Agenda item - Items referred from Council

(a)               Petitions: To receive petitions referred from Full Council.

(i)                 20mph limit on Preston Drove, Stanford Avenue and Surrenden Road- Becky Reynolds

(ii)               Dyke Road pedestrian and cycle lane plans- Councillor Bennett

(iii)             Postpone enforcement on Elm Grove until substantially more safe and legal parking is created- Tanya Richardson

(a)               Petitions

(i)                 20mph limit on Preston Drove, Stanford Avenue and Surrenden Road- Becky Reynolds

84.1         The Committee considered a petition signed by 742 people that requested the council to re-consider its decision not to reduce the speed limit on Preston Drove, Stanford Avenue and Surrenden Road to 20mph. The petition had been referred from the meeting of Full Council held on 31 January 2014.

84.2         The Chair provided the following response:

“Thank you for your petition, and may I congratulate you on the very strong level of support you have received to this.

As I mentioned in my earlier response, the proposals for the second phase of the 20mph programme will be debated and considered at this meeting and include, in recognition of the strength of views expressed by local residents, a recommendation has been included for the speed limit on Surrenden Road, Preston Drove and Stanford Avenue to be reduced to 20mph. This has been supported by a number of stakeholders including Brighton and Hove Bus Company who have confirmed that they would have no objections to a 20mph limit on these roads”

84.3         RESOLVED- That the petition be noted.

(ii)       Dyke Road pedestrian and cycle plans- Councillor Jayne Bennett

84.4         The Committee considered a petition signed by 184 people that urged the council to the review the proposals for Dyke Road pedestrian and cycle facilities. The petition had been referred from the meeting of Full Council held on 31 January 2014.

84.5         The Chair provided the following response:

“Thank you Councillor Bennett for representing this petition.

The report before Committee at agenda item 90, the additional independent assessment included with the report, and recommendation 2.3 specifically address concerns raised regarding crossing arrangements.  I trust that councillors and people who have signed the petition will welcome the recommendation.

While many members of the public respond keenly to consultations, we never hear back from everyone.  What is key is that the council make any consultation as widely available as possible, commensurate to the scale and budget of the scheme proposals.

For what could be termed a ‘cold’ survey (postal information addressed only to ‘the occupier’ of 1520 addresses) a 5 – 10% response rate would be an average.  The informal consultation stage for these proposals had an 11% response.

Further details of the informal consultation are included in the report to 26^th November 2013 committee, when members considered the consultation responses and agreed to progress with the scheme to advertising of the associated Traffic Regulation Orders”.

84.6         RESOLVED- That the petition be noted.

(ii)               Postpone enforcement on Elm Grove until substantially more safe and legal parking is created- Tanya Richardson

84.7         The Committee considered a petition signed by 1443 people that request the council to postpone enforcement of vehicles parked on yellow lines until substantially more safe and legal parking was created. The petition had been referred from the meeting of Full Council held on 31 January 2014.

84.8         The Chair provided the following response:

“Thank you Ms Richardson for your petition, and may I congratulate you on the considerable level of response you have received to the question.

In response, I have to say that it is the opinion of officers that enforcement of yellow lines in Elm Grove should not be suspended pending creation of additional parking spaces.

Enforcement of yellow lines in Elm Grove was reinstated to improve the environment of the area and for road safety reasons, and it is important to monitor the effects of enforcement on the number of road traffic collisions over a 12 month period.

A public consultation took place with local residents last year in which a substantial majority rejected the creation of additional parking spaces, the stated alternative was the enforcement of existing restrictions and at Committee in October members noted the results of the consultation and approved a multi agency enforcement initiative to tackle illegal parking and other nuisances on the street such as abandoned bicycles and unlicensed materials on the highway.

About 500 PCNs have been issued to vehicles on yellow lines in Elm Grove since November so the impact on safety of suspending the activity would be considerable would set a precedent for other parts of the city.

It is possible to include the provision of more safe and legal parking spaces in Elm Grove as part of a consultation for a residents parking scheme for this area however the previous Hanover & Elm Grove Parking Scheme Consultation resulted in a rejection by nearly 70% of households - so it is not clear what the majority of residents are seeking. 

A fresh consultation would only be triggered by a substantial petition of residents in favour and the support of local ward councillors.  The consultation would need approval from this committee and the process could take at least 18 months with no certainty that residents would support a scheme. Therefore if enforcement was suspended now, illegal and unsafe parking may persist in the long term without resolution

There has been some positive feedback following enforcement, here are some examples.

“Parking behind yellow lines in Elm Grove caused difficulties for bus passengers in accessing bus stops......  I would therefore support the Council's actions in enforcing the yellow lines in this case”. – Bus company spokesperson

“feels so much safer just driving on Elm Grove now.  Before enforcement began....had a few near misses as most of the junctions were completely blind. – scooter rider”

“I see no reason why enforcement should be postponed any longer. The petition effectively asks for restrictions to be lifted indefinitely. If this is done in Elm Grove, what’s to stop residents anywhere else in the city doing the same?” – A local business owner

Finally, I would like to note welcome news that at a meeting of the Hanover & Elm Grove Local Action Team in December 2013 a working group discussed parking issues in the area.  The meeting was attended by ward councillors, residents and Sussex Police and reviewed a draft questionnaire which might form part of a community parking survey.  Council officers from the parking and highways team were invited to attend and to comment including matters of design and highway law – this I must stress was conducted in an informal a capacity”.

84.9         RESOLVED- That the petition be noted.