Agenda item

The purpose of the report by the Director of Regeneration is to consider the public response to the proposed MB Orchard Road area Residents' Parking Zone (RPZ), in the context of parking problems and the wider Programme of Consultation on Residents' Parking.

Within this report, "RPZ" means Residents' Parking Zone, "MB parking zone" means the proposed Orchard Road area RPZ located between Goldsmith Avenue and Jessie Road (to the north and south) and Victoria Road North and Fernhurst Road (to the west and east), and "TRO" means Traffic Regulation Order.

Appendix A: The public proposal notice for TRO 84/2018

Appendix B: Public views submitted

RECOMMENDED that the MB parking zone proposed under TRO 84/2018 is implemented as advertised, with the exceptions of cul-de-sacs Chestnut Avenue and Fernhurst Road.

that the MB parking zone proposed under TRO 84/2018 be implemented as advertised, with the exceptions of cul-de-sacs Chestnut Avenue and Fernhurst Road.

After Councillor Stagg's initial welcome and introductions she asked that Pam Turton, Assistant Director (Transport) make a short presentation covering both TRO 84/2018 (MB zone) and TRO 87/2018 (MC zone) together.

For TRO 84 (MB) the 21 day consultation period had been from 30 August to 20 September 2018, following a decision taken in July 2018 on Residents' Parking Schemes which meant that schemes that had already had 2 surveys would not be subject to another one but go out to a Traffic Regulation Order consultation which included the provision for MB permit holders only to park in the zone between 4pm and 6pm.

The results (as set out in paragraph 4.6 of the Director of Regeneration's report) were that from the 1760 letters to households, 153 responses were in support of the proposal, 95 objecting and 8 were unclear if they were for or against the proposal.  22 responses had been from the 2 cul-de-sacs Chestnut Avenue and Fernhurst Road, whose comments had resulted in the exemptions proposed within the recommendation.

For TRO 87 (MC) the advert for consultation had referred to permit holders only parking in the zone from 5pm until 7pm.  Paragraph 4.6 of the Director of Regeneration's report set out the consultation outcomes, with letters sent to 2670 households, with 234 responses of support, 225 objecting (35 from outside the MC zone and 22 not providing an address) and 14 unclear if they were for or against the proposal. There was one correction to representation 84 which had been circulated with the written representations to the Cabinet Member and spokespersons for Traffic & Transportation.

The Assistant Director recommended that the scheme be implemented as amended to exempt the 2 cul-de-sacs.

Deputations were held collectively for the two schemes; these are not minuted in full as these are recorded as part of the web-cast of this meeting which can be viewed here:

https://livestream.com/accounts/14063785/Cabinet-TT-25OCT2018

1.    Cllr Hugh Mason, St. Jude ward regarding the effect on the Albert Road area and asking for a survey of the MD area before MB and MC are implemented

2.    Mr Bartle, in favour of reinstating the MB zone

3.    Mr McCreesh, commenting on MC and LB with the high number of student cars

4.    Mr P Smith, against the reintroduction of MC

5.    Mr M Smart, for MC due to the high number of student cars

6.    Ms B Jones, commenting on an equalities issue for non-car users not being able to have permits for visitors

7.    Ms D Bailey, commenting on the costs to working families of the permits

8.    Mr J Massiah, in favour of reinstating MB but favouring an extended restriction for non-residents of 4-7.30pm

9.    Councillor Steve Pitt, on behalf of himself and Councillor Horton both Central Southsea ward, supporting both MB and MC zones being reintroduced after speaking with residents, the university and doctors surgeries.

10. Councillor Luke Stubbs, Eastney & Craneswater ward, opposing both MB and MC and favouring a strategic approach rather than moving parking problems around, causing displacement.

11. Mr P Aldridge, against MC implementation and challenging the cost of permits

12. Ms C Davis - concerns regarding MC and the problems caused to shift workers

Councillor Simon Bosher, as Opposition Spokesperson (Conservative), queried the ability to change the restricted hours for non-permit-holder parking and Pam Turton clarified that if the suggested hours in the report (which had been consulted on) were amended there would be the need to advertise in a new Traffic Regulation Order (TRO).  The majority for each of the zones had indicated that they were happy with the hours as proposed.  Councillor Bosher was concerned that the parking problem would be moved around Southsea and that the priority list of requested residents parking zones would be affected.

Councillor Lynne Stagg, as Cabinet Member for Traffic & Transportation, responded that residents were able to request RPZs via their ward councillors for surveys to be undertaken, and where these were implemented but problems were occurring these were revisited between 12-18 months.

Councillor Bosher was concerned at the costs involved in implementing the zones, changing signage and the need to go back out to another TRO if there were changes in times. He felt that there had been a low response rate and some residents may not support the proposed timings.  As Chair of the Traffic, Environment and Community Safety (TECS) panel he suggested that the outcome of the panel's review into parking be awaited before these decisions were taken.

Councillor Stagg did not think that it was premature as there was reinstatement of measures which had been removed without consultation.  There is a programme of zones to be considered and it would not be possible to do a city-wide zone.

There was then the opportunity for officers to answer some of the points raised by the deputations, these included:

·         Michael Lawther, City Solicitor, explained the public sector equalities duty, and clarified that car ownership did not form a protected characteristic, and he would send a reply to Ms Jones regarding her inquiry.

·         Pam Turton, Assistant Director (Transport), responded to the queries on when the MD area would be surveyed if MB and MC zones were approved - there would be an informal survey from the week commencing 5th November, i.e. prior to the implementation of MB and MC residents' parking zones.

·         Nicki Musson, Transport Planning & TRO Officer, reported that with regard to the parking bays in Campbell Road (which is in the MD Kings zone) residents on the north side of the road would be able to apply for permits as an interim measure.

·         Wayne Layton, Finance Manager, explained the financial rationale for the pricing structure for residents parking permits was to reduce the number of cars but not impede visitors (allowing purchase of visitor permits).  It was hard to predict the income from permits, scratch cards and fines.  There are 33 residents' parking zones already in place - some generate a surplus and some do not, about 18 make a small surplus and 15 make a loss. Around 85% of permits sold were first permits and 14% were second permits, and only 1% of permits sold were third permits.  Any surpluses made from On-street parking operations have to be remitted to the parking reserve.

·         Pam Turton, Assistant Director (Transport), and Nikki Musson responded to the issue of visitor parking, with the 2 hour restriction being brought in to deter long term parking in the areas, those at home during the day would not need a visitor parking (unless it was within the specified 2 hour restricted times), which would help with business appointments too.

·         Regarding queries raised on the consultation dates Pam Turton and Nikki Musson responded that the 21 days of consultation on the TROs had run from 30 August until 20 September 2018, and the notices had explained what was being proposed to ask for responses within those 3 weeks.  Officers would look into the allegation that businesses had not received notification, although there had been yellow street notices displayed too.

·         Regarding the issue of "reinstating" previous zones (which Henley Road had not appeared in) and any differences, Nikki Musson clarified that there had been displacement experienced by the Francis Avenue boundary, therefore the new boundary for TRO 87 (MC zone) had been drawn at Bath Road, plus the 2 cul de sacs were being excluded due to the representation received from residents there.

Councillor Yahiya Chowdhury, Opposition Spokesperson (Labour), stated that parking concerns was a national issue, with various problems being encountered, that the local community needed help with.  It was hard to find a solution unless parking space is available elsewhere.  He hoped that the 2 hour restriction leaving the rest of the day free would work for the community so he would support the officer's recommendations.  Councillor Stagg explained that the previous system of up to 4 hours restriction was hard to monitor and the 2 hour slot was easier to enforce.

Councillor Bosher referred to the issue of student parking and their ability to register for a RPZ permit; it was confirmed that the authority is not able to discriminate against students whose vehicles are registered locally.  Councillor Stagg responded that work was continuing with the University of Portsmouth to discourage students bringing cars to the city and there were low numbers doing so.

Councillor Stagg explained that based on the numbers reported for the consultation exercises which had shown the majority of respondents being in favour of the schemes being implemented again, so she supported the officer's recommendations for both reports.

DECISION: that the MB parking zone proposed under TRO 84/2018 be implemented as advertised, with the exceptions of cul-de-sacs Chestnut Avenue and Fernhurst Road.