MINUTES of the Hanover & Elm Grove LAT meeting
13th April 2015
[All Actions to be taken from the meeting are shown throughout in bold]
Present (as recorded on attendance list):
Annie Heath (Vice Chair), David Hearn (Secretary).
Chris Taylor (Chair); Leo Beirne & Eve Slocombe (Observers; Town Neighbourhood Policing Panel East Grinstead); Brian Ravenett, Rob Bishop, Tom Barwell, Jo Wadsworth, William Johnston; David Gibson, Dick Page, Darren Sanders, Fred and Marcus Sheldon, John Doherty, Donna Holland, Robert Dawes, Veronica Symons, David Carter, Ivor Fried, Sam Kingsley Fried, Sharon Wickings, Gavin Fowler, Duncan Blinkhorn, Caprice Guldhoj, Emma Daniel (Councillor)
N.B. attendees who do not ‘sign’ the attendance list are not recorded.
The Vice Chair welcomed all attendees especially those for whom this was their first HEGLAT meeting.
Pam and Steve Chapman; Nick Adams.
2. Minutes and matters arising:
Attendees accepted the minutes of 2nd February 2015 without objection.
- HMO Action Group: In response to a question from a resident, the Vice Chair confirmed that the aims of the Action Group referenced in the minutes, were intended to be aspirational and provided a framework for the work of the group. Achievement of any such aims would depend on how the campaign progressed. Details of the work of the HMO Action Group can be found at: brightonHMOactiongroup.org.uk
- Relocation of Bus Stop in Queens Park Road – Dick Page informed the meeting that the Brighton & Hove Bus Company was still progressing with its plans to move the position of the current bus stop to enable buses 18, 21 and 23 to provide more integrated services. Because the new location would likely be somewhere close to the Hanover Pub and closer to Down Terrace this would require a Traffic Regulation Order to be advertised. This will happen shortly and any objections will be heard by the Environment. Transport and Sustainability (ETS) Committee hopefully at its on 7th July meeting.
Action: The Chair noted that an update would be provided to the group in due course.
- City Clean – despite a number of attempts to invite representatives from City Clean to recent meetings to discuss resident concerns about refuse and recycling, there has been little communication from City Clean themselves. An offer to re arrange a mutually convenient time for the meeting to take place during the day had been suggested but those present at the meeting felt that any meeting should instead be included on a future HEGLAT agenda.
Action: The Vice Chair noted the comments of those present and agreed to invite representatives from City Clean to the next HEGLAT meeting.
3. Update on Parking proposals and report from meetings with Councillors and Council Officers
The Vice Chair requested an update from the Chris Taylor (current HEGLAT Chair) and those working in the Parking sub group (David Gibson) be provided to attendees.
Chris Taylor explained the remit of the parking sub group which had been formed to survey opinion on transport, street and parking matters in Hanover and Elm Grove. He emphasised that their remit was not to encourage or discourage the introduction of CPZ’s but merely to report back on what issues mattered to residents and whether some form of CPZ was being requested when surveys were being returned. The group had so far completed surveying a large number of streets south of Elm Grove but still needed to sample the areas north of, and to the top of, Elm Grove.
Chris outlined the findings from residents and local businesses in the Hanover area south of Elm Grove. The majority of residents in these streets were found to be in favour of some form of parking control. This was not however a preference in all streets with some areas and particular streets notably the streets adjoining Baxter Street and Carlisle Street, decidedly against any form of CPZ.
Chris pointed out that where residents were in favour a Medium Touch proposal had been developed. This was a hybrid model of the current Light Touch and Heavy Touch schemes that had been introduced to other parts of the City. This Medium Touch proposal if developed would restrict parking at three times during the day – 10am-11am, 2pm-3pm and between 7pm-8pm and operate over 6 days (Monday-Saturday). Whilst reducing overall levels of parking congestion it was felt the proposal provided sufficient time for visitors, friends. customers etc to continue to come in and out of the area which was something that residents and local businesses had suggested remained important to them.
A general outline of the Medium touch proposal had been shared with local Councillors and with Charles Field at the Council’s Transport team. Chris reported that the Medium Touch proposal, although not tried before, in the City, had received a positive initial reaction from Councillors and Officers.
As a way forward the Council advised that they would expect some early stage interest to be lodged with the Transport Committee scheduled for July 2015 to provide some indication of local feeling and where the Council could begin to prioritise a future list of areas for public consultation. Once identified, Officers of the Council would then begin to draw up firmer proposals working with representative of those areas.
In terms of timeframes, Chris advised that given the workload involved in wider consultation, the traffic orders and administrative requirements, the introduction of any possible scheme was unlikely before the summer of 2016.
Further details of the Medium Touch proposal developed for parts of Hanover and presented at the meeting can be found on the HEGLAT website.http://wp.me/P1H9jH-kD
David Gibson pointed out that more sampling needed to be done and it was important to find out if in some cases the results of surveys in the north parts of Elm Grove may show a preference for No CPZ or a different form of CPZ to the Medium Touch proposal in Hanover. For instance, in streets around Baxter Street and Carlisle Street the surveys had revealed a higher perception from residents of the need for some form of street and traffic flow consideration rather than for controlled parking.
In this case, understanding the variation of feeling would be important and would be useful to share with the Council so that a blanket solution was not proposed.
The meeting noted the progress and the following comments were received:
- Brian Ravenett enquired why the Council appeared to be doing little to prevent unauthorised parking or poor parking. Chris Taylor replied that the Council appeared to have little interest in enforcing rules at present but this would likely increase if a CPZ were to be operating in the area.
- One resident enquired about the potential costs of the permit. Chris replied that the current costs were between £120 for a Heavy Touch scheme and £90 for a Light Touch. A Medium Touch would likely fall somewhere between. David Gibson pointed out that along with proposals had been a request for those on Council tax benefits to receive a 50% discount on the costs of a permit and if these were approved costs may run towards the upper end of the price range.
- The Vice Chair enquired if members of the City Car club sharing scheme could also receive some form of discount on the costs of a permit.
- One resident enquired as to what was being done to remove untaxed vehicles from the streets. The Vice Chair replied that Twitter evidence suggests that there is a ”lone Tax Disc ranger” actively reporting in the area at present although the situation would likely improve further if residents favoured some form of parking controls.
- One resident enquired as to the costs of the scheme. David Gibson explained that the Council would likely fund the costs through a loan (prudential borrowing) which would be paid back over time through income received from permits. The length of payback period depended on the street improvements that residents wanted to see in their areas. More improvements meant a longer pay back period and the Council would have to consider the financial impact of this scheme along with others before making any final decision.
- David Gibson shard very preliminary results of 9 surveys undertaken on the Pankhurst Estate showing a degree of openness to the idea of a CPZ in the area.
- Dick Page commented on the likely impact being or about to be felt from displacement created by neighbouring schemes operating in the Lewes Road and more recently Brighton General Hospital. . The operation of these schemes would likely increase current pressures on space for parking in the surrounding areas.
Action: The Vice Chair thanked all present for their contributions and agreed to update the HEGLAT web site with the current details and to provide an indicative timetable of our understanding of the Council’s timeframes for the process.
4. Police Report:
No Police Report presented at this meeting as PCSO’s unable to attend.
Action: PCSO’s to be invited to provide an update report at next meeting
- FRIENDS OF WILLIAM CLARKE PARK (from Duncan Blinkhorn)
Duncan provided an update to the community weekend on 18-19th April at William Clarke Park.
Saturday 18th April Evening screening of ET in the ‘Cinema in the Patch’
The Spring in the Patch day on Sunday 19th will involve live music and a range of stalls. Stalls can still be found at £10 (community groups); £20 (Commercial use) and £35 for those providing catering. The event takes place from 1pm-6pm.
- HEGLAT website – feedback from an attendee suggested that some improvements could be made to the current HEGLAT website to bring it up to date and make it more informative for residents.
- Cllr Daniel reported that when advised of problems with litter, missed collections or other refuse and recycling matters, she does report these to City Clean staff but she is not always informed when or if matters have been resolved. She is aware that current levels of communication could be improved.
- Date of next meeting:
It was agreed to hold the meeting on Monday 1st June at 7.00pm, at The Hanover Pub on Queens Park Rd.