, and therefore there was around 40 percent capacity.  He noted extension to the Howlands Park and Ride, as part of a student planning application, however, noted there was no further land available at the site.  He noted that the Belmont Park and Ride had a huge capacity, and that work would start shortly on an extension to the Sniperley Park and Ride.  He noted that accordingly, he was relaxed in terms of the capacity of the Park and Ride service.

 

Councillor L Maddison noted Appendix 3 to the report set out the responses to the consultation with 82 ‘negative effects business’ responses.  She noted she used to travel to Darlington weekly, however, parking charges implemented there had impacted visitor numbers.  She noted she felt the economy should be encouraged and she felt that free parking for the Park and Ride would be a good option, to stimulate visitor numbers.  She noted she would not be supporting the proposals.

 

S Drummond asked as regards updating Pop Cards online, noting there were not simple options.  The Strategic Traffic Manager noted that it could be done online, not at the Park and Ride facilities themselves.

 

Councillor M Wilson noted she agreed with the comments from Councillor L Maddison in that the proposed changes would deter visitors and noted that for many people in surrounding suburbs and villages driving into the city was quicker than driving out towards the Park and Ride to then return back in towards the city.  She reiterated that she felt there would be an impact upon tourists too, and felt it was ‘off’ to include the Sunday Park and Ride proposals in with the parking charge increases.

 

Councillor D Wood noted that the Park and Ride was a fundamentally good idea, however, parking charges were based on per vehicle and the Park and Ride charges were per person, therefore were more expensive and less convenient.  He reiterated that he was very concerned in terms of the response from Local Members in this regard, noting of eight Members, only one had attended to speak, appreciating that Councillor R Ormerod was one of those Members and was in the Chair at Committee.  He asked why bother consulting with Local Members if they were not going to respond, adding that only six percent of public respondents were in favour of the proposals.  He noted capacity concerns, carbon concerns, and that the increases in charge disproportionately impact the cheapest tariffs.  He noted the issue of charges on Sundays, with most respondents stating they felt it would hurt businesses. 

 

Councillor D Wood noted that the turnover of parking spaces was difficult to quantify, and he felt the issue in terms of Medium-Term Financial Plan (MTFP) savings was something that should be looked at within the budget proposals being considered at Council next week.  He added he felt that surely the Park and Ride service could be put on Sundays without additional revenue from parking charge increases.  He noted that Council had supported a motion in relation to Cabinet looking at ‘free after 2pm’, however, it had yet to be discussed by Cabinet at this time.  Accordingly, given almost none of the Local Members had come out in support of the proposals, and that there had been no significant support from the public, he would not be willing to support the proposals as set out in the report.

 

Councillor J Howey noted that often her experience in Durham had been that there was a queue for parking and suggested that encouraging the use of the Park and Ride would help, with any surplus being used for other traffic uses, such as supporting rural bus routes.  She noted that in the past it had been the norm that most businesses did not open and trade on a Sunday.  She added that was no longer the case, with many simply considering it another normal day, and therefore she could see no issue in terms of parking charges on Sundays accordingly.

 

Councillor M Wilson asked for clarification, whether surplus from the Park and Ride could be used to support rural transport, as she understood it was only for parking services and repairs to such facilities.  The Strategic Traffic Manager noted the first use of any revenue was to provide the services, with surplus being ringfenced for transport measures.

 

Councillor D Freeman, in response to the comments from Councillor D Wood, noted that around 80-85 percent of the parking charges referred to within the reports related to his Electoral Division, and therefore the vast majority of the impact was for residents within his area.  He reiterated that he supported all the proposals within the reports, including charges, although he could not speak for other Members representing other Electoral Divisions.

 

Councillor D Oliver noted he agreed with the comments from Councillor J Howey in that Sundays had changed from how they were in the past, adding from his experience that Durham had been very busy, especially the previous Sunday.  He added he was not convinced that parking charges were the deciding factor in whether some visited Durham City, with the city being the ’jewel in the crown’ of the county and people had moved on from COVID.  He added he was very comfortable with the recommendation from Officers and agreed with the comments from Councillor D Freeman and felt that as a Local Member his comments should not be dismissed.  He reiterated that therefore he would move that the Officers proposals be supported, and asked how local pollution levels were measured, what data was collected. 

 

 

The Strategic Traffic Manager noted the air quality was an issue in the city, with around 30 percent of traffic going over Gilesgate Roundabout simply travelling through the city.  He noted that the Park and Ride could effectively intercept a number of journeys that were just into the city itself, and impact positively upon air quality.  He noted the plans to electrify the Park and Ride fleet, this also adding to improvements to air quality. 

 

Councillor E Mavin noted he would second the motion supporting the Officer’s proposals.

 

The Vice-Chair, Councillor G Hutchinson noted he had travelled from Bowburn to Durham with a cost of £12 for six hours and noted that support for the Park and Ride was positive.  He noted that speaking to business owners in Coxhoe, where parking limits had been imposed, there had been an improvement for their businesses.  He added he felt that a £2 charge for the Park and Ride, or 90p for parking still represented good value.

 

The Lawyer (Planning and Highways) noted a vote was required for each of the reports and asked if Councillors D Oliver and E Mavin were proposing and seconding each of the reports.  Councillors D Oliver and E Mavin indicated that there were proposing and seconding each of the reports and upon a series of votes being taken, Moved by Councillor D Oliver, Seconded by Councillor E Mavin, it was:

 

Resolved:

 

(i)     That the Committee endorsed the proposal, in principle, to introduce the Durham City (North East) - Parking and Waiting Restrictions, Traffic Regulation Amendment Order 2024, with the final decision to be made by the Corporate Director under delegated powers.

 

(ii)   That the committee endorsed the proposal, in principle, to introduce the Durham City (North West) - Parking and Waiting Restrictions, Traffic Regulation Amendment Order 2024, with the final decision to be made by the Corporate Director under delegated powers.

 

(iii)  That the committee endorsed the proposal, in principle, to introduce the Durham City (South East) - Parking and Waiting Restrictions, Traffic Regulation Amendment Order 2024, with the final decision to be made by the Corporate Director under delegated powers.

 

(iv)  That the committee endorsed the proposal, in principle, to introduce the Durham City (South West) - Parking and Waiting Restrictions, Traffic Regulation Amendment Order 2024, with the final decision to be made by the Corporate Director under delegated powers.

 

(v)   That the committee endorsed the proposal, in principle, to introduce the Durham City (South West) - Parking and Waiting Restrictions, Traffic Regulation Amendment Order 2024, with the final decision to be made by the Corporate Director under delegated powers.