Decision Session: Executive Member for Transport

17 May 2022


Report to the Corporate Director of Place Directorate


Consideration of representations received to the advertised extension of R30 Residents Priority Parking Scheme to include East Parade.













To consider the formal representations received to the legal Traffic Regulation Order, advertised during May 2021, to implement an extension of R30 resident’s priority parking scheme to include the eastern section of East Parade, this incorporated properties located on East Parade between Eastern Terrace and Melrosegate, Bull Lane and Parade Court and determine what action is appropriate.




It is recommended that no further action is taken in relation to the advertised resident’s priority parking scheme on East Parade. In addition it is recommended that approval be given to implement the advertised No Waiting Restrictions (double yellow lines) on East Parade at the entrance to Parade Court only. The No Waiting restrictions to be implemented are annotated in Annex A, along with the advertised proposed residents parking scheme in Annex B.


Reason: To acknowledge residents objections and comments received from both, within the advertised affected area of East Parade and nearby adjoining streets, who would all be disadvantaged by the proposals. Previous responses for the whole area were against the introduction of a scheme and the received representations confirms the existing thoughts of residents relating to implementing restrictions on a partial area.


The no waiting restrictions either side of Parade Court provide the necessary junction protection for safety when vehicles are entering and exiting the junction and maintain a visibility splay for drivers vision of oncoming vehicles.   









We originally received a petition from a percentage of residents who resided on Main Avenue, First Avenue and Second Avenue requesting that consideration was given to introduce a Resident Priority Parking scheme for their area due to the pressures on parking. 



































Once the location reached the top of the waiting list we consulted on introducing an extension of the R30 residents parking scheme to include a larger area, this incorporated the eastern section of East Parade. As the western section of East Parade was already covered by residents parking restrictions if a scheme progressed excluding the remaining East Parade properties then residents would become disadvantaged as all surrounding streets would then be restricted, if proposals progressed to implementation, and residents would then be left with minimal on street parking availability. During this time we posted consultation documentation to all properties within the proposed extended area requesting that residents return their questionnaires and preferences. The original consultation area is shown within Annex C.


The results of the consultation were considered at a Decision Session in April 2020. During this it was resolved to advertise an amendment to the Traffic Regulation Order to introduce an extension of the R30 Residents Priority Parking scheme to include East Parade, Bull Lane and Parade Court only. This was due to East Parade responses being close to the recommended 50% return rate with the majority expressing a vote in favour of implementing restrictions:



Properties consulted

Number of


Returns in support

Returns not in support

East Parade/Bull Lane/ Parade Court


42 (48%)

24 (57%)

18 (43%)

First Avenue


17 (71%)

1 (6%)

16 (94%)

Second Avenue Eastbourne Grove


32 (62%)

5 (16%)

27 (84%)

Main Avenue


28 (55%)

9 (32%)

19 (68%)


An amendment to the legal Traffic Regulation Order to implement the extended Residents Priority parking scheme was advertised in February 2021. This included separate bays and signs to be introduced on East Parade.







Legal advertisement












The proposals for East Parade were advertised in the usual manner of notices placed on street, in the local press, to the statutory consultees and delivered to the adjacent properties, this exceeds the legal minimum requirement. In addition to this each property within the original consultation area (outlined in Annex C) were posted an update letter to advice of the formal advertisement for East Parade and directed how to make representation on the advertised proposal.

During the advertisement period we received 15 objections from residents located on East Parade and no written representations in support of the revised scheme were provided. The majority stated that the advertised scheme would have a detrimental impact for residents as it did not provide adequate parking provision for the number of properties. They also did not expect that a partial scheme would be progressed as the results of the consultation was below the recommended return rate. Representations from East Parade are included as Annex D. 





















Several representations were received from residents of First Avenue, Second Avenue and Main Avenue who were previously included within the proposed Residents Parking extension and voted against the introduction of a scheme. The majority express that they believe implementing restrictions on East Parade only will have a detrimental effect on the wider community. As residents would park within the unrestricted areas which are off the main thoroughfare and would be available as free parking on a first come first served basis. These streets are also closer to properties located on the south of East Parade enabling them to not cross the highway to access available parking on the north. This would increase the existing demand on parking pressures and have the opposite effect when introducing residents parking restrictions. Representations are shown in Annex E, F and G.


Parade Court

Due to the nature of East Parade, within the legal advertisement the scheme was advertised as separate bays and signs (as oppose to an entry sign style scheme) which included double yellow lines at entrances (Annex B). During the advertisement period representation was received in support of the double yellow lines at the entrance to Parade Court due to safety issues and constant obstruction of the entrance. Please see Annex H for comments received and supporting evidence. This was also acknowledge by Councillors who submitted representation in support of the No Waiting Restrictions at Parade Court however both objected to the advertised residents parking to implement restrictions on East Parade only, these are included as Annex I.  


Options for consideration:

Option 1 (Recommended Option)


a)   To take no further action relating to implementing residents parking restrictions on East Parade.

b)   Implement the advertised No Waiting at Any Time (Double Yellow Line) restrictions advertised on East Parade at the entrance to Parade Court only.  



Option 2:

Implement the advertised residents parking scheme.

This is not the recommended option as this does not address the original concerns received from adjoining streets and does not take account of affected residents views and the responses received from the larger area.






Council Plan




This report is supportive of the following priorities in the Council plan in addition to the One Planet York principles, that the Council champions:

 A focus on frontline services; and

 A Council that listens to residents.







This report has the following implications:


Financial The £5k allocated within the core transport budget would be used to progress the advertised residents parking scheme if option 2 was taken forward. The ongoing enforcement and administrative management of the additional residents parking provision will need to be resourced from the income generated by the new measures


Human Resources If implemented, enforcement would fall to the Civil Enforcement Officers necessitating an extra area onto their work load. New and extended 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 – neutral as it is not recommended for any changes to take place;

·        Disability – Neutral as Blue Badge holders who live locally can apply to have a bay provided outside their homes if required;

·        Gender – Neutral;

·        Gender reassignment – Neutral;

·        Marriage and civil partnership– Neutral;

·        Pregnancy and maternity – Neutral as no changes are recommended to take place;

·        Race – Neutral;

·        Religion and belief – Neutral;

·        Sexual orientation – Neutral;

·        Other socio-economic groups including :

o   Carer - Neutral (see Disability);

o   Low income groups – Neutral;

o   Veterans, Armed Forces Community– Neutral.


Legal any No Waiting restrictions implemented would be enforced by CYC Civil Enforcement Officers and included within the Legal Traffic Regulation Order  


Crime and Disorder – no Crime and Disorder implications identified


Information Technology – no implications identified


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


Chief Officer Responsible for the report:

Annemarie Howarth

Traffic Project Officer


Tel: (01904) 551337

James Gilchrist

Assistant Director for Transport, Highways and Environment



5th May 2022        Approved: X





Wards Affected: Fishergate




For further information please contact the author of the report.




Annex A: recommended option for No Waiting Restrictions at Parade Court

Annex B: advertised restrictions for East Parade

Annex C: plan of originally consulted area

Annex D: East Parade representations   

Annex E: First Avenue representations  

Annex F: Second Avenue representations

Annex G: Main Avenue representations

Annex H: Parade Court support  

Annex I: WardCouncillor comments