Surrey Road Parking Consultation

BOROUGH OF POOLE

ALDERNEY, BRANKSOME EAST & WEST AREA COMMITTEE

13 FEBRUARY 2008

REPORT OF HEAD OF TRANSPORTATION SERVICES

SURREY ROAD PARKING CONSULTATION

1.Purpose of Report and Policy Content

1.1To consider the response to a public exhibition on options for controlling parking in Surrey Road.

2.Recommendations

2.1 It is recommended that:

i)the committee notes the response to the exhibition, and that a proposal for a pedestrian facility in Surrey Road at the Branksome Wood Road junction, and a pedestrian refuge near the footpath from Havelock Road are on the Council’s pedestrian facility priority list

ii)Surrey Road is added to the list of roads to be assessed for a Vehicle Activated Sign (VAS).

iii)the Committee approves the advertisement of no waiting at any time restrictions as shown on Drawing HT 300 – 48.

1. Information
2. On 24 October 2007, this committee considered the Traffic Panel’s recommendations regarding requests for parking controls in Surrey Road. The Traffic Panel’s recommendation is attached at Appendix A.
3. When considering the recommendation, the Committee asked Ward Councillors to consult further on the issue and to report back. Residents of Surrey Road were invited to view three alternative options at an exhibition in St John’s Church Hall on 22 February. Residents were invited to make comments on the proposals, and the response is summarised in Appendix B.
4. While Option D – No Change – was the option with most support relative to opposition, it was clear that there was a desire amongst residents for some measure of parking control in the road and a desire for measures to discourage footway parking.
5. The Transportation Advisory Group(TAG) recently considered the issue of footway parking (report attached at Appendix C). The Council currently has no powers to enforce against footway parking unless the vehicle is also contravening a yellow line.
6. There was clearly a concern that yellow lines could lead to higher traffic speeds and so a staggered arrangement, similar to Option B, would appear to do most to address that concern. It would also be possible to retain as much parking as possible for residents by only imposing restrictions on one side of the road (except for the change points). A closer inspection of the individual responses indicates that minor adjustments to the lines suggested in Option B would be the best match to pattern of residents’ responses.

4.Speeding and Pedestrian facilities

4.1Residents raised concerns about speeding in Surrey Road. Speed enforcement is a Police responsibility but Council Officers attend regular meetings with Dorset Police Traffic Management Division and will raise the issue of speeding this area at the next meeting so that they are aware of the concerns.

4.2It would not be appropriate to introduce traffic calming measures on a Classified Road like Surrey Road. The Council is very active, however, in emphasising the Government's anti-speeding publicity locally, and the message is also being spread by the Dorset Safety Camera Partnership, who issue a great deal of publicity of their own. One element of our publicity that has been very well received is the "Travelwise" signs that are placed around the Borough encouraging drivers to slow down. The signs are moved every month so that their message remains fresh in drivers' minds. Speeding is such a widespread concern though, that there is quite a long waiting list for the signs but Surrey Road will be added to the waiting list.

4.3The Council also has a programme of installing VAS signs to warn drivers that they are exceeding the speed limit. Again, there is a great deal of demand for these signs, but Surrey Road will be added to the list of roads for the next tranche of assessments.

4.4The TAG prioritises requests for pedestrian facilities in accordance with a ranking system. Proposals for pedestrian facilities at the Branksome Wood Road signals, and a refuge in the vicinity of the footpath from Havelock Road are on the Pedestrian Facility Priority List.

Julian McLaughlin

Head of Transportation Services

Name and Telephone Number of Officer Contact:

Steve Dean (01202) 262071

Background Papers - none

APPENDIX A

Location: /

Surrey Road

Ward: / Branksome East
Approval & Funding: /

Alderney, Branksome East and West Area Committee

Request by: /

Local Residents.

Nature of Request: / Request for waiting restrictions and measures to discourage footway parking.
Background: / None
Members Comments: / Cllr Mrs Hillman has expressed concerns about the effect of waiting restrictions on residents and their visitors
Emergency Services Refuse Collection Comment: / No specific comments but they would generally support measures that protect their access.
Traffic Panel Comments: / The Council is receiving increasing numbers of complaints that residents find it difficult to use their drives because of the heavy parking along the road. Pedestrians also complain about the widespread footway parking.
The Panel noted that the heavy parking took place in this area throughout the day and night and most of the vehicles parked on the footway. Although there have been concerns about speeding in the road, it is part of the Classified Road network and it would be appropriate to keep it clear of parked cars. Waiting restrictions would also allow enforcement action to be taken against vehicles that park on the footway.
The Panel felt that even if the restrictions were only imposed on one side of the road, vehicles are still likely to park on the other footway. Restrictions should be advertised both sides, for the full length of Surrey Road.
Recommendation: / Impose No Waiting at any time restrictions on both sides of Surrey Road as shown on drg HT200/032
Estimated Cost: / £1,000
Priority: / Accessibility, Safety
Likely Objectors: / There will be objections from some residents

APPENDIX B

RESIDENTS’ RESPONSES

Option / No. of Households supporting / No. of Households opposing
Option A: yellow lines both sides / 7 / 23
Option B: staggered yellow lines / 17 / 14
Option C: Yellow lines south side only / 13 / 15
Option D: No Change / 18 / 6

Additional Comments

i)Speeds – some residents felt that speeding was more of a problem than parking, others were concerned that yellow lines would lead to higher speeds. There were several requests for speed cameras or traffic calming measures

ii)Pedestrians – there were requests for measures to help pedestrians get across the road

iii)Footway parking- several residents pointed out that footway parking made it difficult for pedestrians to get along the road. Others felt that enforcement action should be taken against footway parking rather than imposing yellow lines

iv)Resident Parking- two residents asked for a resident parking scheme

v)Coy Pond Road and Gordon Road – some residents felt that these roads should be reopened

APPENDIX C

BOROUGH OF POOLE

TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY GROUP – thursday 14 June 2007

REPORT OF HEAD OF TRANSPORTATION SERVICES

ON FOOTWAY PARKING

1.Purpose of the Report and Policy Context

1.1To consider the powers that the council has available to control footway parking.

2Recommendation

2.1It is recommended that:

(a)the committee confirm the existing policy that footway parking will not normally be formalised

(b)the council press for Local Authorities outside London to be granted powers to enforce against footway parking.

(c)that a further report be presented to a future meeting should the Department for Transport issue further guidance which could require a change in the approved policy.

3Information

3.1The Council regularly receives complaints that cars are parked on the footway causing difficulties for pedestrians, particularly those in wheelchairs or with pushchairs. Often drivers have chosen to park on the footway in an effort to keep the carriageway clear and the Council sometimes receives requests to formalise footway parking to increase parking provision in residential roads.

3.2Parking on the pavement can cause inconvenience to pedestrians. It can create hazards for visually impaired, disabled and elderly people or those with prams or pushchairs. It may also cause damage to the kerb, the pavement, or the services underneath. Repairing such damages can be costly and the council may face claims for compensation for injuries received resulting from damaged or defective pavements.

3.3The Council can not take any action against footway parking unless there are waiting restrictions (yellow lines) on the highway adjacent to the pavement. A Penalty Charge Notice could then be issued, since a vehicle parked in this manner is contravening the traffic order. Waiting restrictions cover the highway from the centre of the highway to the property boundary.

3.4If there are no waiting restrictions on the highway adjacent to the pavement, then the Council has no powers to issue a Penalty Charge Notice for illegal footway parking. Currently only the Police having powers to deal with footway parking.

3.5London Councils have been given powers to issue Penalty Charge Notices to vehicles that are parked on footways. Outside London, Local Authorities can only prohibit footway parking by making a Traffic Regulation Order. Any such order would, however, need to be conspicuously signed.

3.6It is also possible to deter footway parking through physical measures, such as by installing bollards, raised planters or other street furniture, and by clearly indicating where people should park, but this is expensive unless the problem is very localised.

Formalising Footway Parking

3.7There are roads where the carriageway is so narrow that drivers risk damage to their car by parking wholly on the road, or there is exceptionally high parking demand that footway parking occurs as a result of limited parking. Ultimately it is the driver’s responsibility, to find somewhere safe and legal to park their car. The Council has a responsibility to maintain safe passage for pedestrians, rather than to facilitate parking.

3.8If the footway is wide enough, an Order can be made to allow parking partly or wholly on defined sections of footway. It is suggested that this should only be considered where a clear width of 2m would still remain for pedestrians. There would still be a need to strengthen the footway and the kerbs and to make sure that pedestrians (particularly partially sighted pedestrians) have a clear route around the cars. The Council would also have to be satisfied that pedestrians would not be endangered as the vehicles manouevre into the spaces. It is likely that there will be growing pressure to take action against footway parking and Councils may feel that it is difficult to justify legitimising footway parking in some places but not others.

3.9The Council has successfully introduced a variety of alternative treatments in roads where footway parking was commonplace. Works of this nature can be expensive, but there have been opportunities to introduce them when maintenance schemes were undertaken. In Fernside Avenue for example the carriageway was widened and parking bays created. Shared surface arrangements have been introduced in Argyll Road and Little Croft Road. By redefining the road space, there is no need for a footway parking order and the associated signs.

3.10The new Manual for Streets gives guidance on carriageway and footway design for new roads, and its guidance will be useful if existing roads are to be redefined.

Footway parking – Borough-wide Traffic Regulation Order

3.11The council could consider prohibiting footway parking through a Traffic Regulation Order(TRO). Any such order would, however, need to be enforced, which may be unpopular unless accompanied by an awareness-raising campaign. There are complaints about footway parking from a number of parts of the Borough and it would not be appropriate to introduce a scheme in some roads when other parts of the borough would be unprotected. A Borough-wide ban on footway parking could be considered with a TRO to allow enforcement, the council may need to identify streets where there is no option other to park partly on the footway and would need to be exempt from the order. It would be difficult to justify proceeding with this when there is a possibility of further guidance in the near future and when the same result could be achieved if Councils are given powers to enforce against footway parking.

4.0Possible Actions

4.1The new edition of Chapter 3 of The Traffic Signs Manual, which the Department for Transport expects to consult on in summer 2007, will give more guidance on footway parking and shared parking spaces. A report will be presented to this committee when this further guidance is received.

4.2The council should press the government to give local authorities powers under decriminalised parking to deal with footway parking.

4.3The council could aim to encourage drivers to regard the footway as reserved for pedestrians, with public information and education programmes to help influence attitudes in line with this objective. This may be particularly useful outside schools or footway parking hot-spots where footway parking can be a particular issue. The leaflets could give a clear message of the negative effects of pavement parking, this may have a positive effect on footway parking. If footway parking persisted then physical measures could be considered to deter footway parking.

4.4Footway parking schemes could be considered if the footpaths are wide enough to accommodate footway parking eg more than 2m after the treatment. The footway and kerbs would need to be modified for vehicular use as part of the scheme.

4.5When maintenance schemes provide an opportunity to introduce formal parking areas in roads experiencing high levels of footway parking, treatments to provide parking could be considered at that time.

Julian McLaughlin

Head of Transportation Services

Name and Telephone Number

of Officer Contact:

Steve Dean (01202) 262071

Background Papers - none

TAG140607T3J