Agenda item - City Wide Parking Review Update

Report of the Executive Director of Environment, Development & Housing (copy attached).

1)           That the committee authorises officers to commission parking surveys in early 2015 in streets north of Preston Drove set out in paragraph 6.1 and shown in the plan in Appendix A.  A report is expected to be taken to committee next summer to determine the design and detail of any scheme of parking controls that would be put out to consultation.

2)           That the committee approves the policy recommendations in paragraphs 6.5 a-d inclusive ( highway verge and pavement parking controls) and 6.16 (limited stay “free” bays)

3)           That committee notes the progress reports in paragraphs 6.6-6.15 inclusive and 6.17 – 6.19 inclusive

32.1      The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director of Environment, Development & Housing that provided a progress update on the recommendations of the city wide parking review approved by the Transport Committee in January 2013 and consideration of the council’s response to requests from residents in parts of the city for consultation on new or extended resident parking schemes.

32.2      Councillor Mitchell stated that she welcomed limited stay free parking proposed for a location in Area H and Councillor Mitchell asked if that related to the Broadway shopping area on Whitehawk Road.

32.3      The Programme Manager and Policy Development Officer confirmed that the proposal did relate to the Broadway shopping area.

32.4      Councillor Robins noted that paragraph 6.14 noted that referred to the parking sensor technology. Councillor Robins enquired as to the cost of the potential investment and who had decided not to proceed with its introduction on that basis. Councillor Robins also noted that the report specified that two out of five households now no longer owned a car and that there were now .86 cars per household. Councillor Robins asked if this figure was a distorted by the lack of car ownership in the city centre.

32.5      The Programme Manager and Policy Development Officer noted that the sensors were expensive, would include further costs in infrastructure and therefore had not been deemed feasible adding that full costings were not available at the meeting but could be sent to Councillor Robins. The Programme Manager and Policy Development Officer supplemented that figures on car ownership were taken from the most recent census in 2011 that demonstrated that whilst car ownership was low in the city centre and higher in the suburbs, this was not a uniform pattern.

32.6      Councillor Cox noted that paragraph 5.4 stated that only one ward councillor out of three in Withdean had expressed support for a parking survey in that ward and the Committee were being asked to proceed with a survey, yet both of the ward councillors in Hove Park had also made requests yet this was not reflected in the recommendations of the report.

32.7      The Programme and Policy Development Officer stated that this was because Withdean ward would just be a technical survey of the area and Hove Park, which had already been identified in the previous City Wide parking review, was for a formal consultation on a parking scheme.

32.8      Councillor Janio noted that paragraph 6.2 noted that implementation of grass verge and pavement parking controls had worked but were financed by a one off revenue allocation. Councillor Janio asked if the schemes would be rolled out wider and would continue.

32.9      The Programme and Policy Development Officer noted that extensive conversation with lead transport members for each party had expressed a clear preference and agreement for a concentration and focus to the scheme in the specified areas.

32.10   Councillor Daniel asked if consideration had been given to reducing the fee for personalised disabled bays. In relation to paragraph 6.3, Councillor Daniel stated that whilst she was happy that measures introduced had improved visibility at junctions in the Elm Grove area and would appreciate a further update however, drivers were still parking on hard verges where they could. Furthermore, Councillor Daniel noted that a petition previously received by the Committee signed by 1500 people had requested capital works on the road that the community were involved in yet proposals did not appear forthcoming.

32.11   The Chair noted that charges for personalised disabled bays would be submitted to the Committee via the Fees & Charges report and monitoring discussions on a parking solution in Elm Grove between local groups before making any advancement.

32.12   The Programme and Policy Development Officer stated that it was usual that data for road traffic accidents was accumulated over a one year period and as the measures for Elm Grove were agreed in November 2013, he hoped the data could be shared soon.

32.13   Councillor Theobald stated that his group would be voting against recommendation 2.1 of the report as the majority of ward councillors in the area were against a survey and it did not pay heed to financial constraints currently faced by the council.

32.14   Councillor Davey stated that it was worth noting the record of Committee in acting upon requests and concerns made by residents for parking schemes. Councillor Davey welcomed the report that indicated waiting lists for permits were down significantly, personalised disabled bays had been introduced, time limited free parking bays had been introduced and that many residents were taking advantage of cheaper permits for low emission vehicles. Councillor Davey noted that whilst the census data indicated car ownership had fallen in many areas of the city, it also showed rises in car ownership in the Elm Grove and Withdean areas. Increasing demand, density and pressure on parking required a pro-active response to assist residents and parking survey would provide the authority considered data and information to react.

32.15   RESOLVED-

1)            That the committee authorises officers to commission parking surveys in early 2015 in streets north of Preston Drove set out in paragraph 6.1 and shown in the plan in Appendix A.  A report is expected to be taken to committee next summer to determine the design and detail of any scheme of parking controls that would be put out to consultation.

2)            That the committee approves the policy recommendations in paragraphs 6.5 a-d inclusive ( highway verge and pavement parking controls) and 6.16 (limited stay “free” bays)

3)            That committee notes the progress reports in paragraphs 6.6-6.15 inclusive and 6.17 – 6.19 inclusive