Agenda item - Public Involvement

To consider the following matters raised by members of the public:

 

(a)          Petitions: To receive any petitions presented by members of the public;

 

(i)            Parking restrictions near Aldrington Station

 

(ii)          South Portslade parking consultation

 

(iii)         TRO-15-2017 Hartington Road-Double Yellow Lines on Legal Crossovers

 

(iv)         Save the Mazda Electric Fountain

 

(v)          TRO-14a-2017 Elm Grove Sunday parking restrictions

 

(b)          Written Questions: To receive any questions submitted by the due date of 12 noon on the 20 June 2017;

 

(c)          Deputations: To receive any deputations submitted by the due date of 12 noon on the 20 June 2017.

 

(a)          PETITIONS

 

(i)           Parking restrictions near Aldrington Station

 

5.1         The Committee considered a petition signed by 90 people that requested introduction of a residents parking zone in Aldrington Avenue, Amherst Crescent, Lullington Avenue and Milcote Avenue, Hove.

 

5.2         The petitioner was unable to attend the meeting in person. The following reply was read by the Chair and the meeting and provided in writing:

 

“Thank you for your petition and I do appreciate the parking issues in your area.

As agreed previously at this Committee the Hove Park area including near Aldrington Station has been included as part of the current parking scheme timetable. Officers have met recently with the Hove Park ward councillors to discuss this further.

Officers have prepared an initial consultation letter to go out to residents to see if they would like a parking scheme detailed design to be worked up and whether they would prefer a light touch or full parking scheme.

This consultation has now begun and the results of this consultation will be presented to a future committee meeting so the way forward can be determined”

 

5.3         RESOLVED- That the petition be noted.

 

(ii)          South Portslade Parking Consultation

 

5.4         The Committee considered a petition signed by 118 people requesting a resident parking consultation be undertaken in the South Portslade area.

 

5.5         The petitioner was unable to attend the meeting in person. The following reply was read by the Chair and the meeting and provided in writing:

 

“Thank you for your petition and I do understand the concerns of residents in your area.

Officers are currently working on parking scheme consultations in the Hanover & Elm Grove area, Craven Vale area, Preston Village & Balfour Road areas and the West Hove area with the Hove Park area to follow soon.

As residents of a number of roads have come forward as an area we will look to include this area within the future parking scheme priority timetable.

The current parking scheme priority timetable runs up to 2018 (for completion of schemes) and officers will be presenting a report to this Committee later in the year on an updated timetable based on requests such as this”.

 

5.6         RESOLVED- That the petition be noted.

 

(iii)         TRO-15-2017 Hartington Road- Double Yellow Lines on Legal Crossovers

 

5.7         The Committee considered a petition signed by 170 people requesting the council to allow residents in Hartington Road with legal crossovers to park across their drives without incurring penalty.

 

5.8         The Chair provided the following response:

 

“It is a legal requirement to have parking restrictions covering every part of the highway within a resident parking scheme during the controlled hours of enforcement.

Therefore, it is proposed that double yellow lines will be placed across all legal dropped kerbs to ensure access to and from the off street parking provision so that is kept clear at all times.

Any resident that now applies for a crossover would need to meet the requirements of the Council’s policy which is stricter within a resident parking scheme as it is squarely based on the consideration of the loss of parking”.

 

5.9         RESOLVED- That the petition be noted.

 

(iv)         Save the Mazda Electric Fountain

 

5.10      The Committee considered a petition signed by 1072 people requesting the Council to retain the Mazda Fountain in Victoria Gardens.

 

5.11      The petitioner was unable to attend the meeting in person. The following reply was read by the Chair and the meeting and provided in writing:

 

“Thank you for your petition. The Valley Gardens Preliminary Green Space Design report coming later in the agenda does include retention of the Mazda fountain as well as details of its forecast maintenance and running costs over the next 5 years.

These proposals will be considered by this Committee when discussing that report”.

 

5.12      RESOLVED- That the petition be noted.

 

(v)          TRO-14a-2017 Elm Grove Sunday parking restrictions

 

5.13      The Committee considered a petition signed by 292 people requesting that the proposed controlled parking scheme for Elm Grove be amended to Monday to Saturday only to allow freer movement for parishioners and visitors attending a local church on Sundays.

 

5.14      The Chair provided the following response:

 

“The parking schemes have been through an extensive consultation period with three stages of consultation and we do need to ensure the restrictions are compatible with nearby parking schemes in the central Brighton area to minimise vehicle displacement

The options available within the current design allow parishioners and visitors to the church the opportunity to park within two areas of ‘shared’ pay and display or pay by phone locations situated close by.

Alternatively, there is the option to use the parking provision of a neighbouring scheme a few roads away where restrictions would not apply over the weekend.

Officers are of the opinion that the introduction of exclusive pay and display would be underutilised for much of the time in an area where parking for residents is at a premium.

It is proposed that any schemes introduced are reviewed after 12-18 months which will allow the Council to consider any difficulties for parking should they arise and we will pay particular attention to the church area”.

 

5.15      RESOLVED- That the petition be noted.

 

(c)      Deputations

 

(i)            George Street Opening Hours

 

5.16      The Committee considered a Deputation requesting the council produce a report to the committee considering options for George Street, Hove be opened to vehicles from 3.00pm, all year round due to significant changes to the local trading environment since 2015.

 

5.17      The Chair provided the following response:

 

“Thank you for your deputation and I do understand the concerns you have raised.

Changing the hours of restriction in George Street (to 4pm all year round) was reported to the Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee on 24th November 2015 and it was agreed not to proceed for the following reasons.

 

-          The licence to place advertising boards and tables and chairs on the public highway is for pedestrianised hours only

-          Some stakeholders wanted to keep the restrictions as they currently are

-          The Council received submissions from the public during the period of consultation and 85% were against any changes

-          A number of road safety issues were identified.

 

However, it is appreciated that the situation has now changed following the change in policy by Tesco’s who now require a minimum spend of £5 to allow parking for greater than 30 minutes in their car park.

Therefore, I would propose that a report is brought to a future meeting of this Committee to consider the road safety and licensing concerns if vehicles are allowed to enter George Street from 3.00pm, all year round and to consider if a Traffic Order should be advertised which would then give a further period of consultation”.

 

5.18      Councillor West stated that the Committee had considered issues relating to the opening times for George Street a number of times over recent years and whilst he did have sympathy for those issues the local traders had raised, he did not believe there was public support for a change and the proposal did not meet the council’s own sustainable transport objectives.

 

5.19      The Chair thanked Councillor West for his observations replying that she did believe that a report on the issue would be helpful.

 

5.20      RESOLVED- That the Committee receive an officer report on the matter.

 

(ii)          Hanover & Elm Grove and Craven Vale Resident Parking Scheme Traffic Regulation Order

 

5.21      The Committee considered a Deputation requesting the council amend the proposals for controlled parking in Hanover & Elm Grove moving the ‘Top Triangle’ area from a light touch scheme to a full scheme due to the potential for parking displacement.

 

5.22      The Chair provided the following response:

 

“These issues have been discussed in previous reports and will also be discussed as part of a further report later in the meeting.

In a previous consultations it is correct that residents in the Top Triangle preferred no scheme overall out of all of the options available.

However, in a further question when asked which type of scheme they would prefer if a scheme were to be introduced then the majority wanted a scheme with the least amount of enforcement which is a light touch scheme in preference to a full scheme.

Our overall approach has been to approach it as a whole area and not to take out one particular area and one given time because that has an immediate knock-on effect to adjacent roads.

Therefore, it would be entirely wrong of us to re-consult just five streets without re-consulting the wider area within the light-touch scheme.

So what we have done is give a clear commitment that the whole scheme will be reviewed after 12 months. And that will be built into the controlled parking scheme that comes before this committee in the autumn and therefore, any issues like that can be picked up.

The reason we did two consultations for Hanover & Elm Grove on the detailed design and the type of scheme, that is unusual for the process of most parking schemes was that so residents, when they voted the second time around, could see how the preferences had occurred throughout the rest of the area. We also kept ward councillors closely involved every single step of the way as this final design was brought forward and the final design was agreed by this committee in March.

You have my assurance that there will be a review in 12 months’ time and any difficulties in any area of the scheme as a whole that have occurred, once it’s in, can therefore be picked up”.

 

5.23      RESOLVED- That the Deputation be noted.