Meeting Notes Feb 2011

Hanover Transport Group – Minutes of Meeting : Tuesday 8th Feb

Purpose of the meeting

The area parking scheme had been rejected but the process had identified a number of transport related ideas issues and possibilities to improve the Hanover and elm grove area. The purpose of the meeting is to identify those issues and ideas that could be adopted and taken forward by the group.

The following notes a based on the wide ranging discussion which took place.

  1.  Hanover Streets for People produced a group response to the proposed CPZ which identified clear recommendations ( http://streets4people.wordpress.com ) and included potential improvements in cycle parking/rethink bus routes /on street Cycle storage/ encourage walking by improving the environment/ increase pedestrian crossings/ enforcement of laws relating to inconsiderate parking and parking in cycle lanes.   
  2. Lifetime Neighbourhoods: areas should be designed for all to enjoy – areas should be shared and not dominated by a particular group regardless of age etc. Similar to “Lifetime Homes” concept.
  3. Frequency of Buses and routes through the area – could this be improved?  
  4. Cycle Parking  It was agreed that any improvements to community cycle parking would improve matters and that the group should adopt this as an aim.
  5. Parking in Cycle lanes – The group agreed it was seen as a problem in the area and was also adopted as an issue for the group to pursue.
  6. Yellow Lines Could yellow lines be used at junctions to reduce inconsiderate parking?  
  7. Fire and rescue Emergency Services and other services (refuse/street cleansing) – general agreement that inconsiderate parking is a problem
  8. Pavement Parking White lines on wide pavements lines to regulate parking on wide pavements: (Elm Grove) It was suggested that new use of wide pavements should be to increase cycle lanes rather that formalise parking on the pavement.
  9. Cleansing Refuse /fly tipping/ Binvelopes.. all currently contribute to poor quality streetscape.  
  10. Environment The importance of a good quality environment was emphasised and how it encourages positive and responsible behaviour.
  11. Abandoned Cars – May Road was mentioned and abandoned cars were discussed – noted that cars./caravans and trailers should be reported direct to the council enforcement team (highways) on 290000.
  12. Play Streets: at agreed times of the day certain streets could be allocated for play suggested the group could consider this as a longer term aim.
  13. Local Vehicle Zones: EG Cardiff Local Vehicle Zones – a low cost way of prioritising residents parking and reducing commuter parking – agreed to look at this in further detail for future meetings.
  14. Police enforcement – obstruction of the pavement/roads. It was agreed to ask the police to include this as a neighbourhood priority.  
  15. Travel Map  A travel map for the area had been produced in the past – suggested that could be updated and useful to the group aims
  16. Oyster Card  also suggested the group approach B&H buses and offer Hanover/Elm Grove residents to trial the local version of oyster card for B&H buses
  17. Process and agreement on priorities Although a range of different views on issues and solutions was  represented ,there was agreement on some  shared issues/priorities which could be usefully explored by the group.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s