Docstoc

REVIEW OF PARKING RESTRICTIONS IN AREAS OUTSIDE GUILDFORD TOWN

Document Sample
REVIEW OF PARKING RESTRICTIONS IN AREAS OUTSIDE GUILDFORD TOWN Powered By Docstoc
					                                                                            ITEM 7




                                                              S
    REVIEW OF PARKING RESTRICTIONS IN
     AREAS OUTSIDE GUILDFORD TOWN
        CONTROLLED PARKING ZONE

            SURREY COUNTY COUNCIL
          LOCAL COMMITTEE (GUILDFORD)

                     28th SEPTEMBER 2006


KEY ISSUE

This report presents proposals for improving the regulation of parking in Ash and
Ripley.


SUMMARY

As part of the cycle of reviews the area outside the controlled parking zone has
been considered. This report presents initial proposals for revising the parking
restrictions in Ash and Ripley. It is recommended that these proposals be subject
to consultation.


Report by                                                        Surrey Atlas Ref.

GBC PARKING SERVICES MANAGER                                 Pages 91 & 105 - 106

GUILDFORD B.C. WARD(S)                       COUNTY ELECTORAL DIVISION(S)

LOVELACE                                                                HORSLEYS
ASH VALE                                                                     ASH




                                         1
                                                                                 ITEM 7

OFFICER RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee is asked to agree that:

(i)     the proposed changes to the parking restrictions in Ripley and Ash be
        subject to informal consultation,

(ii)    if there are only minor amendments requested as a result of these
        consultations that they are discussed with the Local Members and if
        agreement is reached the proposals are formally advertised as an
        intention to make an Order under section 1,2,4,32,35 and 36 of parts III
        and IV of schedule 9 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, and if no
        objections are maintained, the Order be made,

(iii)   if there are significant changes requested as a result of the informal
        consultation that a further report is presented to the Committee.


BACKGROUND

1       In December 2004 the Committee agreed a cycle of reviews alternating
        between the Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) and the areas outside the
        CPZ. A schematic representation is attached as ANNEXE 1. It was
        envisaged that each cycle would take 18 months with implementation of
        the changes resulting from one review being implemented during the last
        six months and happening at the same time as the design phase for the
        next review.

2       Following from the 9 December 2004 meeting of the Committee the first
        review of the CPZ was undertaken. This review identified a large number
        of issues and attempted to address all of these. As a result the
        implementation process is still under way. This report presents the initial
        proposals for areas outside the CPZ.

3       There are a number of constraints on the extent to which additional
        restrictions can be created or operated. Under the Agency Agreement
        between the County and Borough Councils the financial responsibility for
        enforcement of the parking bays within the CPZ lies with the Local
        Committee whereas financial responsibility for yellow lines or other
        restrictions outside the CPZ is the responsibility of the County Council
        Executive. The surplus from the CPZ is used to fund reviews of controls
        within the CPZ but no central funding exists for reviewing restrictions
        outside the CPZ. There are also limits on the level of resources that can
        be used to enforce DPE restrictions and it is important to consider how
        any new restrictions could be enforced.

4       For these reasons it was suggested in the Annual Report presented to the
        Committee on 9th February 2006 that a limited review of the outer areas
        could be funded from the CPZ surplus. It is more efficient for enforcement
        to extend controls in areas where parking attendants already visit than to
        create restrictions in areas that they would require additional travelling
        time.


                                          2
                                                                           ITEM 7

5    The Annual Report identified three main areas where there were concerns
     about the affects of parking. These areas were Ash, Ripley and Stoughton.
     Subsequently Park Barn has also been put forward as an additional area
     for review.

6    With regard to Stoughton there are on going discussions about traffic
     control measures and parking restrictions need to be considered in
     conjunction with these wider proposals to ensure that they are
     complementary. It is the view of officers that there would be benefit in an
     early review of the parking restrictions, but the Stoughton Community
     Association (SCA) is adamant that parking and traffic should be reviewed
     holistically. It may therefore be some time before this work can take place.


REVIEW PROCESS

7    Officers have reviewed the parking restrictions in Ripley and Ash and
     previous correspondence received concerning problems. The Officers’
     suggestions were presented to the local County, Borough and Parish
     Councillors.

8    Following these discussions some amendments were agreed and the
     amended plans are attached as ANNEXES B and C.

9    Before amending or introducing any restrictions a formal proposal must be
     advertised and the people affected by it given the opportunity to make
     objections. Once a proposal has been advertised it is difficult to make
     changes as a result of objections as a significant change creates a new
     proposal that then needs to be re-advertised.

10   For this reason it is important to have a period of informal consultation so
     the views of those affected can be taken into consideration before the
     proposals are advertised. It is often necessary to go back and try to
     resolve any conflicting views that arise. It is recommended that the
     proposals detailed in ANNEXES B and C are put out to informal
     consultation by means of a public exhibition to be held on one afternoon
     and evening at venues in the local areas. The Parish Councils have
     agreed to help publicise the exhibitions.

11   The TABLE overleaf illustrates a proposed timetable. The actual
     timescales for review will depend on how much alteration and discussion
     is required on the proposals. For example, if there is agreement at
     informal consultation and no objections when the proposals are advertised
     the schemes could be implemented earlier next year. The timetable
     allows for a full review of comments after the informal stage, the need to
     report back to the Committee if significant amendments need to be made
     after informal consultation, and the need to report formal objections to the
     Committee.




                                       3
                                                                               ITEM 7


           Month                                   Activity
       October          Start of Informal Consultation

       March            Report back to Local Committee on amendments.
                        (Committee lead times are such that it is unlikely that a
                        report could be brought to the December meeting)

       April            Formal Advertisement of Proposals

       June             Report on objections to the Local Committee

       June             Specify and obtain quotes for work

       August           Implement




FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

12.   The implementation of the proposals as they stand is estimated to
      £15,000.


SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IMPLICATIONS

13.   The promotion of effective enforcement and control of parking leads to be
      less congestion and pollution and improved road safety.




LEAD OFFICER                  KEVIN MCKEE, PARKING MANAGER GBC

TELEPHONE NUMBER              01483 444530

BACKGROUND PAPERS:            Review of the Controlled Parking Zone:
                              9 December 2004

                              On Street Parking Annual Report:
                              30tMarch 2006




                                        4

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Stats:
views:15
posted:3/8/2010
language:
pages:4
Description: REVIEW OF PARKING RESTRICTIONS IN AREAS OUTSIDE GUILDFORD TOWN