Mission Statement and Core Principles

MISSION STATEMENT 2015

to find a community-led solution to the parking issues in the area, based on meetings and the community survey, with a view to providing adequate safe and sustainable resident and small business spaces which will help improve the quality of life for all street users in our neighbourhood.”

“Where residents develop suggestions and demonstrate collective support for them the council will endeavour to engage constructively on the issues as highlighted”

Core Principles

Road Safety and Traffic Calming

Where traffic-calming measures are proposed they should:

  • Make streets safer for pedestrians.
  • Help to create the opportunity for new communal spaces – e.g. to locate bike racks, planters, communal bins.
  • Minimise the likelihood of all road users using the areas as a cut-through or rat-run – e.g. Carlyle St., Lynton St., Arnold St., Hanover St. etc.
  • Reduce the necessity for drivers to reverse to avoid on-coming traffic.
  • Should physically or by use of signage, restrict all road users to 20mph including skateboarders and bicycles – Hanover St, Lincoln St and particularly the main through routes such as Southover St, Islingword Rd and Hartington Rd.
  • Be clearly sign posted either through road markings or effective signage e.g. box junctions.
  • Ensure the traffic flow is controllable in the area – e.g. one ways
  • Include a system that empowers and supports members of the community to report incidences of abuse and poor conduct, to relevant authorities e.g. breaches of one ways, illegal parking.
  • Direct traffic away from narrow residential roads to wider thoroughfares
  • Ensure that, where introduced, one way systems do not have other one ways in the same direction in opposite roads e.g Grove Street/ Ewart Street; Belgrave St/Coleman Street
  • Ensure that road markings and yellow lines are kept and maintained so as to be highly visible and regularly reviewed.

Pay and Display Provision

P & D has been requested by residents and businesses within the Hanover and Elm Grove area in surveys, at meetings and in discussion.

Why
: A small P&D provision is needed in either scheme to cater for needs outside the template of a CPZ.   (Heglat group can list examples of these)
Where:

  • For Light Touch – Grouped near businesses & Grouped together to ease finding a P&D space. Away from houses and along blank walls so as not to cause a nuisance to adjacent residents. (Heglat group can suggest these areas).
  • For Heavy Touch – in streets as usual but with more weighting towards groups of spaces together and near businesses.

How: A mix of “Shared PD & Permit Holders”, and “solely PD”.
Amount : For Light – suggest 5% of total available spaces. For Heavy – usual provision.
Administration : to prevent users Renewing remotely, so that spaces retain their intended use. (suggest: No Renewing after initial stay in the same space by phone or online).

Street Improvements

In recognition that many car journeys are short, walking and cycling infrastructure should be installed to reduce car journeys in Hanover & Elm Grove, and to enable the mobility of those without cars. This means our community must be accessible to those walking, and in particular those with additional mobility requirements, throughout the Ward.

Pedestrian Accessibility

In recognition of the needs of all members of our community, all pavements should have dropped kerbs at the ends of the street. This will provide an accessible street environment for those with buggies, mobility scooters and others who have additional mobility requirements, so that all can use the public street-space easily and safely.

Cycle Parking Infrastructure

Cycle stands should be installed to enable all in the community to use and park their cycles easily and safely. Their location should be planned and distributed fairly taking account of data from LAT and Hanover Action surveys, and recognising the needs of:

  1. Residents: to have access to a dedicated bike stand in their street or nearby in an adjoining street.
  2. Visitors: to have dedicated bike stands outside shops, cafes, Post Offices, businesses with callers, and pubs.

Businesses and commercial premises should be encouraged to contribute to funding the cost of these outside their premises in return for some visible sign of their contribution.

In no circumstances should bikes stands be deployed as ‘barriers’ to prevent illegal car parking (e.g. areas of Elm Grove, and the Islingword Road-Ewart Street-Hampden Road junction).

Motor Cycle Parking

Where reserved motor cycle spaces are provided, these should take into account the need for security. Ground-based security anchors in motor cycle bays will dissuade the use of cycle stands, pavement signposts and other street furniture to secure them.

Secure Covered Bike Storage

This should be considered when a suitable critical mass of residents come together in a street or adjoining streets express demand, and a willingness to contribute financially to their installation and maintenance. These should take account of data from LAT and Hanover Action surveys, to prompt a formal process to request such facilities (with an indication of the current charges that would apply, which should be less that charged for a low emissions vehicle parking permit £50pa). Smaller scale storage facilities should be favoured to facilitate widespread distribution (such as the well-used facilities in Phoenix Rise).

Street Trees

In recognition of the positive impact that street trees have on resident well-being, absorption of air pollution (NO2 and particulate), and the aesthetics our urban environment:

  • Additional street trees should be introduced where possible.
  • Dead or felled trees should replaced as a matter of course.
  • Priority should be given to suitable streets that currently have no trees.

Hanover Action as a local community group, the LAT, and the BHCC Parks should work collaboratively to realise this on a short, medium and long-term basis including via community-based fundraising initiatives.

Street Planters

It is recognised that there are a large number of planters currently that are neglected, the LAT and Hanover Action will work collaboratively to:

  • Increase resident ‘adoption’ to ensure maintenance of current planters.
  • Respond positively to data from LAT and Hanover Action surveys showing that groups of residents would like planters.
  • Consider how planters could be linked to traffic calming infrastructure (as seen in roads such as Cobden Road and Wichelo Place, etc.).

APPENDIX 1

Hampden Rd/Ewart St/Islingword Rd Junction

Issues surrounding this junction are numerous particularly for safety of pedestrians in crossing the roads at any point. Cars parked “nose-in” frequently block pavements, badly placed bike racks impair crossings. Pedestrians have to walk in the road to avoid obstacles. There are no dropped kerbs to indicate safe crossing points and to help disabled pedestrians and those with buggies etc.

Quote owner at no.48 Islingword Rd. “….feels trapped by the cars bonnets which take up lots of the pavement and sometimes mean he can’t get out of his gate easily. He occasionally puts notes on really bad examples of blocking parking. Three years ago (approx) he had to be taken out of his house on a stretcher with a heart condition and the ambulance crew couldn’t get out of the gateway and had to lift the stretcher over the low garden wall. He says he has written to the council about it in the past and sent photos of the problem. He would be happy to be contacted again and delighted if it could be sorted out.”

Left: Current layout                                                    Right: Proposed layout

APPENDIX 2

Elm Grove

As has already been outlined in previous emails the Elm Grove situation is of utmost importance and concern to the area. All aspects are important from road safety to parking and pedestrian safety. Design options have been presented to council.

Top Triangle

Special consideration to be given to the Top Triangle – Carlyle, Arnold, Lynton, Baxter, Cromwell streets. Changes in traffic flow and direction and other measures to prevent these streets being used as a rat-run for vehicles avoiding the traffic lights at Elm Grove/Queens Park Rd junction. This has become intolerable and assistance from council here might soften the blow of a CPZ being introduced to these streets which have considerable parking issues including high density of car owners per household and a necessity to part-park on pavements.

 

 ideas

Possible Solution

Finally…….

We ask that council adopt these core principles as a guidance for design and ongoing engagement with both residents and HEGLAT throughout the consultation process and as a framework for an ongoing approach toward street improvements in the future.