Annex F

In Support
Our household welcomes this opportunity to have residents parking on the estate. Our estate becomes a nightmare during college terms, it becomes a car park and the students have no respect for the residents, leaving their rubbish and giving verbal abuse.	Noted
My only concern is that the apartments are having a say in who parks on the estate, is this fair? The apartments have their own designated area where no-one can park, including the rest of the estate and students. So why do they get a say if someone can park outside my house? I fully understand that not all apartments have parking spaces so could a discounted scheme be made available to them? They of course need to park, nobody has any problems with apartment owners parking on the estate but they shouldn’t have any say on who parks outside our homes.	The apartments do not have 100% allocated parking spaces for the residents. The apartments have always been part of the development. There are also 12 other private parking areas within the estate. It would be unfair not to consult them as well as the apartments.
Sadly, we have experienced aggressive behaviour, aggressive driving, swearing and leaving litter behind from college attendees.	Any anti-social behaviour should be reported to the police at the time of the incident.
I am a resident of the flats in Scholars Court but am one of the few flats that do NOT have a designated parking space. Consequently, if the parking permit scheme does go ahead I would need an on-street parking permit. I do currently park on the street as it is my only option, and many times I have to park at the other end of the estate due to students of the college parking on the street outside my block.	The introduction of a Residents Priority Parking scheme would only allow residents of the estate to purchase a permit but would also not guarantee a parking place near to your property.
We are opposed to the residents of the flat being included in this survey. We already made a strong case for the exclusion of these residents as we were not included in their parking scheme! The issues we experience on Bursary Court are in no way reflected at the top of the estate where these flats are located. Specifically, their parking lots are allocated, such that no car can come and take it, or block its access! This however cannot be said about the rest of the estate. NOTE (1) NB OF FLATS>>NB OF HOUSES (2) HOUSES ARE THE ONES HAVING THE PROBLEM HENCE: FLATS SHOULD NOT BE ASKED. OUTRAGEOUS	The apartments do not have 100% allocated parking spaces for the residents. The apartments have always been part of the estate. There are also 12 other private parking areas within the estate. It would be unfair not to consult them as well as the apartments.
Prior to Covid-19 lockdown, there have been issues with delivery vehicles, bin wagons, emergency vehicles all having access issues to the Revival Estate. The timing of the issues are mostly (but not always) during York College term time. It is a fact that York College students and staff park on the Revival Estate either because they are not allowed to park at the college or to avoid the costs of doing so. As one of the first residents of the Revival Estate I have lived with the growing problem. I have, with other residents, reached out to the college to find a reasonable compromise. The college is unable, or unwilling, to police the parking habits of its staff and students. If nothing is done, there is a significant risk an emergency vehicle will not be able to access the Revival Estate, causing serious injury or death. If the council does nothing, despite all the warnings, it will be neglecting its duty of care to residents. I do hope a solution is found for the Revival Estate. However, the council should consider that the problem will just move to another estate/street along Tadcaster Road. A longer term solution would be to ensure York College has the ability to provide adequate parking for its staff and students. If the college cannot increase its capacity of its car parking facilities it should stop growing its student base. In other words, the college should take more responsibility for the problem as well as the solutions the residents and council put in place.	We have previously put in place restrictions to aid movements around the estate and are always looking to ensure the safety of highway users to be able to pass and repass. If the scheme was to be approved, in the next phase of implementation we could look at the extension of existing yellow lines or the installation of new yellow lines to further aid the safe movement of vehicles around the estate.
If the permit system is brought in I would want a sign erecting at the entrance to house numbers 88-96 Principal Rise advising it is a private road with parking for residents only as we would not be party to the permit restrictions.	Each of the 12 private drives/roads would all require signage to advise of this if the scheme is implemented.
The only thing we object to is the flats having a say because many of the residents avoid paying for their permit parking by parking on Principal Rise. Therefore, it is in their interest not to have it. We are in favour of permit parking if it goes through as it will discourage any of the flat residents from parking at the top of the road, therefore making it safer as at that point in the road is badly designed as there is a pinch point and people ignore the yellow lines.	The apartments do not have 100% allocated parking spaces for the residents. The apartments have always been part of the development. There are also 12 other private parking areas within the estate. It would be unfair not to consult them as well as the apartments.
I think residents should get a free permit, many have two cars in this area and why should people on benefits only have to pay a fraction of the cost? People on benefits always end up better off than tax payers.	Residents parking prices are set at full council committee within a budget report on an annual basis. Residents parking is self-funding and the charges contribute towards the management, administration and enforcement of the scheme.
During daytime students from York College should be prohibited from parking in this area as they have a dedicated car park on site. They should obtain a daytime permit to deter free parking on the estate, as like other housing estates you have shift workers who can’t park due to college students parking all around this estate.	If the scheme was to be implemented the restrictions in place would prohibit non-residents from parking within the proposed area during the restricted times.
The main issue is the extra flats permitted at the time of building with insufficient parking supplied, compounded by poor placement of ‘yellow lines’ on site and college parking during term times. The main access to the site should ALL be yellow lines- plus restricted parking allowed during term times. Could the old P+R site (at Tesco’s) not be used as an alternative option? Good access, purpose built even if only for a short timeframe.	If the scheme was to be approved, in the next phase of implementation we could look at the extension of existing yellow lines or the installation of new yellow lines to further aid the safe movement of vehicles around the estate.
I would like to see double yellow lines extended in the position indicated on the attached map	If the scheme was to be approved, in the next phase of implementation we could look at the extension of existing yellow lines or the installation of new yellow lines to further aid the safe movement of vehicles around the estate.
As we have a private drive/stored drive we (2-10 Principal Rise) assume the purchase of visitor permits only is possible? We would only need these for very occasional use and the wording in the letter is not totally clear.	The residents who have properties serviced by the private drives would be able to purchase permits and visitor permits to park within the boundary of the proposed scheme.
Another issue is the speed at which those entering/exiting the estate drive along Principal Rise. I understand there was a proposal to impose a 20mph speed limit and would be interested to know what has happened to this.	The proposal for the reduction in the speed limit is currently on the speed limit review list which is due to be considered later in the year.
I would suggest the scheme is term-time only as the main issue with non-resident parking is students from the college.	Any signs used for these specific times and dates of operation would be very large non regulatory signs that would carry a lot of information on them. Each of the signs would need to be erected on 2 new columns as they would be too large to place on any existing lamp columns.
Can you clarify if I need a permit if I park on my drive?	You would not require a permit to park on your own drive.
No vote cast but comment made
I don’t think it is fair for me to vote because I bought 2 parking slots with this house(Masters Mews)	Noted
Against
The application has been submitted with the intention of preventing students attending York College from parking on the estate. This is discriminatory to students and aimed at one age group. Since the start of the current term, only a very small number of vehicles have parked on the estate and have not caused any obstructions or limited parking. The introduction of this scheme will place a further obstacle to students’ attendance at a time when we should all be finding ways for supporting students to safely travel and attend the college.	All proposed residents parking schemes are resident driven where a majority must be in favour. When we receive a petition or formal request to add an area to the waiting list this is presented to the Executive Member for Transport and must be agreed by them to add the request to the list for resident consultation.
The scheme will be costly to implement and enforce and the council should prioritise other funding requirements at this time	Residents parking is self-funding and the charges contribute towards the management, administration and enforcement of the scheme.
As a household we have two vehicles, one which we park on the estate streets, as we only have a drive suitable for one vehicle. The majority of the year we don’t have a requirement to park the vehicle on the street between the hours proposed by the scheme, as we are at our places of work. In addition, which vehicle is parked on the street, is dependent on a number of variable factors. For convenience this would then require my purchasing of two permits at the cost of nearly £300 for what would really equate to between 10 – 15 days parking per year, within restricted times.	The first permit issued is not vehicle specific and can be used by any one vehicle that requires it.
It is also my understanding that some of the flats on the revival estate where sold without parking provision. Offering those dwellings opportunity to purchase a permit for street parking, albeit with potentially a limitation of hours and with no guarantee of on-street parking, seems unjust.	The apartments do not have 100% allocated parking spaces for the residents. The apartments have always been part of the estate. There are also 12 other private parking areas within the estate. It would be unfair not to consult them as well as the apartments.
I don’t see how the parking restrictions will benefit our particular household or the estate as a whole and feel the matter is really about poor, and potentially at times, illegal parking on the estate, which is surely a police matter.	This is correct. Illegal parking or parking that causes an obstruction should be reported to the police.
In all honesty I begrudge having to pay a fee (substantial for our particular circumstances) to park on our own estate. Especially considering such restrictions weren’t in place at the time of purchase, yet still have issues parking on an evening due to the volume of cars on the estate. An issue created perhaps in part because of some dwellings not having proper parking provision when constructed.	All proposed residents parking schemes are resident driven and residents parking permit prices are set at full council committee within a budget report on an annual basis.
Has there been an improvement in parking during lockdown? If not, the scheme won’t really help.	Parking on the estate has not been monitored during the lockdown period.
How will you stop double parking in Scholars Court, Masters Mews and Ashfield House?	Scholars Court and Masters Mews have parking restrictions within their private parking areas that is enforced by Minster Baywatch. Ashfield House has private parking and an electronic gate preventing unrestricted access to the private area.
Why should friends and family have to pay money to visit us in our own homes?	In order to effectively enforce non-resident parking a displayed permit is required and residents parking permit prices are set at full council committee within a budget report on an annual basis.
Residents should not have to pay for parking on their own street. Any Scheme should come with a free permit for residents. This is just a money making scheme, that even if you pay comes with no assurances that the road will be clear.	The request for a Residents Priority Parking scheme is driven by the local residents and permit prices are set at full council committee within a budget report on an annual basis.
The problem is caused by residents in the flats at the top of the estate, who do have assigned parking, parking additional vehicles on the road. A residents permit scheme would not solve this as they would be entitled to purchase a permit.	In the responses we have received following the consultation there have been a number of different factors highlighted that have contributed to the current issues of parking on the estate, which are not limited solely to the residents of the flats.
This is total nonsense and not required	Noted
Probably like many residents we have many visitors, generally these are ad hoc visits, consequently a visitor permit would often not be known. The current system works fine for most residents. This sounds like another unwanted tax, which we could all do without.	You can purchase visitor permits that are not vehicle specific. The request for a Residents Priority Parking scheme is driven by local residents and is not implemented in order to generate revenue.
I work 8-6 Mon-Sat- the parking scheme suggested is pointless	Noted
I am a tenant in one of the Masters Mews apartments that does not include an allocated parking space, so rely on the free on-street parking around College Court and the surrounding area, for myself and visitors. The introduction of a residents only scheme would mean significant additional costs for tenants like myself, and complicate matters for landlords, potentially effecting rental prices in the future. Although I understand residents concerns and interest in the scheme, I have personally NEVER had any issues parking, despite the number of York College students seeking to use the area.  For me, would bring about unnecessary extra costs.	The request for a Residents Priority Parking scheme is driven by the local residents and permit prices are set at full council committee within a budget report on an annual basis.
Unclear if I have to pay to park on my drive, I assume not. I would prefer more yellow lines, especially at junctions and along one side of the road.(Chancellor Grove)	You would not have to pay for a permit to park on your own driveway.
I strongly object to the residents parking scheme. I bought my house in an area where I do not have to pay for my family and friends to visit, it will devalue my house, as people will be put off buying a house in this area.	The request for a Residents Priority Parking scheme is driven by the local residents and we cannot comment on any impact it may have on house prices.
Most importantly the appalling parking is often residents as opposed to college students. I am affected by student parking but most of the time a word with them is sufficient for them to understand the issue. As a result of Covid, working from home, social distancing etc. it may be unnecessary anyway. Hence, do not introduce this or impose this, Thank you.	Your comments are noted but the request for Residents Priority Parking is driven by local residents.
I moved out of the city to avoid residents parking. My wife and I work as teachers and need 2 cars. We have an option of cutting down a tree to make a driveway place but do not want to do this. I would be happy to loan my drive to students to park on rather than have a draconian measure like this. Is this really important in times like this? I feel sorry for people in the flats who have visitors or 2 cars. If you have to have this it should include holidays as well.	The request for Residents Priority Parking is driven by local residents and requires a majority in favour. If the scheme is implemented the times of operation would include term-time holidays as well.
We are against the permit as prices are too high (we have 2 cars and no allocated parking spaces in Masters Mews). It is difficult the residents are being financially punished when the problem is the college.	The request for a Residents Priority Parking scheme is driven by the local residents and permit prices are set at full council committee within a budget report on an annual basis.
We feel strongly that York College should change their parking policy to allow more students to park on the college site, rather than in the development.	Noted
As a RESIDENT OF Scholar’s Court who does not have a designated parking spot, I strongly object to the proposed ‘Respark’ scheme. At present, I am rarely able to park near my home due to limited on-street parking in the estate. The introduction of the proposed scheme would see me having to pay £100 a year for the same parking provision I have now (my car is pre 2001). I have noticed the cars I see parked on the streets around the estate are the same ones, indicating it is largely residents who park here already. As a healthcare worker who works long shifts (days, nights and weekends) there is no preferred time of operation that does not inconvenience me. I am dependant on my car to access my place of work. Furthermore, I own the only car in my household and as such this affects my flatmate. In conclusion, I strongly oppose the instalment of this scheme as I feel it financially punishes residents who already struggle to park. I would also note that the majority of the estate benefits from ample off-street parking, so I question the motivation for implementing this scheme.	The request for a Residents Priority Parking scheme is driven by the local residents and permit prices are set at full council committee within a budget report on an annual basis. As it would only be available to existing residents of the estate the implementation of a scheme could improve the availability of on-street parking.