Agenda item

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director Policy and Resources, which informed Members of objections that had been received following public consultation on a proposed Traffic Regulation Order to introduce ‘At Any Time’ waiting restrictions in Russell Court, Widnes. At a previous meeting of the Board held on 15^th June 2011, (Minute No8 refers, a petition from residents of Russell Court relating to long standing car parking problems in the area was considered It was recognised that there was no on-highway parking permitted on Farnworth Street and little off-street provision; the lack of any visible controls on parking in Russell Court had meant that this small cul-de-sac had become the parking place of choice for more drivers than the space available could comfortably accommodate.

 

            In a subsequent consultation exercise with residents of Russell Court, provision of 4 additional parking spaces on the ‘drying area’ was proposed. However, this proposal was not generally accepted due to the loss of amenity and comments from the residents that the disabled parking bays should be near the houses.  In view of the comments Halton Housing Trust (HHT) decided that the scheme did not represent good value for money, so the scheme was not progressed. However, the following was constructed:

 

1.    three new disabled person parking spaces at the head of Russell Court;

2.    a former highway grass verge was replaced to create additional road space;

3.    two new ‘private’ off-street parking spaces in the gardens of other properties owned by HHT;

4.    ‘H-bar’ markings to protect adjoining accesses from obstruction; and

5.   bollards had been installed in some of the highway verges to prevent         ‘driving on’ abuse of these areas.

 

            However, parking congestion had continued, creating access difficulties and leading to inter-driver/neighbour disputes.  As Russell Court, was only 5.5 metres wide, parking could take place on one side or the other, not on both sides simultaneously.  In light of this, in June 2012 parking restrictions shown in the report were sent out to public consultation.  The proposed restrictions sought to prevent parking where it should be avoided, in order to prevent obstruction and to maintain the unrestricted flow of traffic.

 

            Subsequently, four objections to the waiting restrictions have been received.  There were no objections to designation of the three disabled person parking spaces at the head of the cul-de-sac.The objections referred to:

 

·         Russell Court is congested at the present time and raised concerns over parking displacement into adjacent areas; 

·         congestion and parking space pressure in Russell Court;

·         the measures that have been taken to try and alleviate the problems.  Again the fears are for displacement of parking demand and particular concerns over the behaviour of neighbours and the possibility of further animosity and the parking difficulties facing visitors to Russell Court; and

·         pressure on available parking space if the proposed restrictions go ahead, and fears her garage entrance would be blocked routinely despite the recently installed ‘H-bar’ marking.

 

            The Officers responses to each of the objections and proposals were outlined in the report.

 

            In accordance with Standing Order No.34 (9), the following public question was submitted to the Board by Ms Wilson:

 

“Why is there a proposal to restrict parking when it has been highlighted that there should be an effort to resolve the issues with new parking bays and that if  restrictions were to go ahead this would have a knock on affect to adjacent streets?”

 

            In response it was reported that efforts have been made to provide extra parking and resident consultation had taken place on a joint construction project with HHT for parking bays on the ‘drying area’ as Para 3.2 of the Board item. Unfortunately, as a result of the consultation feedback, HHT decided the scheme did not represent good value for money, and the project was not progressed. At the turn of the year in response to demand from the residents and local members, using Area Forum/HHT funding, three new disabled person parking spaces were constructed at the head of Russell Court, replacing a former highway grass verge to create additional road space. In addition, two new ‘private’ off-street parking spaces have been created in the gardens of other properties owned by HHT, and ‘H-bar’ markings have been installed to protect adjoining accesses from obstruction.

 

            It was acknowledged that the proposed restrictions would displace a small amount of parking from Russell Court. These vehicles could start parking in other side roads, such as Farnworth Close and Windermere Street. This was an unfortunate side-effect of any waiting restrictions, and any issues created would need to be dealt with in the future. It was accepted that there was an unresolved, general lack of on-highway parking in the area. However, it must be stressed that the proposed restrictions in Russell Court sought only to prevent parking where it should be avoided, in order to prevent obstruction and to maintain the unrestricted flow of traffic.

 

            Ms Wilson asked supplementary questions relating to the following:

 

·         the new bollards have resolved any parking issue of parking on both sides of Russell Court;

·         in 5 years of living at current address not seen cars double parked;

·         visitors to Russell Court would have nowhere to park; and

·         there are existing parking problems at Farnworth Close and Windermere Street and this would displace cars to those areas.

 

 

In response Officers advised that……………………

 

            RESOLVED: That the proposal to make an Order to implement ‘At Any Time’ waiting restrictions on Russell Court, Farnworth, as listed in Appendix 2, be supported and the report be submitted for resolution by the Executive Board.