Meeting documents

The Executive
Tuesday, 29 April 2003

EX290403-14

Return to Agenda

ITEM EX14

EXECUTIVE - 29 APRIL 2003

PROPOSED HEADINGTON CENTRAL RESIDENTS’ PARKING SCHEME

Report by Assistant Director (Highway Management)

 

Introduction

  1. This report is being submitted to the Executive due to the scale and complexity of the Headington Central Residents Parking Scheme. A total of 40 roads are included in the scheme with approximately 1800 properties and businesses being directly affected.

  2. The original objective of this scheme was to revise and extend the existing residents’ parking zone so as to address known and potential parking problems within and south of it’s current boundary. As a result of public pressure the proposals were further extended to include much of Old Headington.

  3. Identified parking problems include commuter parking, displacement from the Headington West Residents Parking Zone and overflow parking from the Nuffield Orthopaedic, John Radcliffe and Churchill hospitals which is expected to increase as a result of expansion programmes. In addition, waiting restrictions will combat the problem of obstructive parking which occurs in some of the narrower streets south of the existing zone.

    4. Background

  4. Headington consists of a mix of houses, a few flats, and business and retail premises. Its shops and restaurants provide its central focus. In addition, there are approximately half a dozen religious establishments and three schools within or close to the proposed zone boundary.

  5. There are competing parking demands from residents, office and shop workers and shoppers. The City Council maintains two off-street car parks in Headington whose tariffs are set at levels which discourage long term parking. Long term parking is now catered for by the recently extended Thornhill Park and Ride.

  6. Effective control of parking is seen as the key to the successful implementation of the Headington and Marston Area Transport Strategy (HAMATS), the aim of which is to create major improvements in the environment by cutting down the amount of car journeys into the area. Part of this strategy can be achieved through removal of long term non-residential car parking.

  7. The Headington Central proposals need to be seen in the context of the existing city centre waiting and parking controls, the introduction of Controlled Parking Zones with residents parking in East Oxford and Headington West (both east of Headington Central) and the possible introduction of the other Controlled Parking Zones with permit parking as recommended by HAMATS to the north, east and south.

  8. Oxford City Council was originally responsible for the scheme, work on which commenced in the mid 1990s. An exhibition organised by the City Council in May 1999 resulted in amendments being made to the scheme including an extension to the zone to various parts of Old Headington. Another exhibition, showing the Old Headington extension,was held in November 1999, which resulted in further amendments being made.

  9. Formal public consultation took place from 15 October 2001 and 5 November 2001 and was based on the designs shown on Drawing Nos. 721/27144 and 721/27145. At the end of the consultation period the scheme was transferred to the County Council when the Oxford agency ended in November 2001.

    10. Review of Original Proposals

  10. Analysis of the formal consultation responses showed that the proposals were not generally well received by local residents. From the 280 replies received, about 170 (some 60%) opposed the scheme in principle. The majority of the objectors seemed to be concerned with the amount of No Waiting at Any Time restrictions and the consequent loss of residents parking places. They also believed that the proposed parking spaces would be insufficient for residential needs.

  11. Due to all the adverse comment it was felt that this scheme could not be recommended to members and needed further review. All the streets within the proposed zone were visited by to see if residents concerns could be accommodated. However, only a small increase in parking could be achieved.

  12. While modifying the scheme it was found that there was a mismatch between the proposed zone and the existing Headington Residents’ Parking Zone in Margaret Road. Originally this small section of road was included within the proposed zone. However as external consultants have recently been commissioned to develop the Headington Quarry Residents Parking Zone, it is now felt prudent to include it in the latter scheme. The area concerned can be seen on Plan No HM721/A4/0020.

  13. Initial concerns about the environmental impact of road markings within the conservation area of Old Headington prompted Oxford City Council to seek special authorisation for restricted zone signing in Andrews Lane, Larkins Lane, Laurel Farm Close, The Croft and William Orchard Close. The approval that was given would have involved replacing the lengths of double yellow line with special signing.

  14. After further consultation with the Friends of Old Headington it was agreed that the special signing required would need to be much larger than the standard signing normally required. As this would have been visually intrusive, it was felt better to revert to the original proposal but using the narrow deep cream double lining, specifically used for conservation areas.

  15. In addition, following the City Council’s formal consultation, it was agreed to relax the No Waiting at Any Time element of the restricted zone to No Waiting - Monday to Friday 8.00am to 6.30 pm. However this has been rejected by a large proportion of residents in the affected roads amid fears of obstructive parking caused by non residents outside the restriction period. The original 24 restriction therefore has been retained except in a small part of The Croft.

    16. Consultation on Revised Proposals

  16. The revised proposals were sent out to informal consultation to all residents and businesses within the zone, the consultation period being 29 July 2002 to 14 September 2002. The informal consultation plans are shown on Drawing Nos.HM721//A0/0021 and HM 721/A0/0022

  17. In general, the proposals were much better received and were generally supported. Comments were received from 555 households, a response rate of approximately 33% which compares favourably with responses for similar schemes. Positive feedback was aided by each resident receiving a map of their area showing local proposals, details on the background to the scheme, a Frequently Asked Questions Sheet and a simplified questionnaire. These can be seen in the Members’ Resource Centre.

  18. Again the main objection was the increase in No Waiting at Any Time restrictions which are necessary to protect junctions, access ways and narrow roads that suffer from obstructive parking. Many of these restrictions would be necessary without the permit scheme.

  19. Unfortunately, in a few areas of the proposed zone, residents have got into the habit of parking in these inappropriate places and as they have not observed a larger vehicle being obstructed they believe that this is not a problem. A graphical street by street analysis of the returned questionnaires can be seen in Annex 1 (download as .doc file) and a summary of residents concerns can be seen in Annex 2 (download as .doc file).

    20. Current Proposals recommended for Formal Consultation

  20. All the points raised have been carefully considered and the plans amended wherever possible. The proposed scheme shown on Plan No. HM721/A0/0021 Rev A and HM721/A0/0022 Rev A show these amendments. The new redesigned scheme has slightly reduced the amount of on street parking in line with residents’ concerns about obstructive parking.

  21. Within the scheme 1009 spaces are now available, 789 of which are permit holder spaces. A further 177 are time limited 2 or 3 hour spaces where permit holders are exempt from such limits. The remaining 39 spaces are 1 hour limited waiting and 4 spaces are without time limit. This assumes all access ways can be protected by the Community Management Scheme as described in paragraphs 26 and 27 below.

  22. It is anticipated that residential demand will be around 640 and business permit holder demand could be up to 150. Resident and business permit holders would therefore require a total of 790 spaces. Visitors and shoppers would therefore be able to use the remaining 220 spaces. However it is expected that many permit holders would use also use these facilities.

  23. Without Community Management only 614 permit spaces would be available, a loss of about 175 spaces. This would leave a surplus of 45 time limited spaces which would be insufficient for on street visitor and shopper demand and where residents also choose to use such facilities. Community Management therefore plays a vital role in ensuring that the zone has sufficient capacity for such users.

  24. An additional concern has been expressed by a number of residents who live in the vicinity of St Leonard’s Road Car Park who state that under the new scheme they would no longer be able to use it free of charge. The controls for this car park, which contain the exemptions for residents, are contained in a separate Oxford City Council parking place order which refers to the existing Headington Residents Parking Zone

  25. Although I believe that it was never the intention to remove this concession, the naming of the scheme Headington Central may inadvertently do this. As a result, I recommend renaming the scheme Headington Residents Parking Zone. Any future removal of the St Leonard’s Road car park concession would need to be made by Oxford City Council. The surrounding zones are called Headington West, Quarry and North East Headington

  26. In an effort to provide additional residents’ parking it is proposed to introduce the new concept of Community Management Parking (CMP). This would allow permit holder bays to be formed on-street across driveways, and would enable residents or neighbours to park there if they wished. Around 175 additional on street parking places would be created if CMP can be implemented.

  27. However it is possible that this could give rise to obstruction problems by inconsiderate visitor permit holders or neighbours, especially where roads are already heavily parked. It should be noted that facility would not be available in time limited spaces, even if permit holders are exempt. Access ways would need to be protected with No Waiting at Any Time restrictions. A leaflet explaining Community Management would be issued along with the permit to both residential and business users to limit any possible abuse.

  28. Unfortunately this initiative will require an additional round of consultation in order to establish which properties would accept CMP within permit holder bays and which would insist on ‘No Waiting at Any Time’ restrictions before the Formal Consultation process can commence. This is because it is no longer permitted to place the double yellow lines within parking spaces as has been done in the past in other Residents Parking Zones.

  29. The Residents’ Parking Permit Scheme will enable permit holders to park up to 24 hours per day, 7 days a week in permit holders only parking places and in some of the time limited spaces again without time limit. No limit is proposed on the total number of permits for each household assuming Community Management can be implemented. However each adult resident can only apply for a permit for a single vehicle. Permit restraint would need to be considered if CMP was not acceptable.

  30. The Visitor Permit Parking Scheme will enable visitors to park in permit holder’s only parking places and without time limit in some of the time limited general public parking places. Residents’ visitor permits will be limited to 50 visit allocations permits per resident per 12 month period. There will also be no charge for these permits.

  31. The Hotel and Guest House Permit Scheme will allow guests at these establishments in the zone to park in permit holders only parking places. A charge of £1 per permit is proposed. There will be no limit on how many of these permits a hotel or guest house may apply for. Permits will be valid for 24 hours commencing from the time of validation.

  32. However such premises will be required to issue those permits only to paying guests and to keep records of their issue. Those records would be available for inspection by authorised officers of the Council at all reasonable times. If it appears that the conditions for the issue of permits are being abused, the Council would be able to withdraw the permits from the hotel or guest house concerned.

  33. The proposed Business Permit Scheme is similar to other zones within the City. This would enable vehicles of businesses occupying premises in the zone and displaying a business permit, to park in permit holders only parking places. A charge of £25 per quarter year per permit is proposed. Business permits will be limited to a maximum of two per business, based on operational need, where that business has got insufficient off street parking car parking space either at the business or nearby.

    34. Environmental Implications

  34. This scheme will make a direct contribution in reducing traffic congestion within Headington. It is hoped that many commuters would change their habits and use the Thornhill Park and Ride or other bus services into the area, and in some cases change their travel mode altogether.

  35. The most obvious benefit will be the reduction in parking congestion within the zone, which should improve the quality of life for most residents. Road safety should be improved which will benefit the children attending the schools in the area. There would also be a reduction in vehicle emissions and the scheme would contribute towards the Council’s policy on sustainability.

  36. There would be some environmental impact in residential streets due to the necessary signing that would have to be erected. Road markings and signing would also have to be provided to define parking areas and the extent of waiting restrictions.

    37. Financial and Staff Implications

  37. The estimated cost of the scheme is £90,000 and is included in the Capital Programme. Operation of the scheme would be funded from within the on-street parking account.

  38. Business Parking Permits would generate an estimated income in the region of £15,000 p.a. Based on previous experience in other zones, this zone would generate on street parking penalty income of £72,800 p.a. The cost of operating the scheme including enforcement by Control Plus is estimated to be £51,000 p.a., giving a potential annual surplus of £36,800.

  39. There are no staffing implications for resulting from these proposals for County Council staff. However Control Plus may have to employ additional staff to carry out the enforcement within the proposed zone.

    40. RECOMMENDATIONS

  40. The Executive is RECOMMENDED to:

          1. not to proceed with the original proposals which were advertised between 15 October 2001 and 5 November 2001;

          2. authorise:

            1. consultation with residents on Community Management Parking as described in the report; and

            2. publication of a draft order for the Headington Residents’ Parking Zone as described in the report and shown on Plan No. HM 721/A0/0021 Rev A and HM721/A0/0022 Rev A, subject to such modifications as appear to the Director for Environment & Economy to be appropriate in the light of responses to the consultation referred to in (a)(1) above.

RICHARD DIX
Assistant Director (Highway Management)

Background papers: Nil

Contact Officer:
Richard Kingshott Tel 01865 815716; Stephen Axtell Tel 01865 815967

April 2003

Return to TOP