Agenda item

Forward Plan Ref: 2014/031

Contact: Jim Daughton, Service Manager – Delivery Tel: (01865) 323364

Report by Deputy Director for Environment & Economy – Commercial & Delivery (CMDE5).

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered objections received to a formal consultation on proposals to introduce two new disabled persons’ parking places in Charlbury and noted comments in support of the proposals received from Amanda Epps a resident of Charlbury and County Councillor Rodney Rose the local member.  Both had been tabled with the published addenda.

David Moyes a resident of Browns Lane, Charlbury for 15 years objected to the proposal to install a space outside the Co-operative supermarket. The parking situation in this area of Charlbury had steadily worsened in recent years due in part to the opening of the Co-operative supermarket which had created a high demand for on-street parking from early morning into the evening 7 days a week which took up spaces previously used by residents despite space available in the shop car park and also to parking restrictions on Dyers Hill. Introduced to solve commuter parking issues they had displaced that problem elsewhere with commuters choosing to park for free rather than pay at the station car park where there was often space available. The installation of the current disabled parking space in Pooles Lane, seemingly positioned with no logical thought had also removed a space regularly used by residents. That space seemed rarely to be used by disabled motorists but was often used by able bodied motorists.  This pressure on parking meant that residents were often unable to park near their homes and he was loathe to use the Co-op car park because of vandalism issues. He urged that the interests of local residents be taken into account and that this proposal, certainly in its present form, not proceed while also undertaking a review of the need for the current disabled persons parking space in Pooles Lane.

Debbie Reeves also a resident Browns Lane for 15 years endorsed the comments of the previous speaker. She questioned the view of county officers that the new disabled parking bay addressed the needs of the more disabled users of the supermarket as the road outside the Co-op was narrow, busy with fast moving traffic and not conducive to use by severely disabled people. She referred to problems experienced by a disabled driver in her family, who had been unable to get out of his car in that space on that road. That appeared to be a common difficulty for disabled people who did not walk well, used two sticks and needed to open their car door at full width which presented a risk of falling between car and the kerb.  All of this took a great deal of time and under severe pressure from other vehicles using that road and personal stress from blocking other vehicles or even pedestrians on a narrow pavement. None of that seemed fair or safe for a disabled person.  Therefore, the space under consideration was only useful for disabled people who moved relatively well. This spot might be nearer the entrance, but it wasn’t fit for the purpose that people seem to want to achieve, which was to give access to a shop. She questioned the logic behind the premiss that the proposal had been to enable access to a shop. Charlbury had two supermarkets and access to the other supermarket on “Five Ways” offered the same amenity as the Co-op, with comparable range, convenient opening hours and proprietors who were entirely helpful but with less pressure on residents’ parking as the houses in that area had driveways and the road and pavement was wider there. Significantly, there was also safer parking directly outside the shop in off-road parking bays. She considered the proposals to change arrangements outside the Co-op did not take an overview of the town, as claimed, and she was unhappy at the way the Charlbury Town Council had reached its decision with seemingly with little regard for some of its residents. Its decision on a similar disabled bay near to her home back in the 2000’s had been a bad decision and the County Council were now being asked to agree to yet another. It was not only bad for residents but also bad for mobility impaired people which made it a nonsense. She asked that the proposal be rejected.

Mr Ruse agreed that the proposed space outside the Co-operative was not a perfect location and would compress the parking available for residents. It also presented some access difficulties for disabled users but anywhere else would be to far away.  He agreed that he had rarely seen the space on Pooles Lane used but the Town Council were of the opinion that it was needed and he understood they would object to any proposal to have it removed.

Mr Tole advised that a disabled space as proposed would be useful for visitors to the supermarket as the designated disabled spaces to the rear of the shop did not offer the same convenience.  He agreed Dyers Hill had created problems elsewhere but a residents parking scheme was not an option.  There was potential for a compromise to reduce the space on Browns Lane from 2 spaces to one and for further consultation on the removal of the space on Pooles Hill.

Having regard to the arguments and options set out in the documentation before him and the representations made to him the Cabinet Member for Environment confirmed his decision as follows:

(a)       approve the proposed disabled persons’ parking place on Market Street, Charlbury as advertised;

(b)       defer the proposal to introduce a disabled persons’ parking place on Browns Lane until the 24 July meeting to enable further consultation.

…………………………………………….

Cabinet Member for Environment

…………………………………………2014