Parking: A Residents Proposal (Updates)

Post Committee Meeting  Update 22 March 2017

We have now had the March meeting of the Environment, Transport and Sustainability (ETS) committee and the recommendations for a CPZ in HEG have been passed with some amendments: A Full Scheme CPZ in the area south of Elm Grove (Hanover central and including the southern section of EG) and streets in the North West section along Lewes Rd up to the gyratory for seven days a week from 9am to 8pm. This scheme to have some shared Pay & Display spaces. A Light Touch CPZ in the area north of Elm Grove from Bonchurch Rd up to the top of Elm Grove and including Pankhurst and the Top Triangle, also including Hartington Rd, for Monday to Friday only with restricted hours between 11am-12 noon and 6pm-7pm.

This scheme to have a limited number of exclusive Pay & Display spaces. The reason they are Exclusive P&D is that residents in this zone will still have nine hours a day when visitors can park for free.

The proposed shared parking on Freshfield Road will now be for resident permit only to increase parking availability in Pankhurst; with further consideration given to finding some more parking in Firle, Glynde and Clayton Roads and a report made back to the next ETS in June.

Council officers will arrange a further meeting with reps from residents associations in Pankhurst, Elm Grove and Top Triangle areas to discuss any possible refinements and improvements to the scheme ahead of the Traffic Order being published and report back to the nest ETS meeting.

The Road Safety Team will investigate options to reduce speeding/racing along Pankhurst Avenue and to consider concerns raised by residents about increased potential speeding in Firle, Glynde and Clayton Roads should the proposed double yellow lines be installed, and report back to ETS.

A trial scheme will be piloted allowing businesses to buy a number of visitor permits in order to offset the potential adverse impacts of a CPZ. Permit costs will be as currently advertised on the council website. Visitors permits will be allowed as per existing schemes. https://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/content/parking-and-travel/parking/parking-permits Residents with Traders Permits applicable until 5pm will be able to park for free for unlimited time in nearby pay & display bays. ie. when returning home from work etc.

HEGLAT knows that even after nearly four years of hard work, these schemes are not perfect and will not suit everyone – that would never be able to happen – but we have managed to negotiate, push and argue with the council (and upset a few people) and whilst some issues are still to be resolved we have made considerable changes to a standard council CPZ. Several of the things listed above simply wouldn’t have been in these recommendations had we not held them to task. Nobody has ever been offered them before now. Watch this space for more info in the coming couple of months.

 

 

 

Parking Consultation Timeline (update February 2017)

March 14th 2017 – Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee – Decision

Application of Traffic Orders  – (21 days) during this time further comments can be accepted

Summer 2017 – Implementation works (where approvals given)

Autumn 2017 Operational Start (where approvals given)

Representations and petitions from residents to the March Committee can be sent in at any time up to one week before the meeting.

Please send to john.peel@brighton-gov.gov.uk in the Democratic Services Department at BHCC.

For further information email the Chair Charis Taylor at greysland@sky.com

——————————————————————————————————————–

Update June 2016

Council to consider findings of Parking Consultation at its Environment, Transport and Sustainability Committee on 28 June 2016.

Update (January 2016) Council officers confirm outline timetable for Consultation

Jan 19th 2016 – ETS Committee – Approval for consultation work – Days / times and Area

March – Initial consultation to residents

May / June – ETS Committee – approval for detailed design consultation

Summer – Detailed design consultation

October – ETS Committee approval for traffic order

November / December – traffic order advertised

Jan 2017 – ETS Committee – final approval.

Feb / March – implementation work

Spring 2017 – Operational start.

 

Update (6 October 2015)

Council to consider priorities of schemes for public consultation at meeting of ETS Committee on 13 October 2015. . HEGLAT scheme confirmed as high priority on agenda. Update expected shortly.

UPDATE (June 2015) Representation for TES Committee 7th July 2015

“As the result of the transport and parking survey undertaken by residents via Hanover & Elm Grove Local Action Team (HEGLAT), with 1101 surveys returned, we the residents, now ask Brighton & Hove City Council to undertake the development of a mutually agreed proposal. This is to be followed by a consultation on a Controlled Parking Zone in the area, based on the Community Parking Plan as devised and proposed by the residents and HEGLAT. The outline of this Community Parking Plan having already been discussed with, and positively and constructively received by council officers and councillors in meetings prior to this representation.”

UPDATE (May 2015)

Two potential schemes operating in the area Medium Touch for streets south of Elm Grove, potential for Lighter Touch for streets north of Elm Grove. Surveys still to be undertaken and residents views collated for Pankhurst Estate, streets up by Brighton General. Recognition that residents in some streets (Carlisle, Baxter and those around the Triangle) will not benefit from controlled parking.

UPDATE  Outline of Residents Proposal (April 2015)

What is being proposed so far? Unique Medium Touch scheme covering the whole Zone

When will it operate? Six and seven day options being considered.

Hours of Operation: 10am-11am, 2pm-3pm and 7pm -8pm..

  • Pay and Display during each restricted hour and only during one restricted hour. No roll over or unused minutes to the next hour. Available in 30 minute increments.
  • Bays available for businesses and shops FREE up to 30 minutes
  • Extra permits for self employed people with a van +private vehicle.
  • Closer look at “Passing Points” in certain streets
  • Proposals to include more one way streets to improve traffic flow
  • More traffic calming measures to slow traffic
  • Closer look at proper Bike Storage rather than just Open Racks.
  • Special bays of “floating permits” for businesses that have a need for several vehicles such as garages, or businesses with fleet vehicles. These are essential to the lifeblood of the area.

Special Considerations:

  • An option for Zone 1 (south of Southover Street), where the majority of people favoured Heavy Touch, to change to Heavy Touch by joining the current Zone C should Medium Touch solution fail to meet requirements.
  • The Triangle (the streets around Carlisle and Baxter Street), Pankhurst Estate and IOW Triangle (Carisbooke, Ryde, Snowdon, Totland, St Helen’s Road) and other areas North of Elm Gove to be excluded if so desired.
  • 50% Concession on price of a permit for those on Council Tax Benefit

Elm Grove: Submission of new resident design proposals for Elm Grove as part of development phase prior to full consultation exercise and consideration to be given to the use of chevron parking as a viable way of improving parking capacity in Elm Grove.

Indicative Timetable

Time Forum Action
July 2015 B&HCC Transport Committee Delegation of HEGLAT representatives to confirm extent of resident’s interest in further consultation on some form of controlled parking in the area.
July –Nov 2015 Joint Working Group Council Officers and HEGLAT team to work up residents proposals based on findings from surveys.
Early 2016 Council Formal Consultation exercise on proposals
Mid 2016 Council Results of Consultation
From Summer 2016 Council Approvals and Implementation of Agreed Scheme

Background Information

Here are some answers to some of the common questions regarding the surveys which have been going on:

What are the surveys?
these are general transport and parking surveys to find out how people in the area use transport, what kinds of transport they use and how they feel about parking issues in the area. They are about issues on the streets as well as parking

Why did they happen , when pretty recently Hanover rejected CPZ?
Because some people were expressing a concern that the council might come back quite soon with another consultation on parking. Also in some areas people felt the parking has got worse as we are now surrounded by other controlled parking zones, and we are one of the few places people can park free for AMEX, shopping or put their second cars if they live in a parking zone. Other streets were not getting rubbish collected because of parking and some people could not use the pavement. The council are likely to be presenting ideas and proposals, but we felt it was better to come up with our own proposals “a residents plan” instead, if this is what residents want us to do

What will their results do?
The results will give us an idea about how opinions on transport issues and parking have changed (or not) and how people are feeling about any form of controlled parking in the area. The results may also tell us what people think about the reasons for increased parking pressures and whether things like public transport is working well enough for us. They may also tell us if there are different opinions coming from different parts of the area.

Are the council involved?
No – the council are not involved at all. This survey has come about from the grass roots of the people of Hanover and Elm Grove. It is being conducted by the residents, the results are being compiled by the residents and any ideas as to how things can be improved will come from the residents. If the surveys show interest in a proposal it will be us the residents that work out the detail. We will only put it to the council if residents want us to and if the council start to make noises about wanting to have their own consultation.

What are the results?
We don’t know yet. We stared off with a pilot survey of only six streets to see if the survey worked and gradually more people from other streets are coming forward to offer their help in surveying their own streets. The initial six streets were Bonchurch Road, Belgrave Street, Toronto Terrace, Franklin Street, Lincoln Street and Hallett Road – six streets from varying parts of the area.
Since then we have also had completed surveys from Beaufort Terrace and Montreal Rd. Surveys are nearly finished in Queens Park Rd and Baxter St and are underway/about to start in Hampden Rd , Milton Rd, Howard Rd, Newark Place, Holland St, Ewart St, Bentham Rd and Southampton St.

Early indications are telling us that the area is now rather split on these issues, particularly on parking. The area to the south of Elm Grove seems to be more in favour of some form of controlled parking but both the north side of Elm Grove and the east/top side of Queens Park Road are still very much against it.

Use of bikes and buses varies from region to region with most people doing a lot of walking! Cars and other motorised vehicles still stand out as being the most commonly used form of motorised transport particularly for people who need to travel out of the city or to areas not well served by buses. When a street completes a survey the HEGLAT sends a letter to residents with the detail of the results. These are shown by street name in the drop down menu.

What are the options?
No formal options for anything have been discussed yet although the survey has asked for opinions on options such as Heavy Touch CPZ, Light Touch CPZ, permits being charged for at the current full rate, a rate which just covers the cost of administering the scheme, subsidised rates for people on low incomes or keeping no schemes at all.

If there is enough interest we want to work in detail on a plan to suit us the residents of Hanover. It could be a Hanover specific scheme with all sorts of features the council do not usually offer. It could be medium touch for example or could include extra car club spaces, planters, bike racks and the removal of unecessary yellow lines

How do I add my opinion?
You can come to the HEG LAT meetings, e-mail us (heglatters@gmail.com or see below for specific people involved), facebook message us via the HEGLAT page, tweet @heglat or help in having your street surveyed.

What happens next?
We will continue with street surveys untill the end of October. Then, if the surveys suggest a desire for change in some areas, we shall set up a working group to devise a firm proposal (Oct- Dec) If the working group agree on a proposal this will then be double checked with residents and if residents support the ideas and wish us to present them to the council then we shall do so. We shall also ask all prospective council candidates to support the residents plan before the elections in May BEFORE they are voted in!

Can you help?
This is a community led project and we are all doing this in our spare time, we would appreciate anyone that can help by doing surveys and especially usefull would be data inputting survey results. Contact Dave Gibson -davidsg@ntlworld.com who is facilitating the distribution of survey packs to street volunteers or Chris Taylor -greysland@sky.com who is co-ordinating data inputting

Advertisements

15 thoughts on “Parking: A Residents Proposal (Updates)

  1. It would be useful to see a breakdown of the Council’s running costs to maintain and monitor an area’s parking scheme. I live in Queens Park area where they are also considering a scheme. I do have sympathy for Hanover residents as your streets are narrow and it is always choca block. I also, however, agree with the comment on here regarding the ongoing cost to the residents. I don’t understand how after initial set up costs, how the monitoring of the scheme by a traffic warden warrants £120 p.a. from EVERY resident household EVERY year! If it’s about 17,000 residents,that’s £2,040,000 EVERY year for the council! They say they are doing because it is requested by residents – then why do we have to fork out so much? The average traffic waraden salary in UK is £18,967. To monitor an area the size of Hanover would surely not need more wardens than roughly four in my mind. So it doesn’t take a genius to do the maths and see the council are benefiting from our misery enormously. Which incidentally, a lot of people feel, was created by them in the first place. So my question is, why don’t the residents not only fight for parking restrictions but also a sense of fairness. We shouldn’t allow ourselves to be ripped off or be hood winked by the council supposedly ‘doing us a favour’.
    Lastly my other issue, whilst talking about fairness, is what happens to essential workers in these areas. Such as teachers. The school I work in, also in Queens Park area, have staff talking about leaving as they travel in from outside Brighton. They already leave home at the crack of dawn when travelling by car,so would suffer having to leave almost an hour earlier to travel by bus! People who have cars generally need their cars. Life requires it sometimes, whether the council like to think of car as a dirty word or not. I live near enough to town, seafront and downs to walk just about everywhere, but there are still times I need my car. One of the staff I work with travels in far and early to open up the school office. She then has to drive to Woodingdean to visit her elderly mum and then return to the completely other side of Brighton and beyond. Life is never black and white. Then all around the school in the day they have a parking scheme which ends just there. So everyone parks beyond this (where I live) and this street is completely EMPTY all day! Is this a sensible scheme. Why can’t the council issue free or low cost all day vouchers for school staff only for the school side of these roads? They will be gone by the time residents return home. The school will not be jepodised or lose good staff or caused any hassle to residents (who generally park on the housing side of the road anyway). One size doesn’t fit all. The council need to be much more flexible, fair and caring.

    Like

  2. Hi Is anyone going to respond to the ‘No’ fliers going through letterboxes now the consultation document has been circulated. It has been sent around by someone in Albion Hill who obviously does not have the access problems that the streets running from Southover St to Albion Hill etc have. It is becoming impossible to get services to come to our addresses, the roads are constantly blocked restricting access further. This is not just about the number of spaces, though I am led to believe there will still be enough for residents once all the other people using our area are eliminated not just day time commuters but those without parking permits, those on holiday staying with friends anywhere in the City. It really is becoming an impossible area to live in environmentally. Please vote for us to reclaim our area, our space.

    Like

  3. Do come and have a look at the controlled parking zone to the south of Hanover, here in Richmond Street, Windmill Street and Stanley Street it has made a big improvement. Residents can now use the pavement, emergency vehicles and those delivering can get access, there is space for bike parking and families play out. The change was radical – removing parking spaces in the narrowest streets, but for us as residents parking has got much easier and it has completely changed the atmosphere of the place – we no longer feel that we live in a car park.

    Like

  4. Hi how do people feel about the parking in the Hartington area North of Elm Grove? Our street has become a caravan & motor home storage area. Anyone else having issues?

    Like

  5. Just had a conversation with someone who didn’t realise I lived in hanover who was proud they had found a solution to their parking issue. Living in seven dials they park in hanover leaving the car there the entire week sometimes .so they don’t need a parking permit.. that’s what we are up against to a find a space in our own area. Do we really want to be a free long term car park for the city?

    Like

  6. Parking is a nightmare in Hanover and over congestion causes innumerable problems. Cars are routinely damaged because the street and too narrow for parking both sides of the road. Service vehicles cannot deliver, and more importantly emergency vehicles cannot reach residences. The pavements are blocked, and visibility coming out of streets severely restricted. I think we should be included in Zone C and take our chances with getting a space. The whole environment would be improved greatly by restricted parking and one system where appropriate. i might actually be able to use the car without fear on not being able to park again

    Like

    1. Catherine
      Many thanks for your email. The Council’s consultation process is due to start shortly on whether residents would like to see more controlled parking in the area. This should give you an opportunity to make your views clear as to whether you will support some form of controlled parking for the area.

      Like

  7. I don’t believe we should have to pay extra money to park our cars in Brighton and the parking here is worse than any other city because of the previous CPZ policies and is a cash cow for the council, who don’t care about anything other than money when it comes to parking.

    Residents parking would remove valuable spaces and create additional cost to residents, the maximum we should allow is the cost of installing them being covered in any charge – not £120 fees like elsewhere to give local council massive profits for less actual spaces for all of us.

    Having said this, Hanover has become a car park, so something like this may have to be done and this is also a good opportunity for the rest of the streets, such as Cobden Road, to become one way.

    Getting rid of vital bus services in the area would also make the problem worse, so they need to protect the 37b and 21 routes.

    Like

  8. I was born and still live in Hanover and I can honestly say I am fed up living in a free car park. What people don’t realise that is not everyone in Hanover area owns a car so there will always be a space for everyone that does, take away all the city workers and non residents that leave their cars in Hanover, there will be plenty of spaces albeit not outside your own house but at least it won’t take 30 minutes driving round looking for a space. Please genuine residents, let’s all stick together and make Hanover a CPZ.

    Like

  9. There is no guarantee that paying £120 for a resident’s car parking permit will get you a space when you want one. (As an aside why do resident’s parking permits cost more in Brighton than some parts of London?)
    The new parking scheme I saw still allows others to park round the streets here and can be taking up spaces just as before leaving us with no spaces. The number of available car parking spaces will be greatly reduced under a parking scheme too.
    It would be good to have more space in the streets but visitors and workers should be encouraged to come into Brighton by bus, share cars or train to achieve this. Outsiders are not encouraged because public transport is more expensive and less reliable than driving. Making outsiders pay for parking is a valid deterant but they should pay more. When we pay council tax already,why should residents of hanover pay for an unreliable parking system on top?
    At the moment I always get a space within Hanover area and have never had to pay to park so far.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Are you going to ask the Council to create parking spaces in Elm Grove by taking back the Road where it has been Tarmacced and perhaps plant some more ‘Elms where this is not possible?

    Liked by 1 person

  11. I have lived in Hanover for 9 years and the parking is getting worse and worse. I heard an exasperated Father on Lincoln St last week say: “I’m sick of living in a free car park!’. Also, the amount of vans getting parked here is not fair either. We need residents parking please!

    Like

  12. I feel there is a definite need for residents parking in and around Hanover Street, not so far mentioned in the surveys, but the first street of choice for shoppers from the Level, and where many students also park in term-time. (Incidentally, do the universities have an input into these surveys?) Parking is getting increasingly difficult for the residents of the streets at the lower end of Hanover; in fact it has become a nightmare; and in my view residential parking should have been installed long ago. The fact that most other places in Brighton have it only adds to the problem.

    Like

    1. Gillian, as a resident of hanover street I feel it important to treat the lower streets as a special area. The lining in the street indicates a large number of parking spaces will be lost. This could easily result in hanover st and others becoming just as crowded as ever. I fear that cars from higher up the hill will drive down and legitimately park in hanover street as they may already be doing. Shoppers, walking into town, walking to the station, walking to jobs in london road and so on will be tempted to park here in the lower streets of hanover where they can then climb aboard their cars to drive up to home at the top of the hill.
      HANOVER STREET MARKINGS HAVE DEVIATED FROM THE PLANNED MAP by not double lining one side of the road and changing sides half way along. We now have a strange space for two cars producing a kind of ‘chicane’ supposedly to slow down cars along the road. This deviation has taken yet more parking spaces. What is the point of showing residents a map to accept or not the plan originally presented to us and then changing it WITHOUT ANY CONSULTATION WITH THE RESIDENTS. The original plan is much more acceptable than the ‘chicane’ method that only encourages drivers to swerve around it. A large space of about 6 car spaces now has to provide for large vehicles to get round it. Who gave the OK to change the original plan and why? Might it be to allow the only person in the street with a garage, therefore not at all affected by a potential loss of parking spaces, in order to smoothly exit their private parking facility. ‘IF’ this is true it is disgraceful and I ask that the original plan should be reinstated and quick.

      Like

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