Agenda item

BEECHFIELD GARDENS & CROW LANE - BROOKLANDS SCH40 - RESULTS OF FORMAL ADVERTISEMENT

Minutes:

The report before the Committee detailed the responses received to the formal advertisement undertaken with the residents of the Beechfield Gardens and Crow Lane (between its junctions with Sandgate Close and Jutsums Lane).

 

Following the June 2017 meeting of the Committee it was agreed that that a residents parking scheme be designed and formally consulted.

 

It was stated that residents were formally consulted on a residents parking scheme operational 8am to 8pm Monday to Friday inclusive, with  associated single yellow lines operational 8am to 6:30pm Monday to Saturday in line with the existing waiting restrictions and associated ‘at any time’ waiting restrictions for access and safety reasons.

 

Officers informed the Committee that given the very low level of objections to the formal advertisement and the results of the previous consultations, it was recommended that the residents parking scheme be implemented. It was further recommended that the advertised operational hours of Monday - Friday 8am-8pm were varied by a reduction to the operational period to Monday - Friday, 8am to 6:30pm.

 

The variation, to the advertised times, took account of two representations that described the advertised period as excessive as non-residential vehicles rarely arrive after 6:30pm. In officers view it was considered that the reduction to the operational hours would benefit guests of local residents who, under the advertised times, would have required a visitor parking permit between 6:30pm – 8pm.


The report informed the Committee that Ward Councillors had discussed the variation with residents and were happy for the restrictions to
be implemented until 6:30pm with the effects monitored to ensure the hours of operation are sufficient.

 

In accordance with the public speaking arrangements the Committee was addressed by a resident who spoke against the variation to the advertised operational times of the scheme. The resident stated that the reduction to operational times would not deal with parking by evening commuters / shift workers including staff at the local hospital and the local post office facility. The resident raised particular concerns over the effect of the variation on Beechfield Gardens. .

 

With its agreement Councillor Viddy Persaud addressed the Committee.

Councillor Persaud stated that Ward Councillors and a majority of local residents were in support of the revised operational period ending at 6.30pm. Councillor Persaud noted that the effectiveness of the scheme would be monitored. She concluded that there would be opportunities to work with businesses to develop better transport links in the area.

 

During the debate, a Member warned that reducing congestion in Crow Lane could open the road to fast movement of vehicles and increase road safety issues.

 

In response to a Member, officers confirmed that the proposed residents parking bays by the cemetery and post office sorting office would be monitored and if underused could be changed to dual use.

 

In response to a proposal to increase the operational hours for Beechfield Gardens to 8pm, officers stated that the preference was to maintain one set of restrictions in the area but that the scheme would be monitored and the operational hours for Beechfield Gardens could be changed in the future if warranted.

 

Following the debate, the Committee RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Environment, Regulatory Services and Community Safety that the proposals to introduce a residents parking scheme in Beechfield Gardens and Crow Land (between Sandgate Close and Jutsums Lane), operational Monday - Friday, 8am to 6:30pm (a reduction to the advertised times of Monday - Friday, 8am - 8pm),  be implemented;

 

That the effects of the implemented proposals be monitored.

 

Members noted that the estimated cost of the scheme was £0.003m, which would be met through a virement from the revenue budget to the capital (A2017), as there are no funds within the capital budget to fund the project.

 

The voting to proceed with the scheme was 9 in favour of implementation with 1 abstention.

 

Supporting documents: