ITEM CMDT6
CABINET MEMBER FOR TRANSPORT – 24 APRIL 2008
DISABLED PERSONS’ PARKING PLACES – SOUTH OXFORDSHIRE DISTRICT
Report by Head of Transport
Introduction
1. This report considers the proposed provision of new Disabled Persons’ Parking Places (DPPPs) and the formalisation of existing “advisory” DPPPs in South Oxfordshire District following the publication of the draft Oxfordshire County Council (South Oxfordshire District) (Disabled Persons’ Parking Places) (Amendment No. 2) Order 20**.
Background
2. The increasing demand for parking in Oxfordshire can lead to particular difficulties for disabled people who need to park close to their homes or place of work. The County Council may provide a DPPP on a public road where there is a need.
3. On 7 December 2004 the Executive agreed to rationalise policy with regard to disabled parking which included proposals to adopt a uniform approach to be implemented throughout the County. Previously, in Oxfordshire (as opposed to Oxford City) disabled parking was provided by the use of advisory bays. These bays are marked up on the ground but no disabled sign plate is provided and as they do not appear in a Traffic Regulation Order they are not enforceable. A review of these DPPPs is being carried out across Oxfordshire to ensure they are still required and those that are will be formalised. It will then be possible to enforce them. At the same time, new requests for DPPPs are considered.
Procedure
4. A fact sheet listing the criteria required to qualify for a DPPP is available in the Members’ Resource Centre. A primary condition for qualification is that the applicant has to be a Blue Badge holder. Applicants have to complete a detailed application form and provide a copy of their driving licence and vehicle registration documents to prove that both the driver and the vehicle are resident at the address where the DPPP is requested.
5. The site is then assessed by a Highways Inspector to see if a DPPP is feasible. If it is, informal consultation is carried out with various authorities, such as the Emergency Services. If no comments are made, formal consultation is commenced. This report considers comments in respect of the DPPPs referred to in paragraph 1 received at the formal stage.
Formal Consultation
6. The Directorate sent a copy of the draft Amendment Order, a Statement of Reasons for the Order and a copy of the Public Notice appearing in the local press to formal Consultees on 6 February 2008. These documents, together with the Oxfordshire County Council (South Oxfordshire District) (Disabled Persons’ Parking Places) (Consolidation) Order 2006 and plans of all the DPPPs were deposited for public inspection at County Hall, the main office of South Oxfordshire District Council and Didcot, Henley, and Thame Libraries. They are also available for inspection in the Members’ Resource Centre.
7. Separately, the Directorate wrote to local residents in each area where the proposed DPPP would be sited asking for their comments. Plans showing the location of each of the bays are available for inspection in the Members’ Resource Centre.
8. Comments were received in respect of the proposed DPPPs in West Croft, Berinsfield; Abbott Road and Evenlode Drive, Didcot; Queen Street, Dorchester-on-Thames; Gainsborough Hill, Greys Hill, Harpsden Road, St Mark’s Road, Henley-on-Thames; The Furlongs, Moreton; Ashford Avenue, Sonning Common; Churchill Crescent, Thame and London Road, Wheatley.
9. Comments were received in respect of the proposed formalisations of the informal DPPPs in Barnes Close and Mereland Road, Didcot; Thames Road, Goring; Gainsborough Crescent, Mount View, New Street, Niagara Road, Thameside and Watermans Road, Henley-on-Thames; Churchill Crescent, Thame and High Street, Wheatley.
10. A synopsis of each comment with an officer response is set out at Annex 1 (download as .doc file). Copies of the responses can be viewed in the Members’ Resource Centre.
11. The only statutory Consultee to comment was Thames Valley Police Traffic Management Unit who advised that they had no objections to the draft order.
Recommended Changes to the Proposals
12. The following are locations where it was proposed to provide new DPPPs but as a result of consultation it is recommended they should not now proceed or the location should change:-
(a) Clarence Road, Henley - the applicant has recently had to give up driving due to deteriorating health and has withdrawn the request for a DPPP. It is recommended that this proposal is not progressed.
(b) Gainsborough Hill, Henley - as a result of comments from residents it is now proposed to make the proposed double DPPP one long 11.5 metre bay terminating at the boundary between Nos 27 and 29 in order to make more efficient use of kerbspace (Annex 2) (download as .doc file). This would also avoid the DPPP blocking the proposed dropped kerb outside No 29 which has recently been passed by Oxfordshire Highways. It is recommended that this revised proposal is approved.
(c) Harpsden Road, Henley - As a result of comments from No 25, the proposed DPPP will now be centred on No 23 (Annex 2) and it is recommended that the new location is approved.
(d) Mount View, Henley - the applicant has died so a DPPP is not now required. It is recommended that this proposal is not progressed.
13. The following are locations where it was proposed to formalise existing informal DPPPs but as a result of consultation they are not now required and can be removed
(a) Thames Road, Goring - the original applicant has moved and there are no longer any Blue Badge holders in the locality. It is recommended that the bay is not formalised.
(b) Niagara Road, Henley - the original applicant is now in a specialist care home and is not expected to be able to return home on a regular basis. It is recommended that the bay is not formalised.
(c) Thameside, Henley - the original applicant has moved and the DPPP is not used. It is recommended that the bay reverts to Pay and Display as Blue Badge holders can park here for any length of time.
Other DPPPs in the Advertised Draft Order
14. Comments on the other DPPPs are provided at Annex 1. The issues of note from these are:-
(a) West Croft, Berinsfield (Annex 2) - A petition from a resident with eight signatures has been received objecting to the proposed DPPP on the basis that parking is very restricted, the vehicle in question is only used occasionally and is garaged elsewhere, manoeuvring vehicles in West Croft would be more difficult and the Fire and Rescue Service find it more difficult to access the locality. The Parish Council has also objected to the proposal.
In response, it should be noted that the disabled are at a disadvantage when there is pressure on parking. This is an area of sheltered housing and the applicant is the only Blue Badge holder. The SOHA Scheme Manager has provided additional information in support of the application. The applicant does have a garage but this is some distance away and cannot be reached because of the disability. The applicant has agreed to give up the garage if the DPPP is installed. The immediate area is not a vehicle turning area but a parking area and the DPPP would have no effect on other parked vehicles or the ability to park or leave the site. The Emergency Services have all been consulted and no objections have been received. It is recommended that this proposal be approved.
(b) Abbott Road, Didcot (Annex 2) - a number of objections have been received to the proposed DPPP due to the road being narrow and leading to a school and there is pressure on parking. Students at the school also park in the road. Both residents on the opposite side of the road to the applicant are afraid that the proposed DPPP would prevent or make it difficult for them to access and leave their driveways. It has been pointed out that the applicants have off-road parking to the rear of their property and that an alternative would be to provide a hard-standing in the front garden.
In response, it should be noted that there are three blue badge holders at the property and another has serious health problems. Two of the badge holders are very disabled and cannot negotiate the path to the garage at the end of the garden and the landlord (SOHA) has indicated that for cost reasons they will not fund vehicle hard-standings in front gardens. Vehicles currently park on the applicant’s side of the road so the residents opposite will not find any difference in accessing their drives as a result of the proposal. Furthermore, the Highways Inspector has advised that the DPPP has been positioned to maximise access to the driveways on the opposite side of the road. In view of the extreme difficulties faced by the applicants it is recommended that this proposal be approved.
(c) Queen Street, Dorchester-on-Thames (Annex 2) - One objection has been received to this proposed DPPP from a resident. The DPPP has been requested by the school to assist the disabled parent of one of their pupils. The objector points out apart from 20 minutes in the morning and 20 minutes at school leaving time, there is no parking problem here and for this short period, a DPPP is not required. The school itself have installed disabled aids on site to assist the parent with access but actually parking on the road outside is causing problems for the person involved.
In response, consideration was given to installing a short stretch of double yellow lines but it was felt that this would be abused by able-bodied drivers. Another alternative was a time limited DPPP but outside school starting and closing times there is no parking problem here at other times and this type of restriction is not well understood. It is recommended that the proposal be approved.
(d) Greys Hill, Henley-on-Thames (Annex 2) - One of the immediate neighbours is unhappy with the proposal because it would replace an area of single yellow line outside the applicant’s house and half of her frontage, retaining a single yellow line over the rest of her frontage and thus the applicant could park at all times while she could not. Other options have been explored to fit the DPPP in but all have produced objections. The Area Traffic Engineer has now met residents on site and has agreed that the single yellow line can be reduced by the length of the proposed DPPP which should be located in the end of the yellow line section further away from the junction than originally planned. As a result it would cover all the frontage of the applicant’s immediate neighbour. However on the south-western side there will be unrestricted parking instead of a short section of single yellow line. Consequently a fresh consultation is being carried out and the results reported orally at the meeting.
All the other proposals are recommended to go ahead as advertised.
How the Project supports LTP2 Objectives
15. The introduction of new DPPPs will help in Delivering Accessibility by enabling disabled people to park near to their homes and thus access a wider range of services.
16. Removal of DPPPs that are no longer required will Improve the Street Environment by reducing sign clutter and result in better management of parking.
Financial and Staff Implications (including Revenue)
17. The cost of installing the DPPPs is approximately £11,000 and will be met from the existing revenue budget provided for these.
RECOMMENDATION
18. The Cabinet Member is RECOMMENDED to authorise variations to the Oxfordshire County Council (South Oxfordshire District) (Disabled Persons’ Parking Place) (Amendment No 2) Order 20** as published in order to provide for:
(a) seventeen new DPPPs as set out at Annex 1 to this report;
(b) the formalisation of twenty-one existing advisory DPPPs as specified in this report;
STEVE HOWELL Head of Transport Environment & Economy
Background papers: consultation documentation
Contact Officer: Mike Ruse, Tel 01865 815978
April 2008
|