Decision Session – Executive Member for Transport	21 September 2021
Report of the Director of Transport, Environment and Planning

Consideration of results from the consultation to extend the existing R20 Fishergate Residents Parking Zone.

1.

2.

Summary

To report the consultation results, in response to a proposal to extend R20 Fishergate Residents Parking Zone, and determine what action is appropriate.

Recommendation

It is recommended that approval be given to advertise an amendment to the York Parking, Stopping and Waiting Traffic Regulation Order to introduce Residents’ Priority Parking for Kilburn Road only outlined in Option One with a plan provided as Annex F.

Reason: To implement adequate parking management in line with the council’s objectives as stated in the Local Transport Plan and the stated preferences of residents from the streets consulted.

Background

3.

We received separate petitions from residents of Alma Grove/Alma Terrace (part) and Kilburn Road requesting consideration to be given to introduce a Resident Priority Parking scheme for their area. 

The petitions were reported to the Executive Member for Transport on the 7^th February 2019 and the 19^th September 2019. The Executive Member gave approval to consult with residents and to extend the potential consultation area when it reaches the top of the waiting list. As both streets are in close proximity to each other and there are potential new large developments in the area, it was deemed acceptable to consult on a larger area from Grange Street to Wenlock Terrace, to consider a possible extension to R20.

4.

We posted consultation documentation to all properties during week commencing 15^th March 2021 requesting that residents return their questionnaires by email wherever possible or in the Freepost envelope provided by Friday 16^th April 2021. The plan of the extended consultation area is included as Annex C.

A separate consultation letter was delivered to the private streets located in the area as the implementation of residents’ parking on private streets is a more complicated matter, requiring the consent of the frontagers who are the street managers and are responsible for the road.

The consultation documentation is included within this report as:

Annex A: Letter sent to residents on streets maintained at public expense

Annex B: Letter sent to private street residents

Annex C: Plan of the consultation area originally proposed to be included within the R20 extension (red outline)

Annex D: Plan of the existing R20 zone boundary (black outline)

Annex E: How a Resident Parking Scheme Works using entry/exit regulations, the current cost of permits (April 1^st 2021 to 31^st March 2022) and Questionnaire

Consultation Results

5.

In total 824 properties were consulted and asked to return their completed questionnaires. 

Traditionally, officers consider that, as a minimum,  50% of questionnaires need to have been returned and the majority of those returned need to be in favour of a residents’ parking scheme for the implementation of such as scheme to be considered further.

As we did not receive the original request (petition) from all streets included in the consultation, the results have been separated to review the area on a street by street basis. However the 50% returns usually required was not achieved on the vast majority of streets:

Streets maintained at public expense	Number of properties	Yes	No	Full Time	Mon - Fri 9-5	Other	Ballots returned	% Return	% In favour
Arncliffe Mews	18	6	1	5	2	0	7	38.9	85.7
Alma Terrace	99	39	8	34	8	2	47	47.5	83
Alma Grove	30	8	2	9	0	0	10	33.3	80
Alma Court	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Frances Street	87	15	9	15	5	2	24	27.6	62.5
Ambrose Street	100	17	12	20	1	3	29	29	58.6
Holly Terrace	20	5	4	5	2	0	9	45	55.6
Carey Street	8	2	1	2	0	0	3	37.5	66.7
Wenlock Terrace	118	17	7	13	5	1	24	20.3	70.8
Kilburn Road	67	40	2	28	10	3	42	62.7	95.2
Lastingham Terrace	15	5	5	5	4	1	10	66.7	50
Hartoft Street	54	10	12	9	5	1	22	40.7	45.5
Farndale Street	61	15	17	18	4	0	32	52.5	46.9
Levisham Street	23	8	3	6	3	0	11	47.8	72.7
Fulford Road	46	1	4	1	2	1	5	10.9	20
Total	749	188	87	170	51	14	275	36.7	68.4

Private streets	Number of properties	Yes	No	Full Time	Mon  - Fri 9-5	Other	Ballots returned	% Return	% In favour
Maida Grove	15	2	2	2	1	0	4	26.7	0
Kensal Rise	23	0	1	1	0	0	1	4.3	0
Edgeware Road	37	11	14	8	7	0	25	67.6	44
Total	75	13	17	11	8	0	30	40	32.5

Although responses received from Lastingham Terrace reached the 50% return rate, opinion is split evenly between responses for and responses against the introduction of the residents’ parking scheme. This location would also be difficult to implement without including Hartoft Street, Farndale Street and Levisham Street due to the position of Lastingham Terrace properties. When considered together, these streets reached a 49% response rate, with 50.7% of respondents in favour of a residents’ parking scheme.

On Edgeware Road, the questionnaire return rate reached 67.5% but only 44% of respondents were in favour of a residents’ parking scheme.

A precis of comments received during the Consultation Process is included as Annex G and separate representation received from private Streets is included as Annex H. Where extensive objections have been submitted for the private streets these are included verbatim within Annex H, this includes one from Edgeware Road and one from Maida Grove.

Preferred Times of Operation 

6.

For those residents who replied to this section, most indicated a preference for a full time scheme operating 24hours Monday to Sunday.

The alternative option given was Monday to Friday 9am – 5pm.

Other Suggestions from the consultation included:

Weekends only

7 days between 9am – 6pm

7 days between 6pm – 7am

7 days between 8am – 6pm

8am - 8pm

6pm – 6am, 6pm – 8am

Monday – Friday 8am – 8pm

Monday – Saturday 9am – 8pm

Monday – Saturday 8am – 6pm

Resident Comments (précis, Annex G)

7.

The most common views across all residents, in support and against introducing Residents’ Priority Parking were centred around the following themes:

· Cost of permits

· Parking problems related to commuter and student parking

· Increased parking demand due to local developments not providing adequate parking amenities  

Conflicting comments were received about the current position with regards to parking.  Some residents do not see any issue with the current level of parking.

8.

Options for consideration:

Option 1 (Recommended Option) (Annex F)

a) Advertise an amendment to the Traffic Regulation Order to introduce a new Residents’ Priority Parking Area on Kilburn Road only, to operate 24hours Monday to Sunday as outlined on the plan included as Annex F.  To be an extension of R20.

b) No further action to be taken for the remainder of the consulted area at this time.  If residents south of Alma Terrace/Alma Grove area provide additional evidence of support within 18 months of implementation of a scheme on neighbouring streets then we can seek authorisation to re-consult with these areas at that time.

c) No further action for residents of Hartoft Street, Lastingham Terrace, Levisham Street and Farndale Street as this is the second consultation which has not received the relevant positive returns rate the area should also be removed from the waiting list.

9.

Option 1 is the recommended option because:

This option progresses a residents’ parking scheme where the majority of residents who responded to the consultation support such a scheme (based on a questionnaire return rate of 62.7%). This is in line with officers’ current approach of generally not recommending to progress with a residents’ parking scheme where this is not supported by local residents. 

Two separate petitions were originally received asking for City of York Council to consider introducing residents parking. These were received from residents of Alma Grove and 1-15 Alma Terrace and from Kilburn Road. However permission was granted to consult on a wider area at the same time.

Alma Grove only reached a 33% response rate (80% of those who responded were in favour of a residents’ parking scheme). When considering Alma Grove with Alma Terrace and Alma Court, the response rate reached 43.2% (with 82.5% of respondents in favour of a scheme).

Kilburn Road reached a 62.6% return rate, with 95.2% of respondents in favour of a scheme.

Edgeware Road reached 67.5% return rate but only 44% of respodents supported a residents’ parking scheme. It is also important to note that as Edgeware Road is a privately maintainable highway, a much higher level of support would be required from frontagers for a scheme to be considered.

Option 1, the recommended option therefore proposes to progress the implementation of a residents’ parking scheme for Kilburn Road, using entry signage only, which will need to be erected on the adopted highway highlighting the ‘end’ locations of the scheme. Regulations introduced in 2012 enable local authorities to enforce a scheme using entry signage only without marking parking areas on street and signing individual bays. It is proposed to introduce this system on Kilburn Road only.

Officers therefore propose to start the legal procedure for such a scheme on Kilburn Road. This will provide an additional consultation period.  Any interested party will therefore be able to make a formal representation to the advertised proposal.  Objections to the proposal will receive further consideration as part of this process.

10.

Option 2:

Advertise an amendment to the Traffic Regulation Order to introduce a new Residents’ Priority Parking Area to operate 24hours Monday to Sunday for those streets which are adopted highway located within the consulted area, as an extension to R20.

This would exclude Edgeware Road, Maida Grove and Kensal Rise as these streets are privately maintainable streets and frontagers have not expressed a strong support for the introduction of residents’ parking schemes in these streets.

This is not the recommended option, as for most streets, response rates were too low to ascertain the level of support for such a scheme from local residents, and, where response rates were higher, reaching 50% or more, the proposals were not supported by a majority of respondents.

11.

Option 3:

a)    Advertise an amendment to the Traffic Regulation Order to introduce a new Residents’ Priority Parking Area on Kilburn Road only, to operate 24hours Monday to Sunday as outlined on the plan included as Annex F.  To be an extension of R20.

b)    Advertise an amendment to the Traffic Regulation Order to introduce a new Residents’ Priority Parking Area on Hartoft Street, Lastingham Terrace, Levisham Street and Farndale Street, to operate 24hours Monday to Sunday, to be an extension of R20.

c)    No further action to be taken for the remainder of the consulted area at this time. If residents south of Alma Terrace/Alma Grove area provide additional evidence of support within 18 months of implementation of a scheme on neighbouring streets then we can seek authorisation to re-consult with these areas at that time.

This is not the recommended option as although responses received from Lastingham Terrace reached the 50% return rate, opinion is split evenly between responses for and responses against the introduction of the residents’ parking scheme. This location would also be difficult to implement without including Hartoft Street, Farndale Street, Levisham Street and two properties on Fulford Road (requiring access to the area), due to the position of Lastingham Terrace properties. When considered together, these streets (including the two Fulford Road properties) reached a 49.7% response rate (below the 50% rate usually considered as a minimum requirement), with 49.4% of respondents in favour of a residents’ parking scheme.

12.

Option 4:

No further action to be taken.

This is not the recommended option because it is not in line with the council’s objectives as stated in the Local Transport Plan and does not respond to the clearly expressed preference of some residents (specifically on Kilburn Road).

13.

Consultation

The consultation documentation is reproduced within this report as Annex A, B, C, D and E. The results of the consultation are given in Annex D.  Comments received during the process are précised with officer response as Annex I.

If approval to proceed is granted, for the recommended option, further consultation will be carried out within the legal process.  Notices will placed on street, in The Press and delivered to properties in the affected area. An update letter will also be sent to all consulted properties advising of the outcome and next stages once established.

14.

Council Plan

This report is supportive of the Council plan priority to be an open and effective Council.

15.

Implications

This report has the following implications:

Financial –The £5k allocated within the core transport budget will be used to progress the proposed residents parking scheme. The ongoing enforcement and administrative management of the additional residents parking provision will need to be resourced from the income generated by the new measure

Human Resources – If implemented, enforcement will fall to the Civil Enforcement Officers necessitating an extra area onto their work load.

New zones/areas also impact on the Business Support Administrative services as well as Parking Services.  Provision will need to be made from the income generated from new schemes to increase resources in these areas as well as within the Civil Enforcement Team.

Equalities – The impact of the proposals on protected characteristics has been considered as follows:

· Age – Positive impact for residents who should be able to park closer to their dwelling but potential negative impact for other car users who will not be able to park on these streets any longer without a permit;

· Disability – Neutral as Blue Badge holders who live locally can apply to have a bay provided outside their homes and Blue Badge holders can park in Residents’ Parking areas;

· Gender – Neutral;

· Gender reassignment – Neutral;

· Marriage and civil partnership– Neutral;

· Pregnancy and maternity - Positive impact for residents who should be able to park closer to their dwelling but potential negative impact for other car users who will not be able to park on these streets any longer without a permit;

· Race – Neutral;

· Religion and belief – Neutral;

· Sexual orientation – Neutral;

· Other socio-economic groups including :

o Carer - Neutral (see Disability);

o Low income groups – Negative as low income residents who use on street parking will need to pay for a parking permit. The charge is the same for all residents in the zones regardless of their circumstances;

o Veterans, Armed Forces Community– Neutral.

Access to the new online parking permit system - A plan is being developed for the wider Residents’ Parking Service to help those that either don’t have access to the internet or the skills to use the online system to access the parking system as they do with other similar ICT access requirements

Legal – The proposals require amendments to the York Parking, Stopping and Waiting Traffic Regulation Order 2014:

Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 & the Local Authorities Traffic Orders (procedure) (England & Wales) Regulations 1996 apply

Crime and Disorder – no Crime and Disorder implications identified

Information Technology – any new residents’ parking scheme will need to be included in the new online parking permit system so additional IT resources may be required to set up the proposed scheme

Property – no Property implications identified

Other –no other implications identified

Risk Management – In compliance with the Council’s risk management strategy there is an acceptable level of risk associated with the recommended option.

Contact Details

Author:	Chief Officer Responsible for the report:
Annemarie Howarth Traffic Project Officer Transport Tel: (01904) 551337	James Gilchrist Assistant Director for Transport, Highways and Environment
	Date:  10 September 2021
Wards Affected: Fishergate
For further information please contact the author of the report.

Annexes:

Annex A: Letter sent to Residents of Public maintainable streets

Annex B: Letter sent to residents of Private streets

Annex C: Plan of the consultation area originally proposed to be included within the R20 extension (red outline)

Annex D:  Plan of the existing R20 zone boundary (black outline)

Annex E: How a Resident Parking Scheme Works using entry/exit regulations, the current cost of permits (April 1^st 2021 to 31^st March 2022) and Questionnaire

Annex F: Proposed Scheme (Recommended Option)

Annex G: Precis of comments received during the Consultation Process

Annex H: Private Street representations

Annex I: Tables of consultation returns