report to: cabinet member transportation
TRANSCRIPT
Report to: Cabinet Member Transportation Date of Report: 1 May 2012 Date of Decision: 9 May 2012 Subject: Receipt of Petition – Manor Road Residents’ Parking Zone,
Blundellsands Report of: Director of Built Environment Wards Affected: Blundellsands Is this a Key Decision? No Is it included in the Forward Plan? No Exempt/Confidential No
Purpose/Summary To inform Members of the receipt of a petition against the proposed Residents’ Parking Zone in Manor Road, Blundellsands Recommendation(s) It is recommended that Cabinet Member Transportation:-
i) Note the contents of the petition; ii) Reaffirm the current consultation methodology; iii) Refer the matter back to the Crosby Area Committee for a decision on the
progression of the scheme. How does the decision contribute to the Council’s Corporate Objectives?
Corporate Objective Positive Impact
Neutral Impact
Negative Impact
1 Creating a Learning Community √
2 Jobs and Prosperity √
3 Environmental Sustainability √
4 Health and Well-Being √
5 Children and Young People √
6 Creating Safe Communities √
7 Creating Inclusive Communities √
8 Improving the Quality of Council Services and Strengthening Local Democracy
√
Reasons for the Recommendation: To address issues raised in a petition from residents, forwarded on by Crosby Area Committee.
What will it cost and how will it be financed? (A) Revenue Costs Nil (B) Capital Costs Nil Implications: The following implications of this proposal have been considered and where there are specific implications, these are set out below: Legal "Under Section 46 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 , the highway authority may prescribe charges to be paid for leaving vehicles in parking places".
Human Resources None
Equality 1. No Equality Implication
2. Equality Implications identified and mitigated
3. Equality Implication identified and risk remains
Impact on Service Delivery: Nil What consultations have taken place on the proposals and when? The Head of Corporate Finance (FD1500) has been consulted and any comments have been incorporated into the report. Head of Corporate Legal Services (LD843/12) has been consulted and any comments have been incorporated into the report. Are there any other options available for consideration? No Implementation Date for the Decision Following the expiry of the “call-in” period for the Minutes of the Cabinet Member Meeting. Contact Officer: Steve Johnston – Team Leader (Traffic Management & Road
Safety) Investment Programmes & Infrastructure Tel: 0151 934 4258 Email: [email protected] Background Papers:
√
Report to Crosby Area Committee on 14 March 2012, entitled ‘Manor Road, Crosby – Objection to Proposed Residents’ Privileged Parking scheme.’ 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Members will recall that at its meeting on 8 July 2011, Cabinet Member -
Street Scene and Transportation approved the new Policy for Residents’ Privileged Parking (RPP) schemes. Due to budgetary and staffing constraints, it was agreed that no further RPP schemes be introduced unless funded from external sources, such as via a Planning Condition linked to a proposed development, or if Ward Members see fit, from their own devolved Area Committee budgets.
1.2 As a result of the change in policy, Blundellsands Ward Members requested
officers to investigate the introduction of a RPP scheme on Manor Road, Crosby, to cover the section from Cambridge Avenue to Victoria Road.
1.3 Under the Council’s normal procedures, consultation documents were
delivered to all properties on Manor Road between Cambridge Avenue and Victoria Road. Copies of the consultation documents are attached as Annexes A - C.
1.4 As the object of the scheme is to provide on-street parking spaces solely for
Manor Road residents, the consultation documents made it quite clear that parking permits would only be available for residents living in 9-15 and 6-12 Manor Road. Occupiers of the shop at 2-4 Manor Road or the Garage would not be eligible for permits. Likewise, residents at Cook’s Court, who have their own large car park, would not be eligible.
1.5 The results from the consultation were subsequently reported back to Crosby
Area Committee on 4 January 2012. 1.6 A total of 20 sets of documents were hand delivered to properties, of which 13
questionnaires were returned. Out of the 13 returned questionnaires, 11 were in favour of the scheme, and 2 were against. The two against the scheme gave no reason, but were not eligible for a permit.
1.7 As a result of the consultation, Crosby Area Committee gave approval to
proceed with the legal advertising of the Residents’ Parking Scheme. 2.0 Objections to the Scheme 2.1 At its meeting on 14 March 2012, a report was presented to Crosby Area
Committee, detailing four objections and a petition, which had been received against the proposed scheme.
2.2 The four objections were backed up with a 40 signature petition which stated:-
“As residents of Manor Road it is our belief that the introduction of such a limited scheme will further impact on our limited parking spaces as the cars will simply move up 150 yards and park outside our houses. As fellow residents of the section of Manor Road and adjoining roads closest to Crosby Village we experience problems everyday in being unable to park our cars within a reasonably close distance to our properties, particularly during the ‘school run’ but in many cases throughout many other times of the day. As part of our objection we are asking for the current scheme to be halted and to complete a more detailed review and to consult with all residents of Manor Road and adjoining roads rather than just consult with the residents of number 2 to number 15 Manor Road, Cooks Court residents, Mia Hairdressers and the car repair garage. We are also asking that the Resident Privileged Parking scheme is offered to all of us, as we also experience difficulty parking our vehicles near to our houses.”
2.3 A copy of the petition is attached as Annex D, and was signed by 40 residents
of 22 properties on Manor Road and Cambridge Avenue, although it was stated by objectors at the Crosby Area Committee meeting, that signatures had not been sought from any other adjoining roads, or further up Manor Road, but that they felt that the petition would have been much larger if they had had the time to canvas residents’ views from a wider area.
2.4 Supporters of the scheme, i.e. residents from 2 – 15 Manor Road, spoke of
their daily problems with over-spill parking from Crosby Village by customers and shop staff unwilling to pay for parking in the three public car parks, and agreed with the recommendation in the report. This suggested that Members should proceed with the proposed RPP for the small section of Manor Road, as originally advertised and at a later date carry out another consultation with residents of a wider area. The extent of how far the next ‘phase’ of the Manor Road RPP scheme would need to be determined by Blundellsands Ward members, and could include some or all of Manor Road, and some or all of the adjoining side roads. Blundellsands Ward Members would also need to determine the extent of the public consultation.
2.5 This recommendation “that Crosby Area Committee approve the introduction
of the Residents’ Privileged Parking scheme on Manor Road, Crosby, as originally approved.” was put to the vote but was rejected, and the following counter proposal was put to the vote and carried 5 votes to 3. As a result, it was resolved that:- (1) consideration of the proposed scheme be deferred pending the outcome of
(2) below;
(2) the petition be referred to the Cabinet Member – Transportation and he be requested to consider it in the light of the way consultation was undertaken on this proposed scheme and to undertake a general review of the way consultation is undertaken on such proposals; and
(3) the Director of Built Environment be requested to report back to this
Committee after the Cabinet Member has considered the issues referred to in (2) above.
3.0 Discussion 3.1 Historically, the majority of residential roads around Crosby Village have
suffered from over-spill parking from the shopping centre for many years, as shoppers and shop workers choose not to pay for parking within the public car parks.
3.2 Prior to Cabinet Member - Street Scene and Transportation approving the new
Policy for Residents Privileged Parking on 8 July 2011, a total of approximately 160 individual roads were on the list of roads where RPP had been requested. To put this into context, a plan attached as Annex E shows roads around Crosby Village where RPP schemes had previously been requested.
3.3 Clearly, it can be seen that displaced parking from the Village centre causes
major problems for many residents, and it is understandable why residents adjoining the small section of Manor Road where the RPP is proposed, feel aggrieved and feel that what is being proposed is unfair.
3.4 Officers and Members have already recognised the problems for residents
living close to the Village centre and have already stated that an area-wide RPP scheme would be pursued as a Planning Condition for any future redevelopment of Crosby Village by Sainsburys. Unfortunately, a timescale for any resubmission of the Planning Application by Sainsburys cannot be given, and in the interim, following the change in the RPP policy, Ward Members are now choosing to introduce small scale RPP schemes to ‘cherry pick’ the areas which they believe suffer the worst.
3.5 The danger of this approach is now demonstrated by the response to the
Manor Road RPP scheme. Members should note that advice on the extent of any proposed schemes and the possible effects on surrounding roads will always be given by officers to Ward Members, as indeed was the case on this particular scheme.
3.6 As can be seen from paragraph 2.2, the four objections and 40 signature
petition object to the proposed RPP scheme basically on the grounds that the scheme has been restricted to such a small area of Manor Road. Discussions within the Crosby Area Committee meeting on 14 March 2012 also revolved around the fact that consultation had not taken place with residents from adjoining roads, hence the resolution to “undertake a general review of the way consultation is undertaken on such proposals”
4.0 Consultation Methods 4.1 Consultation on this particular scheme was carried out using the same
methodology which has been employed for small highway improvement schemes and RPP schemes over the last decade.
4.2 This takes the form of hand delivering consultation documents and
questionnaires to all properties which will be directly affected by the proposed
scheme. This is done to ensure that any consultation results reflect the wishes of the residents mostly affected by the changes outside their properties, and are not skewed by other residents or road users who live away from the proposed scheme and may not have to put up with any inconvenience associated with the proposal.
4.3 In the case of this RPP scheme, consultation with residents in Victoria Road,
Cambridge Avenue, Miller Avenue and all sides roads further down Manor Road would have inevitably resulted in the response that RPP was required in the whole area, and not just a small section of Manor Road. It is clear that Blundellsands Ward Members recognise this fact, given their promise to look at expanding the RPP zone further down Manor Road. However, at this time members only wished to proceed with a scheme on the top section of Manor Road
4.4 It could be argued that the consultation should have been extended to
surrounding roads, but one of the reasons for adopting the new policy for RPP schemes was that staff and funding resources had been considerably reduced over recent years, and the old style area-wide RPP schemes incorporating maybe a dozen roads could no longer be afforded or accommodated within current workloads and demands.
4.5 The change in the RPP policy, allowing Ward Members to use their own
budgets for small scale RPP schemes, will only work if it is accepted that officers only have enough resources to consult with residents immediately affected by the proposals. The dissemination of scheme information, the logic behind the determination of the scheme boundaries and any future proposals for extension of the scheme must be carried out by Ward Members via their normal constituents’ press releases / leaflets etc.
5.0 Summary 5.1 In response to Crosby Area Committees’ resolution for a review of the
consultation methods, it is suggested that the method and scale of the consultation was commensurate with the small scale of the actual scheme.
5.2 Prior to the consultation process, discussions took place with Ward Members
regarding the scale of the scheme and subsequent consultation, and adjoining residents had the option to object via the legal notices in the local Press and the notices on site.
5.3 It is recognised, however, that it may have been beneficial for the proposed
scheme to have been more widely publicised, albeit not as part of the formal consultation process. It is suggested that, in future small scale RPP schemes being promoted and funded by Ward Members, Members should be mindful of the possible ‘knock-on’ effect on surrounding areas when determining the extent of the proposed scheme, and consider whether to carry out additional publicity via their normal constituents’ press releases / leaflets etc to keep adjoining residents informed. This should run concurrently with the formal consultation process carried out by officers.
5.4 In response to the petitioners request to increase the scale of the scheme, it is suggested that this can only be addressed by Blundellsands Ward Members themselves. As highlighted in the previous report to Crosby Area Committee, Members have the option to:-
• Over-rule the objections and proceed with the scheme as originally
advertised. • Over-rule the objections, proceed with the scheme and consider
funding a second phase of RPP within the adjoining area. Consultation on a second phase of RPP would need to be built into current workloads and it is likely that this would not be possible until the end of summer.
• Abandon the proposed RPP scheme. 5.5 It is recommended, therefore, that the decision on the progression of the
scheme be referred back to Crosby Area Committee.
PROPOSED RESIDENTS’ PARKING BAYS
MANOR ROAD, CROSBY
CONSULTATION
Following complaints from residents regarding lack of on-street parking for
residents on Manor Road, Blundellsands Ward Councillors have agreed to fund the
introduction of Residents’ Parking Bays on the section of Manor Road closest to the
shops on Cooks Road.
A plan showing the proposed Residents’ Parking Bays is enclosed with this letter. If
the majority of residents agree with the proposals, and the scheme is approved by
Crosby Area Committee, each of the residents living in 9-15 and 6-12 Manor Road
will be eligible to apply for Residents’ permits for each vehicle which is registered
at their address. In addition, they may also apply for one Visitor’s permit per
property. Each permit (Resident’s or Visitor’s) will be subject to a one-off £20
registration fee, i.e. if you have two vehicles and also want the Visitor’s permit, you
will be charged a total of £60 for the three permits. If you change your vehicle in
the future, you will be charged another £20 registration fee to change the
Resident’s permit.
The purpose of this consultation is to seek your views on the proposals. Included
with this letter is a plan showing the proposals and a questionnaire. Please take the
time to fill in the questionnaire and return it in the pre-paid envelope provided, to
reach us no later than Friday 25 November 2011.
Our local Council meeting, called Crosby Area Committee, will decide whether the
scheme is progressed, so any comments or objections to the proposals will be taken
back to their meeting on 4 January 2012, at SING Plus, Cambridge Road, Seaforth
at 6.30pm. You are welcome to come along to that meeting.
If you require any further information before completing your questionnaire please
phone our Contact Centre on 0845 140 0845 and leave a message for Steve Johnston. Steve will phone you back as soon as possible. Please let Steve know if you require
this information in large print, or any other format.
Many Thanks,
Alan Lunt
Director of Built Environment
ANNEX A
PROPOSED RESIDENTS’ PARKING SCHEME
MANOR ROAD, CROSBY
QUESTIONNAIRE Are you in favour of the proposed Residents’ Parking Scheme on Manor Road, Crosby,
as detailed on the enclosed plan? (Place a tick (ü) in the appropriate box): -
YES
NO
Comments (continue overleaf if necessary):
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
................................................................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................................
Name: ........................................
Address: ........................................
........................................
………………….…
…………………………………….
Please complete and return in the pre-paid envelope provided, to reach us no later
than Friday 25 November 2011.
Sefton MBC Traffic Services Unit
Traffic Management & Road Safety Team
ANNEX B
2
#TCB
97
1
10.4mGarage
2
12
2 to 4
14
1 to 49
Cook's Court
5 to
8
61
17
1564
52
METROPOLITAN BOROUGH OF SEFTON
Alan Lunt
Director of Built Environment
Title
Manor Road, Crosby
Proposed Residents’ Parking Bays
( Drawn
Scale
Date
SJ
NTS
Nov 2011
Key
Existing No Waiting at Any Time
Existing ‘H’ brackets
Proposed Residents’ Parking Bays
Existing Yellow lines to be reduced by
approx 2m to allow two vehicles to park in
new residents’ bay
Proposed Residents’ bay for two
vehicles
Proposed Residents’ bay for four
vehicles
ANNEX C
ANNEX D
METROPOLITAN BOROUGH OF SEFTON
Alan Lunt
Director of Built Environment
Title
Crosby Village
Location of existing and proposed RPP schemes
( Drawn
Scale
Date
SJ
NTS
Apr 2012
KEY
Existing RPP schemes
Requested RPP schemes
Proposed ‘Manor Road’ scheme
ANNEX E