Agenda and draft minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of Members' Interests.

The purpose of the report by the Director of Regeneration is to consider creating designated bays for electric vehicle charging points, and options for personalisation of disabled bays. 

 RECOMMENDED that the Cabinet Member for Traffic & Transportation:

(1) approves the continued installation of disabled parking bays in residential areas for use by all blue badge holders but that the Council's policy of refusing to designate use by any one particular blue badge holder or class of blue badge holder be reaffirmed; 

(2) approves the introduction of traffic regulation orders to create enforceable designated bays for charging electric vehicles;

(3) delegates authority to the Director of Regeneration to develop and implement a viable solution for the implementation of EV charging.

Pam Turton, Assistant Director, presented the report on behalf of the Director of Regeneration.

Mr D Brown had submitted a written representation to Councillor Bosher as the Cabinet Member for Traffic & Transportation and was given the opportunity to make a deputation as he was present, but he chose not to speak as his points were covered in his written submission (email) which had set out Mr Brown's concerns as the space he used was not respected by Gunwharf shoppers.

Councillor Bosher was aware that it was legally possible to designate a blue badge parking bay for the specific use of an individual blue-badge holder, but was concerned what the implications would be city-wide if this precedent was set.  He had received Mr Brown's communication and extract from the letter from the Department of Transport to Flick Drummond (from December 2016 when she was a MP). Pam Turton confirmed that there were 1800 disabled parking bays, and if these became specific and limited to individual users this would limit the opportunities for other disabled drivers to use them. While applicants for disabled bays are asked to make a one-off contribution (£51) to the total costs of implementation, the applications process is clear that the provision of a bay does not provide for exclusive personal use.

Questions were asked by members to Pam Turton, Assistant Director, and Denise Bastow, Parking Office Manager, which included:

·         The number of disabled bays implemented per year?

 - Usually between 200-300 are implemented, with equivalent numbers usually removed

·         Whether particular areas could be designated, such as near to Gunwharf where drivers may be avoiding parking fees?

 - Blue badge holders are entitled to use pay and display facilities without cost

 *      How contraventions of parking in disabled parking bays were dealt with - it was explained that any blue badge holder can park in a disabled bay and applicants are clearly advised of this at the application stage and only a vehicle that was not displaying a valid blue badge would be enforced against by means of the issue of a Penalty Charge Notice.  The contribution made by the applicant goes towards the cost of installation and maintenance of the disabled bay.

• How the disabled parking bays were allocated and eligibility -

     Eligibility is determined by the applicant having a blue badge, a vehicle registered to someone at the address and not having usable off road parking, and bays are allocated as close as possible to the applicant's property

·         Could extra disabled bays be put in roads? There is no limit to the number of disabled bays that can be implemented within a residential street, however, it was considered that adding in an additional bay over above those requested could negatively impact on the parking pressures in residential streets.

Discussion then took place with regard the electric vehicle (EV) charging points element of the report, and questions were raised including:

·         How these bays would work?

- The Bays would be protected by Traffic Regulation Order, meaning that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

The report by the Director of Regeneration sets out the benefits of a cycle hire scheme in Portsmouth. Consideration is also given as to which model of cycle hire scheme would be most beneficial to the city's residents and visitors.

RECOMMENDED that the Cabinet Member for Traffic and Transportation:

(1)       Supports the development of a floating bike hire scheme within Portsmouth and Delegates authority to the Director of Regeneration to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with a cycle hire organisation, but that the City Council maintains an 'Observer Approach';

(2)       Agrees the withdrawal from the existing Brompton Bike Hire dock at the Hard Interchange as this has not proved cost effective for the City Council;

(3)       Delegates responsibility to the Director of Regeneration, to consider the floating bike hire options available to Portsmouth and establish the best suited service provider for the city.

Pam Turton, Assistant Director, introduced the report of the Director of Regeneration, which set out the advantages and disadvantages of the floating bike hire schemes and docked hire schemes and concluded that the 'floating hire' scheme would be the most appropriate model to increase the number of hire locations in the city.

Councillor Bosher, as Cabinet Member, had received a written deputation from the Portsmouth Cycle Forum's Chair Ian Saunders supported the promotion of cycling in the city, outlining that it needed to be with the development of a safe cycling network.  Councillor Bosher was keen that there be improvement of the cycling infrastructure in the city.

Questions were raised by the three members, covering:

·         Responsibility for the bikes (including servicing and collection)

- it was reported that the Memorandum of Understanding would enable these discussions to take place and that individuals would be responsible for returning the bikes to appropriate locations (with a locking mechanism being used to sign out of the hire time). Vandalism would be dealt with by the service provider.

·         Visits to see schemes at other comparable cities

- Nick Scott reported on the visit to Southampton to see the implementation of their recent YoBike scheme and it was noted that some cities have a variety of providers (such as at Oxford) although for the trial period there would only be 1 provider in Portsmouth.

·         Discount schemes and the involvement of the University of Portsmouth (UoP)

- there would be work with the University of Portsmouth to look at subsidised rates for students and there was the potential for this to be extended to businesses. Pam Turton was due to meet with UoP representatives the following week to discuss the proposed floating scheme; Councillor Stagg believed that the University had expressed concern about the removal of the Brompton Bikes.

·         Data provision -

as a scheme would be App based this would offer collection of useful data, such as key routes for cycling in the city

·         The level of interest by companies - there had been 7 expressions of interest

·         Use of the Guildhall Square

- it was reported that this would need the involvement of the Licensing Unit at the City Council.

·         It was noted that the hire bikes at the Hard had not had the anticipated level of usage, but that it remained a key location for a replacement scheme for consideration by the new provider

·         Councillor Chowdhury raised the issue of liability and advertising of the scheme - there would be a media campaign when the provider had been selected

Councillor Bosher was pleased that the cost of the scheme would not fall to the City Council but to the provider, through the Memorandum of Understanding. 

DECISIONS

The Cabinet Member for Traffic and Transportation:

(1)       Supported the development of a floating bike hire scheme within Portsmouth and Delegates authority to the Director of Regeneration to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with a cycle hire organisation, but that the City Council maintains an 'Observer  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

The purpose of the report by the Director of Regeneration is to review existing parking permits and their associated charges.

RECOMMENDED that the Cabinet Member approves:

(1)             Residents Parking Charges

A charges framework for Resident and Business Parking permits for a period of 3 years, with effect from 1st January each year:

(2)  Visitor Permits

To only offer visitor permits in 12hr and 24hr periods from 1st January 2018

A charges framework for Visitor Parking Permits for a period of 3 years, with effect from 1st January each year:

(3) Residents' Parking Permit Administration

(i)An additional administrative fee of £100 from 1^st January 2018 per multi-vehicle permit. 

(ii) A requirement for residents' permit holders to supply eligibility paperwork every 3 years.

(iii) Refunds for permits only being offered when the amount to be refunded exceeds £10

(4) Other Permit Types

The continued issue of permits to organisations detailed in Appendix A

Pam Turton, Assistant Director, introduced the report of the Director of Regeneration, which set out the proposed changes in charges and the administration of permits.

Councillor Bosher asked officers to elaborate on the permit administration recommendations.    Denise Bastow, as Parking Office Manager, explained that in the main permits were issued as virtual permits (which helped to combat fraud).  This means that those who have usage of more than one vehicle, but only need to park one vehicle at any one time, can continue to be issued a physical permit but for an additional charge of £100; eligibility paperwork will need to be supplied to confirm usage of multiple vehicles where circumstances necessitated it. 

It was also recommended that there be a resubmission of paperwork to check entitlement every 3 years; the move to virtual permits and resubmission of paperwork are there to help combat fraudulent usage of permits.  Proportionate refunds had been given in cases where people move out of the city or sell their vehicle, but as some of the refunds were for very small values (eg £2.50) it is proposed that once the refund has been calculated it will only be offered if the refund value is at least £10 due to the administrative cost of processing refunds

Councillor Stagg asked about the use of emails as she was concerned some older customers may not have access to this; it was reported that emails were used if these addresses had been provided but that letters could also be sent where appropriate.

Councillor Bosher supported the proposed framework of charges for the next 3 years, and stressed that there were only 43 issued third residents parking permits.  He also drew attention to the information in Appendix B showing the comparative costs with other local authorities, especially the neighbouring councils charging more for first permits (Fareham and Southampton) so Portsmouth's levels represented better value.

DECISIONS

The Cabinet Member approved:

(1)             Residents Parking Charges

A charges framework for Resident and Business Parking permits for a period of 3 years, with effect from 1st January each year:

(2)  Visitor Permits

To only offer visitor permits in 12hr and 24hr periods from 1st January 2018

A charges framework for Visitor Parking Permits for a period of 3 years, with effect from 1st January each year:

(3) Residents' Parking Permit Administration

(i)An additional administrative fee of £100 from 1^st January 2018 per multi-vehicle permit. 

(ii) A requirement for residents' permit holders to supply eligibility paperwork every 3 years.

(iii) Refunds for permits only  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.

This report by the Director of Regeneration is for information only. The purpose of this paper and accompanying report is to apprise the Cabinet Member for Traffic and Transportation of the evaluation of the 2016/17 Sustainable Travel Transition Year Programme.

RECOMMENDED that the Cabinet Member:

(1) acknowledges the evaluation report and the successes delivered through the Sustainable Travel Transition Year 2016/17 programme;

(2) continues to support programmes to encourage behaviour change activities going forward.

Pam Turton, Assistant Director, presented the report of the Director of Regeneration which pointed to the success of the Sustainable Travel Transition Year Programme, and Appendix A of the report which detailed the range of schemes which had delivered the objectives. One of these had been the Pompey Monster Scheme which had encouraged children and their parents to walk to school which had been trialled successfully for 3 schools.

Councillor Bosher and Pam Turton praised the team which had worked hard in the delivery of the programme.  Councillor Bosher was pleased by the evidence of travel advice leading to visitors staying longer in the city as well as the engagement with school-children and their parents in the walk-to-school schemes.  He also applauded the positive work to encourage safe cycling.

Councillors Stagg and Chowdhury also supported the Cabinet Member in welcoming the successes.  Councillor Chowdhury felt these initiatives were important for the well-being of children and should be further promoted. Councillor Stagg wanted action to promote the safety of cyclists by tackling the behaviour of drivers. Councillor Bosher had attended a road safety educational event at the Mountbatten Centre which the police had run, and work was taking place to increase the safety of cyclists.

DECISIONS The Cabinet Member:

(1)  acknowledged the evaluation report and the successes delivered through the Sustainable Travel Transition Year 2016/17 programme;

(2) continues to support programmes to encourage behaviour change activities going forward.