SIDCUP/LONGLANDS

 

ENVIRONMENT, TRANSPORT AND REGENERATION PORTFOLIO

Report to Councillor Daniel Francis, Cabinet Member (Transport Planning and Parking) – 19 November 2004

(Internal ref: x_191104_etrp_r71)

Decision Sheet

SIDCUP TOWN CENTRE AND SIDCUP STATION CONTROLLED PARKING ZONES – PROPOSED MINOR CHANGES – OBJECTIONS

Decision ref: ETR 71/04-05

Plan

ISSUES

On 8 June 2004, the Cabinet Member approved the advertisement of Traffic Orders to introduce “At Any Time” waiting restrictions in parts of Lansdown Road, Main Road and The Drive, Sidcup and minor changes to the parking layout in the Sidcup Town Centre Controlled Parking Zone and the Sidcup Station Controlled Parking Zone.  The proposals were advertised on 15 September 2004.  There were some objections and comments, which are now considered.

OPTIONS

(a)

To approve the introduction of the advertised proposals with minor modifications.

(b)

To approve the introduction of the advertised proposals without modifications.

(c)

To abandon the proposals.

DECISIONS

(1)

The Assistant Director (Strategic Planning and Regeneration) authorised to make the necessary Traffic Orders and implement the following in respect of changes to Sidcup Town Centre and Sidcup Station Controlled Parking Zones as shown on Drawing No. 99143/11;

(2)

The proposed changes to “at any time” waiting restrictions in Main Road and the new proposals to introduce “at any time” waiting restrictions at the Lansdown Road/Danson Close and The Drive/The Lawns junctions to be introduced, as advertised;

(3)

The proposed changes to parking bays in Belton Road, Birkbeck Road, Church Avenue, Granville Road, Hadlow Road, Sidcup Hill and St. John’s Road to be introduced, as advertised;

(4)

The proposed revocation of the parking bays in The Green and Church Avenue to be introduced, as advertised;

(5)

The advertised proposals to change two existing residents bays in Craybrooke Road to shared use (Residents/ 2 hour parking) bays to be amended so that only one existing bay is changed;

(6)

The advertised proposals to change two existing shared use (Residents/ Business permit) bays in Selbourne Road to shared use (Residents/2 hour parking) bays, not to be implemented.

REASONS

The advertised proposal to amend the existing “at any time” waiting restrictions in Main Road is intended to improve safety without adversely affecting parking at the location.  Therefore, the request by the objector to extend the restrictions further is not recommended.  There were no objections to the proposed “at any time” waiting restrictions at Lansdown Road/Danson Close and The Drive/The Lawns junctions, and these can be introduced.

 

There were no objections to the advertised proposals for changes to parking bays in Belton Road, Church Avenue, Sidcup Hill, St John’s Road and Hadlow Road (section within the existing Sidcup Town Centre Controlled Parking Zone) and these can be introduced.

 

The single residents’ bay in Granville Road, close to the junction with Birkbeck Road is causing safety problems and despite one objection, it should be removed.  Objections were also received to extending an existing resident’s bay in Birkbeck Road, but additional resident spaces are required for permit holders in this area.

 

Although one objection was received regarding the transfer of the northern section of Hadlow Road from the Sidcup Station to Town Centre Controlled Parking Zone, the change should be introduced since it will have no impact on the use of the bays.  Two objections were received to the removal of the parking bays in The Green.  However, this proposal was based on safety grounds and should be introduced.

 

The objection to change one of the residents’ bays in Craybrooke Road to shared use (Residents’/2 hour short stay) bays is considered to be justified because the number of resident permit holders in this location has recently increased.

 

The objections to change two shared use (Residents/Business permit) bays in Selbourne Road to (Residents/ 2 hour short stay) bays were from local businesses (with permits).  Since there are no car parks close by and parking in the area is difficult, it is recommended not to introduce this proposal.

 

Signed:  D FRANCIS

Date:  22 November 2004

Councillor Daniel Francis

LAST DATE FOR CALL-IN (by Scrutiny Committee): 3 DECEMBER 2004

 

 

 

ENVIRONMENT, TRANSPORT AND REGENERATION PORTFOLIO

Report to Councillor Daniel Francis, Cabinet Member (Transport Planning and Parking) – 19 November 2004

 

Decision ref: ETR 71/04-05

Main Report

 

SIDCUP TOWN CENTRE AND SIDCUP STATION CONTROLLED PARKING ZONES – PROPOSED MINOR CHANGES – OBJECTIONS

Decision ref: ETR )

1.     Background

On 28 June 2004, the Cabinet Member approved the advertisement of Traffic Orders for changes to the Sidcup Town Centre Controlled Parking Zone and the Sidcup Station Controlled Parking Zone.  Traffic Order advertisements were placed on 15 September 2004.  The objections and comments to these proposals are now considered.

2.     Proposed Waiting or Loading Restrictions

There were no objections to the proposals to introduce “At Any Time” waiting restrictions at the Lansdown Road/Damon Close and The Drive/The Lawns junctions.  These will be introduced as advertised.

 

There were no objections to the proposals to amend the “At Any Time” waiting restrictions in Main Road.  However, a letter requesting that the proposed restrictions be extended has been received.  The Council recognised that there is some demand for ‘on-street’ parking at this location.  Therefore, the proposed changes were intended to improve safety without adversely affecting on-street parking.  The advertised proposals are considered adequate to improve safety and additional restrictions are not recommended.

 

There have been no objections to the proposal to introduce additional ‘At Any Time’ waiting restrictions and ‘peak hour’ loading restrictions at the southern end of Hadlow Road (near Sidcup High Street)

3.     Proposed Changes to Parking Bays

The Traffic Order advertisements included many changes to parking bays and waiting restrictions within the Town Centre Controlled Parking Zone and some changes to parking bays within the Station Controlled Parking Zone.

 

There have also been no objections to the proposal to change the parking bays in Belton Road, Church Avenue, Sidcup Hill, St John’s Road and in Hadlow Road (within the existing Sidcup Town Centre Controlled Parking Zone).

 

Objections were received to seven of the proposals.  The proposals, together with objections received and officers’ comments, are listed below.

 

Objection 1

 

One letter of objection was received to the proposal to remove a single residents’ bay in Granville Road, because resident permit holders need parking availability in the area.

 

Officers’ Comments

 

The resident bay in question is close to the junction with Birkbeck Road and it is considered to be causing safety problems to vehicles turning at the junction.  As part of other proposals in the immediate area, it is recommended to change an existing short stay (2 hour) bay to a resident’s bay and this will generally increase the provision for resident permit holders in this part of Granville Road.

 

Objections 2 & 3

 

Two letters of objection were received to the proposal to extend an existing resident bay in Birkbeck Road, because the bay would restrict access to the road from adjoining driveways.  It was also commented that existing business permit holder bays are not regularly used and some could be converted to resident bays.

 

Officers’ Comments

 

Additional resident spaces are required for permit holders in this area and it is recommended that the existing single resident bay in Birkbeck road be converted to a double bay.  If approved the new bay would be marked out with due regard to existing driveways in the locality.  The existing business bays at the southern end of Birkbeck Road will be monitored and their partial conversion to resident permit holder bays could be considered as part of any future Controlled Parking Zone reviews.

 

Objection 4

 

One letter of objection was received to the proposal to transfer the existing small section of Hadlow Road from the Sidcup Station Controlled Parking Zone to the Sidcup Town Centre Controlled Parking Zone.  It was commented that this would adversely affect users of Emmanuel Church.

 

Officers’ Comments

 

The proposal to include the whole of Hadlow Road into the Sidcup Town Centre Controlled Parking Zone is mainly being promoted to make the parking controls more consistent in the whole length of the road. This will make the controls easier to understand by motorists and will have the additional benefits of reducing signage clutter in the road

 

Similar to the situation in adjoining Granville Road, none of the existing parking bays in Hadlow Road (within the existing Sidcup Station Controlled Parking Zone) operates during the times of this Controlled Parking Zone (i.e. Monday to Friday, 1pm – 3pm).  They already operate during the Town Centre Controlled Parking Zone times (i.e. Monday to Saturday, 9am – 5.30pm).  Therefore, including all of Hadlow Road in the Town Centre Controlled Parking Zone will actually have no effect on the operation of the parking bays in this area and as such would not affect users of the local church.

 

Objections 5 & 6

 

Two letters of objection were received to the proposal to remove the section of free parking bays in The Green.  Although it was appreciated that removing the bays could aid traffic flow, it was commented that implementing the proposal would attract more vehicles into the road, particularly HGVs.  Concerns were also raised that traffic speeds would generally increase throughout the road, increasing the risk of accidents, particularly to pedestrians.  Both objectors were concerned that removing this free ‘on-street’ parking facility would place further pressure on available parking in the area.

 

Officers’ Comments

 

Whilst it is accepted that average traffic speeds could increase on this section of The Green, the existing bays only enable ‘two way’ traffic to continue flowing, if both passing vehicles are cars.  If one vehicle is wider than a standard car width, an obstruction is caused at the point where they meet.  This has often caused dangerous situations, when one vehicle has to reverse to allow the other vehicle to pass.

 

A width restriction (in a westbound direction) is already in place on The Green to prevent HGVs using this route towards Elm Road.  Speed tables are also present either side of the restriction, to reduce vehicle speeds on the approach to the restriction.  As part of the Sidcup Traffic Review, it is recommended that a proposal to introduce a full width restriction be developed and consulted on.  If introduced, this would obviously restrict all HGV ‘through’ traffic from using this route.

 

It is acknowledged that the majority of users within the free parking bays are ‘all day’ parkers and that some of these may be business employees within the town centre.  It is very unlikely that many of these drivers would be eligible to park within resident permit holder bays.  Therefore, should the existing free bays be removed, any displaced parking is likely to transfer to the ‘off street’ car parks (where spaces are available) or to outside the Controlled Parking Zone area.  In the event that, the number of ‘business permit’ applications increase, the allocation of business permit bays within the town centre Controlled Parking Zone would need to be assessed.

 

Objections 7, 8 & 9

 

Three letters of objection were received from residents of Craybrooke Road.  It is commonly stated that, since the surveys were conducted, a new resident has moved into the road who has subsequently purchased a resident’s permit and regularly uses one of the bays which is proposed to be changed from a resident permit holders bay to a Shared Use (Residents /2 hour short stay) bay.

 

Officers’ Comments

 

Taking into account, further site inspections and the comments received, it is considered that the proposal to convert the single resident bay (outside Nos 13 and 15 Craybrooke Road) to a shared use resident / short stay bay, should not be implemented.  However, it is still considered appropriate for the single resident bay (outside No. 10 Craybrooke Road) to be converted to a shared use resident / short stay bay.

 

Objection 10, 11 & 12

 

Three letters of objection and a number of phone calls have been received from local businesses objecting to the proposal to convert two existing Shared Use (Resident / Business) bays in Selbourne Road to Shared Use (Resident / 2 hour Short Stay) bays.  It was commented that the two bays in question are regularly used and that the removal of these bays would have a serious adverse effect on their businesses.

 

Officers’ Comments

 

It is acknowledged that the ‘business permit holder’ bays are regularly used.  However, it is increasingly difficult to provide additional short stay parking facilities at the eastern end of the High Street, close to the shops.  Therefore, it was proposed to convert the shared (resident / business permit holder) bays to provide more short stay parking facilities close to the shops, since alternative ‘business permit holder’ bays are allocated further into Selbourne Road.

 

Following the level of concern raised locally by the business community, it is recommended that the existing parking bay layout in Selbourne Road be retained.

4.     Summary of financial implications

On 28 June 2004, approval was given to meet the cost of the above changes, estimated at £10,000 from the Capital Programme Provision for Controlled Parking Zones in 2004/05.  The provision in the current year is now £88,000.

 

The changes proposed in this report would not affect the cost significantly and therefore there is no need to modify the approved cost.

5.     Summary of Other Implications

(a)     Environmental Impact

The proposals will result in a slight reduction in the overall number of posts and signs.

(b)     Community Safety

By improving the layout of parking bays and the regulation of waiting and loading, the proposals should improve road safety.

(c)     Equal Opportunities

Parking regulations apply to all people, though exemptions are provided for disabled people.

(d)     Human Rights

The proposals have been the subject of public consultation and the results reported to the Cabinet Member.

 

 

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 – SECTION 100D

List of Background Documents

 

Objections received to Traffic Orders

Contact officer:

S Bates

Ext:

5931

Reporting to:

Assistant Director (Strategic Planning & Regeneration)

 

------------------------------ END ------------------------------