Agenda item

Forward Plan Ref: 2020/090

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Community Operations (Interim) (CMDE7).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation on a proposal to introduce and amend waiting restrictions on Browning Drive, Bicester where parking - in particular by commuters – is resulting in road safety and access problems for residents.  The proposals were considered at the Cabinet Member for Environment delegated decisions meeting on 21 May as part of a larger group of proposed waiting restrictions in Bicester which had been put forward following discussions and site meetings with officers and the local members. While the other proposals were approved at that meeting, a decision on the proposals for Browning Drive and Kingsley Road was deferred to allow further investigation and investigation.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the proposed waiting restrictions on Browning Drive and Kingsley Road as advertised.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered a report (CMDE7) presenting responses received to a statutory consultation on a proposal to introduce and amend waiting restrictions on Browning Drive, Bicester where parking - in particular by commuters – is resulting in road safety and access problems for residents.  The proposals had been considered at the Cabinet Member for Environment delegated decisions meeting on 21 May as part of a larger group of proposed waiting restrictions in Bicester which had been put forward following discussions and site meetings with officers and the local members and while the other proposals had been approved at that meeting, a decision on the proposals for Browning Drive and Kingsley Road had been deferred to allow further investigation.

County Councillor Les Sibley considered the need for on street parking restrictions in Browning Drive, Bunyan Roadand Kingsley Road in Bicester as urgent as it was patently evident that inconsiderate and dangerous parking of vehicles at the T junctions created a hazardous and dangerous situation for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. The report stated that an objection had been received that the parking restrictions would adversely affect residential parking in Kingsley Road but he pointed out that there were no residential parking facilities in this road.   The CO-OP HGV vehicle which delivered twice a day to the local store was an ongoing traffic and parking issue that needed to be resolved as the vehicle when it parked by the bus stop/post box in Kingsley Road to load and off load blocked the entrance to either the car park at the front of the shops or the car park to the rear. This ongoing situation was a potential safety hazard for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. Drivers of local buses had also complained about inconsiderate and dangerous parking of vehicles at both T junctions as it caused visibility and other safety issues. Thames Valley Police had not objected indicating that without traffic restrictions in place they were unlikely to prosecute an offending motorist. Bicester Town Council supported the traffic regulations requesting that yellow lines are enforced. Local Bicester Town and County Councillors also supported the proposal.

He understood the concerns from some residents that introduction of double yellow lines might lead to issues of displaced parking and should the recommendation be agreed then a review should be undertaken following completion of the signage and lines to address any issues that might arise. 

Rachael Shaer a resident of Browning Drive expressed concern over a fundamental error in regard to the Browning Drive Waiting Restriction Proposal as it stated that ‘The proposal was to introduce and amend waiting restrictions on Browning Drive where parking – in particular by commuters – is resulting in road safety and access problems by residents.’  That was not true and was very misleading as there was no commuter parking! Commuter parking insinuated cars were parked all day whereas the parking that happened in the proposed area on Browning Drive was all short term.  She added that she had seen no evidence of effective consultation with residents or further investigations with regard to these proposals since the last meeting, which is what she had been led to believe would happen.

As she had stated previously at the May meeting she objected strongly to these waiting restrictions. There were no houses directly impacted at present whereas by introducing the restrictions many houses and families would most certainly be. If this went ahead then cars which cannot access Harts Vet small car park would then not be able to park short term where they currently do in the proposed waiting restriction zone. She agreed that was near the junction but the junction was very wide with good vision and provided ample parking on a long stretch of road by the vets and a fenced/grass area and caused no obstructions. She reiterated that it had taken many years of communication with the vets to encourage their customers to park away from residents’ houses further down the road and we had endured years of blocked driveways, restricted access and not being able to park outside our own homes. If this proposal went ahead then we would not only be back to square one but worse. As well as access to her own and her neighbours’ properties being affected she was extremely concerned regarding her disabled parents who lived almost opposite the vet and the problems this would cause them and their carers needing clear access multiple times daily as well as ambulance access as needed.

In conclusion, all these restrictions would do is move and increase parking issues with local residents further up the road where the cars who could not park in the proposed zone just moving further up the road to cause access and safety issues to a great many more people than was happening now. She stressed again the negative impact these waiting restrictions would have on her, her family and the local neighbourhood.

The Cabinet Member thanked Councillor Sibley and Mrs Shaer for their presentations.  She asked what form had the further consultation taken and why had Mrs Shaer been unaware of what had been carried out.

Officers responded that there had been no further full consultation and information remained as set out in the report submitted to the May meeting. However, officers had been back on site with road safety officers during which it had been observed that the junction had been blocked requiring cars turning right having to cross over the lane.

The Cabinet Member accepted this was a standard double yellow line proposal at a junction which she considered appeared dangerous. Therefore, having regard to the information set out in the report and the representations made to her at the meeting she confirmed her decision to approve but having regard to the concerns expressed to her by the resident asked for a review and report back after 6 months to see if the proposal was working satisfactorily.

to approve the proposed waiting restrictions on Browning Drive and Kingsley Road as advertised with a reviewafter 6 months with report back to the Cabinet Member for Environment.

Signed……………………………….

Cabinet Member for Environment

Date of singing………………………