Agenda item

Andy Thomas, Head of City Development, will give an update on the Westcotes Residents Parking Scheme.

Andy Thomas, the City Council’s Head of City Development, reminded the meeting that consultation had been undertaken with residents that had shown there to be problems with parking in the area, particularly where people wanted to park outside of their homes and where there were narrow streets. 

As a result of this, parking controls had been suggested for some of the roads in the Ward, in order to try to improve the situation for residents.  Mr Thomas stressed that these were not final proposals and the maps displayed at the Information Fair prior to the meeting, on which the proposals were shown, were an indication of the type of controls that residents had suggested they would like the Council to introduce.  As such, the maps and other documents were not legal documents.

All households in the area would be formally consulted on the principles shown on the maps displayed at the Information Fair prior to the meeting.  Details of where further information could be found in community languages would be included in this. 

Following the consultation, if the proposals for an area were found to be workable and residents voted that, on balance, they would like to have a parking scheme introduced, the Council would design a formal scheme on that basis.  Residents’ parking schemes would not be introduced where the formal consultation showed that the majority residents in a road, or part of a road, did not want such a scheme.  This could mean that parts of some roads were in a scheme and other parts were not, as long as the distinction was clear and a legally enforceable boundary could be created between the parts.

It also was stressed that the Council was concerned not to damage businesses in the area by introducing parking controls that deterred people from using those businesses, but this had to be balanced with the needs of residents.  Local businesses would be included in the formal consultation process and were welcome to make representations about proposals for any scheme.

There were a number of locations in the area that generated heavy traffic, such as schools, churches and the mosque.  Discussions therefore would be held with these establishments, to try to determine what action could be taken to reduce traffic problems in their vicinity.

Once a formal scheme had been designed it would be consulted on and, if it was to proceed, then advertised in the Leicester Mercury.  At this stage, anyone could object to the proposals, irrespective of where the objector lived.  The Council was legally obliged to work with all objectors, to decide how to proceed in each particular case.

In response to a question, Mr Thomas explained that he was not aware of a situation ever arising where a residents’ parking scheme had been removed because residents had changed their minds about having a scheme.  Schemes could be reviewed to ensure that they were working as intended, but the number of reviews that could be undertaken would be limited by resources available. 

During discussion on this matter, the following points were noted:

·              copies of the maps displayed at the Information Fair prior to the meeting would be passed to Ward Members to enable them to discuss the principles behind residents’ parking schemes more easily with interested parties;

·              Mr Thomas stated that he would be happy to display the maps displayed at the Information Fair prior to the meeting at appropriate locations in the area, such as libraries or shop windows;

·              leaflets advising residents that residents’ parking schemes were being considered would be distributed to households in streets just outside the areas being considered for such schemes, as these residents could be affected by any scheme introduced;

·              the Council did not have a set of standard criteria that were applied to determine whether a road should or should not have a residents’ parking scheme.  The particular circumstances of each case were considered, including the impact of the scheme on households and businesses in the area;

·              where residents’ parking schemes were introduced, each householder would be allocated one parking permit.  This was a consistent policy across the City;

·              “H” markings could be painted on roads outside properties with drop kerbs.  This often could be done free of charge to residents.  In June 2009 these markings had become legally enforceable; and

·              income received from parking fines was used to fund the Council’s parking system, concessionary fares and unprofitable bus routes.