Issue - items at meetings - Old Town Traffic Regulation Orders

skip navigation and tools

navigation and tools

Find it

Issue - meetings

Old Town Traffic Regulation Orders

Meeting: 15/01/2013 - Transport Committee (Item 47)

47 Old Town Traffic Regulation Orders PDF 117 KB

Report of the Strategic Director, Place (copy to follow).

Additional documents:

Decision:

1. That, having taken account of all duly made representations and objections, the Committee approves as advertised the following order;

a) Brighton & Hove (Boyces Street) (Prohibition of Driving) Order 20** (TRO-21a 2012)

2. That the Committee authorises Officers to request an Independent Inspector to hold a public inquiry into the following orders:

a) Brighton & Hove (Brills Lane) (Prohibition of Driving) Order 20** (TRO-21b-2012)

b) Brighton & Hove (East Street) (Prohibition of Driving) Order 20** (TRO-21c-2012)

c) Brighton & Hove (Prince Albert Street) (Prohibition of Driving) Order 20** (TRO-21d-2012)

d) Brighton & Hove (Ship Street) (Prohibition of Driving and One-Way Traffic ) Order 20** (TRO-21e-2012)

e) Brighton & Hove (Old Town) (Weight Restriction) Order 20** (TRO-21f-2012)

f) Brighton & Hove Various Controlled Parking Zones Consolidation Order 2008 Amendment Order No.** 20** (TRO-21g-2012)

g) Brighton & Hove (Waiting & Loading/Unloading Restrictions and Parking Places) Consolidation Order 2008 Amendment Order No.** 20** (TRO-21h-2012)

Minutes:

47.1 The Committee considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place that presented the comments and objections received in relation to the proposed Traffic Regulation Orders in the Old Town area of Brighton.

47.2 Councillor Mitchell thanked officers for providing an informative briefing. She stated that whilst the project had good intentions to improve the local environment, there had been significant objections from local business and the taxi trade regarding such issues as loading and parking bays as well as objections from residents at the top of East Street. Councillor Mitchell supplemented that the cost of the necessary public inquiry could not be justified in the current economic climate. She believed that approval be delayed subject to further efforts to resolve the objections and a report be brought back to Committee at a later date.

47.3 Councillor Cox stated that he would like to see further pedestrianisation into East Street. He stated that he found it perplexing that democratically elected officials could not authorise the measures and that authorisation would be dependent on the approval of an Independent Inspector. Councillor Cox supplemented that he believed the cost of the Inquiry could not be justified.

47.4 Councillor West relayed that this was an important issue that had already been considered and approved in principal by the Committee. He believed that it would be to the merit of the entire city to approve the proposals which could have the added benefit of improving tourism in the city.

47.5 Councillor Robins agreed with comments previously made that the cost of a public inquiry could not be justified. He added that he did not feel there was an urgent need to modify the area.

47.6 Councillor Mitchell asked if consideration had been given to amending the designated loading times which would remove the need for a public inquiry.

47.7 The Project Manager replied that this could only happen where loading would be restricted between 7am and 10am and between 4pm and 7pm. Such a small timeframe would not achieve the objectives sought in the overall Old Town scheme.

47.8 Councillor Follett stated that it was unfortunate that the proposals would need to be considered by a Public Inquiry. However, he believed the Committee needed to look at the wider picture. Specifically, that Brighton was the sixth fastest growing tourism location and the proposals would help maintain and improve this. In addition, Councillor Follett felt that consideration should be given to the heritage status of the area affected by the proposals and the associated environmental benefit the scheme would provide.

47.9 The Chair relayed that his first involvement in local politics had concerned the pedestrianisation of George Street, Hove. This had been a similar scenario as the proposed Old Town scheme. Despite apprehension at the time, the implementation of pedestrianisation measures in George Street had been realised to the benefit of local resident, business and the wider Brighton and Hove area. The Chair believed benefits would also be realised from the Old Town proposals and, whilst the need for a public inquiry was unfortunate, he believed it to be a necessary investment.

47.10 Councillor Janio asked if there was a risk the public inquiry would not rule in the authorities favour.

47.11 The Head of City Infrastructure stated that there extensive work had been conducted to address concerns about the scheme and the project design was to a high standard. On this basis, he believed a public inquiry would find in the authorities favour.

47.12 The Chair then put the recommendations to a vote with the following results:

47.13 RESOLVED-

1. That, having taken account of all duly made representations and objections, the Committee approves as advertised the following order;

a) Brighton & Hove (Boyces Street) (Prohibition of Driving) Order 20** (TRO-21a 2012)

For: 9

Against:0