Decision Session Executive Member for Transport	19 April 2022
Report to the Corporate Director of Economy and Place Directorate

Consideration of Representations received in response to advertised amendments to the Traffic Regulation Order for St.Oswald’s Road.

Summary

1. Consideration of representations received, in support and objection, to advertised proposals to amend the Traffic Regulation Order for St. Oswald’s Road, Connaught Court and Love Lane junction.

Recommendation

2. It is recommended that the Executive Member give approval to implement a lesser restriction to the advertised proposal on St. Oswald Road and its junctions with Connaught Court and Love Lane. It is recommended to implement no waiting at any time restrictions to the junctions of Connaught Court and Love Lane

Reason: Following receipt of the objections, further site visits were completed and found no obstruction issues between the junction of Connaught Court and Atcherley Close.

Background

3. Requests for waiting restrictions or other changes to the TRO for minor traffic management issues are placed on a waiting list to be considered at the same time.  We received a request from a resident who raised an issue of vehicles parking on both sides of the carriageway between the junctions of Connaught Court and Atcherley Close leading to a chicane of parked vehicles and larger vehicles having difficulties proceeding along St.Oswalds Road. The resident also raised an issue of restricted visibility when exiting Love Lane due to vehicles parking close to the junction.

4. We advertised the proposal to amend the Traffic Regulation Order on 22^nd October 2021 (The advertised plan and an extract of the formal advertised proposal is included as Annex A).

5. Following the advertisement we received 3 representations in objection to the proposed restrictions (the representations are included in Annex B).

The issues raised in the representations in objection to the proposal, Included:

· Problems for residents of the Fulford Ings being able to park during times of flood

· Potential conflict between neighbouring residents due to a reduction in available parking spaces

· Displacement of parked vehicles to Atcherley Close

· No historic issue of obstruction of the carriageway

Consultation

6. The advertised proposals for amendment of the Traffic Regulation Orders were advertised in the local press and notices put up on street. Properties adjacent to the proposals were posted details as they are the most likely to be affected.

Options and Recommendations

7. The options available are:

a) Uphold the objections in part and implement a lesser restriction that advertised(Recommended and plan below)

b) Implement as advertised

c) Uphold the objections and take no further action

8. Highway Regulations will only permit us to implement the restriction       as advertised or a lesser restriction. We are unable to implement a more restrictive restriction through this process without re-advertising.

Council Plan

9. Considering this matter contributes to the Council Plan; An open and effective council.

10.    Implications

        Financial There are costs associated with the advertising and implementation of any proposal. These will be met by the budget allocation within the department for “New signs and lines”

Human Resources (HR) Any proposals which are implemented will become enforceable by the Council’s Civil Enforcement Officers in the same way as existing waiting restrictions.  This will have an impact on the available resources of this department.

Equalities There are no Equalities implications identified

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 There are no Crime and Disorder implications

Information Technology (IT) There are no IT implications

Property There are no Property implications

Other There are no other implications identified

Risk Management

14 In compliance with the Council’s risk management strategy there is a low risk associated with the recommendations in this report.

Contact Details

Author:	Chief Officer Responsible for the report:
Geoff Holmes Traffic Projects Officer, Traffic Management Tel No. 01904 551497	James Gilchrist Assistant Director for Transport, Highways and Environment
	Report Approved	X	Date	7 April 2022
Specialist Implication Officers Finance – Patrick Looker (Service Finance Manager) Legal – Cathryn Moore (Legal Manager, Projects) Wards Affected					All
Fishergate Ward and Fulford and Heslington Ward For further information please contact the author of the report

Background Papers: N/A

Annexes:

Annex A: St. Oswald’s Road Advertised Plan & Legal Notice,

Annex B: St. Oswald’s Road representations received