Minutes - Newtown and Parkstone Area Committee - 4 June 2008

Minutes - Newtown and Parkstone Area Committee - 4 June 2008

BOROUGH OF POOLE

NEWTOWN AND PARKSTONE AREA COMMITTEE

4 JUNE 2008

COMMITTEE SUITE, CIVIC CENTRE, BOROUGH OF POOLE

The meeting commenced at 7.00pm and concluded at 9.15pm

Members of the Committee present:

Councillor Woodcock (Chairman)

Councillors Clements, Collier, Mrs Stribley and Wilson

Members of the public in attendance: 10

NPA1.08APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Plummer.

NPA2.08DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Cllrs Collier and Woodcock declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 4 – Major Junction Improvements at Ashley Cross and Station Road - as members of the Parkstone Conservative Club, Parr Street.

NPA3.08MINUTES

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Meeting held on 9 April 2008 having been previously circulated, be taken as read, confirmed as a true record and signed by the Chairman.

NPA4.08MAJOR JUNCTION IMPROVEMENTS – ASHLEY CROSS AND STATION ROAD

Steve Dean, Principal Engineer (Transportation Services) introduced the Report of the Head of Transportation Services, outlining proposals for improvements at the Ashley Cross and Station Road / Commercial Road junctions. The proposals, which were designed to improve vehicular capacity, reduce delays and reduce pollution, were part of a package of proposals which Transportation Services was planning to introduce along the Prime Transport Corridor (PTC) between Poole and Bournemouth Town Centres.

The proposals had undergone several stages of consultation to date and the purpose of the report was to inform Members of the results so far and to obtain the views of the Area Committee which would be reported to the Transportation Advisory Group (TAG) at its meeting on 31 July 2008 where the final decision on the scheme would be taken by the Portfolio Holder.

An update of the consultation results, distributed to the Meeting for information, showed that 65% of respondents agreed with the proposals for Ashley Cross; 73% were in favour of proposals at Station Road and 58% were in favour of proposals for Church Road.

In response to questions, the following issues were considered:

  • Government funding would be provided to implement the scheme if it was to be approved;
  • Cllr Mrs Stribley expressed broad support for the scheme, which she felt to be beneficial to the economy of the town and to the vitality of Lower Parkstone.
  • Cllr Mrs Stribley queried whether, subject to local support, Officers should progress the Ashley Cross / Station Road improvements ahead of the proposed improvements to the St Osmunds Road junction, as there were a number of objections to the latter scheme which could create ‘knock-on’ delays to the Parkstone scheme;
  • Transportation Services anticipated a 15% increase in traffic flow following implementation of the improvements;
  • information on the percentage of through-traffic using the route was not available but the roadside interview surveys which were currently underway would give an indication of this type of information.

Members of the public were invited to expresses their views. The following issues were considered:

  • Mr King felt that the proposals did not take into account the likely impact on traffic flow in Curzon Road, which he felt would be detrimental;
  • Mr King expressed the view that there were ‘gaps’ in the consultation as he felt that residents had not been given the opportunity to comment on the whole scheme, including those elements which were outside of the Newtown and Parkstone Wards; In response, Cllr Collier explained that he could not accept this point of view as residents were not prevented from attending consultation events in other wards and in fact proposals for junction improvements at St Osmunds Road had been brought before this area committee meeting for consideration.
  • In response to a question from Members, Steve Dean explained the need to ban some right hand turns, which were particularly disruptive, at certain strategic junctions; It was explained that even if drivers elected to use the next available right-hand turn on their journey, the overall effect would still be an improvement on the current situation;
  • As part of the consultation process, Ashley Road traders had been invited to comment on the proposals;
  • There were no plans to ban the right hand turn into Curzon Road;
  • Cllr Wilson expressed concern that Station Road was a traffic bottleneck and that the problem could be further exacerbated by elements of the proposed scheme;
  • Transportation Services had investigated banning a right hand turn at Station Road but concluded that the benefits of doing so would be negligible; Cllr Collier commented that the right hand turn should stay as he felt it was essential to maintaining the vibrancy of the area;
  • It was anticipated that Station Road parking spaces would be reduced by no more than two, in order to accommodate the improvements;
  • Cllr Mrs Stribley requested that guardrails were not installed at the Britannia Road pedestrian crossing;
  • There were no plans to re-open Approach Road to through-traffic due to the close concentration of housing in the area.

The Meeting considered additional proposals to introduce a 20 mph zone throughout Chalice Close, Church Street, Parr Street and Pascoe Close. During a general discussion the following issues were raised:

  • Traffic regulations required that physical features, including road humps, be installed in designated 20mph zones if traffic speeds were significantly higher than 20mph;
  • Cllr Wilson stated that he was in favour of a 20mph scheme in the area;
  • In response to a query from Peter Steer as to whether there was a need to impose 20mph restrictions in Chalice Close and Pascoe Close, Steve Dean explained that if these roads were excluded from the scheme, Transportation Services would be required to introduce additional signage;

As the projected cost of designating a 20 mph zone was likely to be significant, the Transportation Advisory Group would be asked to consider the most cost effective means of achieving this.

RECOMMENDED

(i) that the views of the Newtown and Parkstone Area Committee as expressed herein be added to the consultation results to be presented to the Transportation Advisory Group on 31 July 2008; and

(ii)that the Transportation Advisory Group be asked to consider cost effective means of introducing a designated 20 mph zone in the vicinity of Parr Street.

NPA5.08TRAFFIC PANEL

Steve Dean introduced the Report of the Head of Transportation Services which outlined the recommendation of the Traffic Panel that no waiting and no loading at any time restrictions be imposed along the northern side of Whitecliff Road, and that loading restrictions be extended through the keyhole bridge. The recommendation had arisen following an increase in the number of drivers parking on both sides of Whitecliff Road to the east of the Keyhole Bridge.

It was estimated that the cost of imposing the restrictions would be £1,000 to be met from the Committee’s remaining budget.

During a general discussion, the following issues were considered:

  • The Council had adopted a general policy to introduce double-yellow lines (no waiting at any time), as opposed to single-yellow lines (restricted waiting times), as the former required no additional signage to be installed;
  • Cllr Collier felt that the imposition of a loading ban would not serve the best interests of Whitecliff Road residents;
  • There were concerns that the Civic Centre Parking Scheme had increased pressure on parking in Whitecliff Road;
  • Imposing no waiting restrictions would improve the flow of through traffic;
  • Cllr Wilson requested an update on S106 monies collected for the area;
  • Should the Area Committee be minded to approve the recommendations, the proposed parking restrictions would be advertised and consulted upon;
  • The Area Committee recognised that increased parking in the area had resulted in access problems for local residents.

In summary, Members supported the recommendation of the Traffic Panel that parking restrictions be imposed on the north side of Whitecliff Road. In addition, members felt that it would be appropriate to undertake a comprehensive review of the area. Including parking restrictions.

RESOLVED

(i) that the Newtown and Parkstone Area Committee Meeting approves the imposition of no waiting restrictions (double-yellow lines) along the northern side of Whitecliff Road and recommends that the order be advertised forthwith; and

(ii) that the Area Committee does not support the imposition of no loading at any time restrictions along the northern side of Whitecliff Road; and

(iii) that the Area Committee approves the allocation of approximately £1,000 from the Committee’s budget to cover the cost of imposing parking restrictions in Whitecliff Road; and

(iv)that Transportation Services be requested to undertake a comprehensive review of the Whitecliff area and return to the Area Committee at a future date with proposals for recommendation to the Transportation Advisory Group. It is recommended that the review covers Sherwood Avenue, Sandbanks Road and Whitecliff Road and that it gives specific consideration to whether any part of this area should have time-limited parking restrictions imposed.

Cllr Mrs Stribley left the meeting at 8.30pm

NPA6.08OPEN FORUM

The Meeting noted the responses to questions submitted by residents as follows:

(i)Use of Portacabins at Whitecliff Recreation Area

The following question had been received (29.05.08) from Peter Steer, Secretary, Parkstone Bay Association;

"Now that the Doctors have vacated the surgery, as per the 106 agreement, will this agreement now be fully implemented by the removal of the Portakabins plus confirmation that, irrespective of any planning applications on this site, the site will be now returned to recreational use as promised by our ward councillors 2 years ago."

Response:

“This issue was discussed at last night’s Cabinet meeting where Members agreed to a proposal to make use of the existing sited Portacabins on Whitecliff Recreation Ground in connection with a temporary Day Care Centre whilst the Fourways site is redeveloped. Consequent upon this decision, the process was due to commence today (4 June) to enable the necessary adaptation work to the Portacabins to be scheduled for completion by the end of July, thus enabling the relocation of Fourways to occur on schedule.

Members also agreed that no Service Unit or any part of the Council will consider making further use of the Portacabins on Whitecliff and the land will be returned to public open space once "Fourways" has ceased use of the land”.

During a general discussion, the following observations were made:

  • Peter Steer questioned whether Cabinet’s Motion that ‘no Service Unit or any other part of the Council would seek to make further use of the Portacabins at Whitecliff’ was likely to prove any more binding than the previous condition on the land which required that it be reinstated to its original condition once the doctor’s surgery had ceased use of the site?
  • Cllr Clements expressed the view that the matter had been handled ‘disgracefully’;
  • temporary occupation of the site by Fourways would commence in July / August 2008 and would continue until completion of the Fourways build in approximately 2 years time;
  • the Chairman explained that all three Ward Councillors had been very reluctant to agree to the use of temporary Portacabins at Whitecliff. However they had taken the view that use of the site for the doctors surgery and the Fourways rebuild was ‘overwhelmingly’ beneficial to the public.
  • Extending the temporary use of Portacabins at Whitecliff to reprovide Fourways during the rebuild project represented the best value for money out of all available options;
  • Use of the Portacabins would be restricted to 9.00am to 5.00pm, Mondays to Fridays. Weekend use would not be permitted;
  • Cllr Wilson stated that he felt that the budget to ‘decant’ Fourways during the rebuilding project was ‘not defined’ and felt his alternative suggestion to build a new Fourways centre on a new site had been ‘ignored’. He felt that the plan to re-provide services for service users at a different site during the rebuilding project was not conducive to the vulnerable people who used the services;
  • The initial expectation that the Fourways re-build could be completed in stages, thus enabling service users to remain on-site for the duration of the build, had not proven feasible;
  • In response to a query from Peter Steer, Cllr Collier explained that the feasibility of all alternative sites had been thoroughly investigated and that none had proved a viable alternative to Whitecliff;
  • Cllr Collier noted that he had abstained from voting on the substantive Cabinet Motion that ‘Members agree the proposal to make use of the existing sited Portacabins on Whitecliff Recreation Ground in connection with a temporary Day Care Centre whilst the Fourways site is redeveloped.’;
  • In response to a query from Peter Steer, Cllr Collier confirmed that no planning permission to expand the site had been granted and that an additional portacabin which had been delivered to the site in error had been immediately removed.
  • It was clarified that only Fourways would be temporarily relocated to Whitecliff. No provision had been made to temporarily re-home Heathlands on-site.

(ii)Whitecliff Car Park

The following question had been received (29.05.08) from Peter Steer, Secretary, Parkstone Bay Association;

"The Parkstone Bay association wish to AGAIN request 4 hour parking provisions be placed on Whitecliff Car Park and the whole length of Whitecliff Road from the Keyhole Bridge to Sandbanks Road to ensure that parking spaces are available for persons using the recreational area. The revitalised play area will, we hope, attract many more residents to the park and the present all day parking by the "Civic Centre Traffic Island" office workers should not be allowed to continue to prevent park useage."

Response:

“There is an item on this agenda recommending the imposition of waiting restrictions along the northern side of Whitecliff Road between the bridge and Sherwood Avenue. If parking is restricted to the southern side of the road this does not cause undue traffic problems, indeed this is a very popular place for visitors to park. Imposing a time limit in this area would have little effect on traffic flow, but could displace parking into other residential roads nearby. There would be a need to mark parking bays on the carriageway and place signs at regular intervals along the road. The suggestion of imposing a 4hr limit on the southern side of the road was considered by this committee on 18 January 2006 and not approved.

A 4hr limit was advertised in Whitecliff Recreation Ground car park in 2004. The suggestion prompted a large number of objections and was not proceeded with”.

The Chairman drew the Meeting’s attention to Agenda Item 5 ‘Traffic Panel’ as previously discussed, and reiterated the Meeting’s resolution that Transportation Services would be requested to undertake a comprehensive review of the Whitecliff area and be asked to return to the Area Committee at a future date with proposals for recommendation to the Transportation Advisory Group.

The review would give specific consideration to whether any part of the area should have time-limited parking restrictions imposed.

(iii)Whitecliff Recreation Group – Speed Limits

The following question had been received (29.05.08) from Peter Steer, Secretary, Parkstone Bay Association;

"In order to protect Health & Safety of young and old people, who MUST cross these roads to gain access to the recreation area, that the speed limit on the roads adjoining the Whitecliff Recreation Ground and Baiter Park - Turks Lane, Whitecliff Road, Catalina Drive be reduced to 20 mph enforced by effective speed humps."

Response:

“The Council receives numerous requests for traffic calming measures and, unfortunately, has only a very limited amount of funding for such work. It is, therefore, very important that these funds are spent where they will be most beneficial.

The Department for Transport imposes very strict criteria on the Council as the Highway Authority when we install traffic calming features, to ensure that the features themselves do not create a hazard. These requirements mean that traffic calming is by no means an inexpensive way of reducing vehicle speeds or accidents. Road Humps, for example, have to be regularly spaced along a road and so there would need to be several along Whitecliff Road to comply with the regulations.

Accident reduction is a high priority for the Borough and the Council is careful to ensure that greatest benefit is obtained from any expenditure that it commits to road safety. Whilst there would be an understandable desire to reduce the general speed of traffic in Whitecliff Road, fortunately only one personal injury accident has been reported to the Police in the last 4 years alongside the recreation ground. This inevitably means that available resources must be used elsewhere as there are many other locations in Poole with a worse accident record than Whitecliff Road”.

The Chairman confirmed that options to reduce the speed limit to 20mph in Turks Lane, Whitecliff Road and Catalina Drive would be considered as part of the overall review into traffic in the Whitecliff area, as agreed under Agenda item 5 ‘Traffic Panel’.

Top View