DOWNEND Waiting Restriction Review Phase 1 - Consultation ... · single yellow lines. It is...

1

Nigel Riglar

Director for Environment and Community Services

Streetcare, Transport and Waste, Design & Operations Team, P O Box 1954, Bristol, BS37 0DD

Tel: 01454 868004 E-mail: [email protected]

www.southglos.gov.uk

DOWNEND – Waiting Restriction Review – Phase 1 - Consultation Feedback Report

Purpose of the report This report is to feedback the results from the consultation on the proposed waiting restrictions in the vicinity of Downend. Background Requests have been received by residents in the Downend ward to review the current waiting restrictions. Proposed Scheme As the Downend ward is a large area to cover, it has been agreed to split the review into 3 phases, (phases 1, 2 & 3) and this particular consultation is focusing on phase 1. The following roads will be affected:

Badminton Road

Buckingham Gardens

Buckingham Place

Carpenters Shop Lane

Christchurch Avenue

Christchurch Lane

Church View

Croomes Hill

Dial Lane

Downend Road

Edmund Close

Hill House Road

Longden Road

North Street

Overndale Road

Overnhill Court

Overnhill Road

Park Road

Peache Road

Salisbury Gardens

Salisbury Road

Sunridge Drawing Reference Drawing number T304-681-003 shows an overview plan of the existing restrictions and T304-681-010 shows an overview plan of the proposed restrictions. Consultation The consultation took place for 3 weeks between 1st October 2019 and 22nd October 2019. Details of the proposals, including a plan and statement of reasons were posted on the South Gloucestershire website. The Council sent postcards advising of the consultation to properties affected by the proposals. In addition, notices were posted and maintained in the area for the 3 week consultation period. Local

mailto:[email protected]

2

Nigel Riglar





members, the Parish Council and the emergency services, amongst other statutory stakeholders were invited by email to view the consultation.

Feedback from the consultation The online consultation drawing, which showed an overview plan of the proposed waiting restrictions was viewed a total of 73 times. There were 70 individuals and organisations in total that responded to the consultation via the questionnaire. The comments received as part of the consultation have now been reviewed. Figures 1 – 5 show the results of the questionnaire responses.

The respondents were asked whether they supported the scheme as a whole, the results for this question are shown in figure 1.

Figure1:

The respondents were asked whether they agreed with the proposed limited waiting bays in various locations. The results for this question are shown in figure 2.

Figure 2:


3

Nigel Riglar





The respondents were asked whether they agreed with the proposed double yellow lines in various locations. The results for this question are shown in figure 3.

Figure 3:

0 2 4 6 8 10

Downend Rd/ The Willows

Buckingham Gdns


Christchurch Ave

Christchurch Lane N

Christchurch Lane S

Croomes Hill

Dial Lane

Edmund Close

Hill Hse Rd

North Street

Overndale Rd

Overnhill Ct

Overnhill Rd

Park Rd/Salisbury Gdns

Peache Rd

Salisbury Rd/Longden Rd

Sunridge

Do you agree with the length of proposed double yellow lines at...?

I don't know

The double yellow lines should belonger

The double yellow lines should beshorter

Yes

I do not agree with the proposeddouble yellow lines at all


4

Nigel Riglar





The respondents were asked whether they agreed with the proposed single yellow lines and times of operation in various locations. The results for this question are shown in figures 4 and 5. Figure 4:

Figure 5:

The comments received as part of the consultation have now been reviewed. The comments/concerns received via the online questionnaire are in Appendix A. No other comments have been received.

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Buckingham Place

Christchurch Avenue

Overnhill Road

Do you agree with the times of operation for the proposed single yellow lines at…?

I don't know

No

Yes, I agree with the single yellow lines, but not the times specified

Yes

0

2

4

6

8

10

Buckingham Place Christchurch Avenue Overnhill Road

Do you agree with the length of the proposed single yellow lines at…?

Yes

The single yellow lines should be shorter

The single yellow lines should be longer

I do not agree with the single yellow lines at all

I don't know


5

Nigel Riglar





Future Programme The results from the questionnaire show that the majority of respondents were not in support of the scheme as a whole, however many respondents supported the proposals in certain locations and were in favour of introducing waiting restrictions. The following roads will be advanced to the next stage with no further amendments to the original proposals:

Badminton Road

Buckingham Gardens


Christchurch Lane

Croomes Hill

Dial Lane

Downend Road

Edmund Close

North Street

Overndale Road

Overnhill Court

Park Road

Peache Road

Sunridge

Woodlands Rise The following roads will advance to the next stage with the following amendments:

Buckingham Place – This road will be subject to a second consultation due to comments raised in the initial consultation. Proposal drawings will be able to be viewed once the consultation opens.

Christchurch Avenue – Respondents were divided with regards to being in support of or against the proposed double yellow lines. Following comments raised in the initial consultation, it is proposed to proceed to the legal advertisement stage with the double yellow lines, however the proposed single yellow lines will be abandoned from the proposals as respondents did not agree with the length or times of operation.

Church View – The school keep clear markings will be included in the second consultation with regards to prescribed times of operation. Proposal drawings will be able to be viewed once the consultation opens.

Hill House Road – The majority of respondents agreed that the length of double yellow lines should be longer at this junction, therefore proposals will be extended and forwarded to the legal advertisement stage.

Longden Road – Following issues raised in the initial consultation, proposals will be extended and forwarded to the legal advertisement stage.

Overnhill Road - The majority of respondents disagreed with the proposed double yellow and single yellow lines. It is proposed to remove the proposed sections of single yellow lines and extend the double yellow lines by 2.5m either side of the entrance, eliminating the need for intrusive signs and reaching a solution that we are hopeful will satisfy the residents of both William Court and Overnhill Road. This will ensure that the section of highway is kept clear at all times to improve visibility, whilst reducing the initial proposed area subject to restrictions. These proposals will be forwarded to the legal advertisement stage.


6

Nigel Riglar





Salisbury Gardens – The majority of respondents agreed that the double yellow lines should be extended, therefore proposals have been amended to extend the double yellow lines to the property boundary between 2 & 4 Salisbury Gardens and forwarded to the legal advertisement stage.

Salisbury Road – The majority of respondents agreed that the length of double yellow lines should be longer at this junction, therefore proposals will be extended and forwarded to the legal advertisement stage.

During the 3 week advertisement period, notices will be placed in the local paper and on street in the affected roads. Details of the proposals will also be published on the Council’s website, giving people an opportunity to formally object to or support the proposed scheme. Depending on the outcome of the advertisement, it is anticipated that works will commence on site shortly after the Traffic Regulation Order has been signed and sealed. However, if objections are received during the advertisement stage, the Council will be required to consider objections in a report before reaching a decision.

Appendix A

Comments received at Consultation via the online questionnaire

Officer’s response

Badminton Road – Proposed LW bays, relocation of disabled bay and proposed double yellow lines.

No comments received

Buckingham Gardens – Proposed double yellow lines

Many of the clinic patients are often unable to park as the library car park is always full between the hours of 9 and 4. If it would be possible to covert the land beside the clinic to parking this would help the clinic and library greatly. Also, if Buckingham Gardens Day Nursery were given permission to use more it the land at the front of the building as parking for staff and parents there would be less cars parked on the nearby roads. While I understand that it is with the intention to encourage other modes of transport, many heavily pregnant women and people with young children would find it incredibly difficult to travel any other way than by car.

Thank you for your comments. Converting the land beside the clinic to accommodate extra parking is beyond the remit and budget available for this scheme.

Buckingham Place – Proposed LW Bays & Single yellow lines

The customers of The Foresters pub use Buckingham Place as a car park. They are frequently loud and rowdy

Thank you for your comments.

Key: The comments are colour coded according to Figure 1 on page 2. All comments with red stripes to their left indicate that the respondent did not support the scheme. All comments with green stripes to their left indicate that the respondent did support the scheme. All comments with blue stripes to their left indicate that the respondent didn’t know if they supported the scheme.


7

Nigel Riglar





after an evening in the pub with no regard for residents in the street who are trying to sleep. I think more restrictions are needed to discourage this behaviour at unsocial hours.

Waiting restrictions are not used to resolve anti-social behaviour.

As a resident [information redacted for data protection] without private parking I feel it should be noted that the current hours restricting parking on the street don't fit with a traditional working week and also don't allow anyone to visit the street for more than 1 hour even on a Saturday. I suggest parking be permitted for up to 2 hours between 9am and 5pm Monday to Friday in bays rather than up to 1hr between 8am and 6pm Monday to Saturday. I suggest parking on single yellows be restricted between 9am to 5pm Monday to Friday instead of between 8am and 6pm Monday to Saturday. Most people work 8-4 or 9-5 Mon-Fri and the average commute is 45 minutes. With the current hours restricting parking on Buckingham Place you need to leave for work by 8am but might not need to leave until 8:45am and if you get home at 4:30pm you can't park up for the night until 6pm. As someone living with multiple sclerosis it can be difficult to have to park 3+ streets away from home because I got back from work too early. Reducing the current restrictions on parking should make ample improvement for the majority of people living here now and in the future. At least 90% of properties on Buckingham Place have driveways and or garages, but most can not accommodate the additional vehicle of a visitor. With the current restrictions on parking a residents visitor can only spend 1 hour with them. If they've driven from London, Wales or Devon that's half the time they spent getting here in the first place. As most social calls happen on a weekend it would benefit both visitors and residents to be free from parking restrictions on weekends. As most residents would be at work Mon-Fri it would benefit visitors and businesses on the nearby high street if parking was permitted for up to 2 hrs instead of 1 without having a detrimental effect on residents. I fully support increasing the amount of parking bays and single yellow lines on Buckingham Place. Buckingham Place is wide enough to park cars on both sides of the street without causing too much disruption to through traffic but an increase in parked cars could slow moving vehicles down enough to reduce the amount of speeding we experience here which would make the road safer and quieter for everyone.

Thank you for your comments. The limited waiting bays are restricted to an hour as this allows a regular turnover and enables other motorists to use these parking spaces. An additional 20m of limited waiting parking was proposed in the initial consultation, which would have in turn allowed visitors or residents to park outside of the prescribed posted hours. Respondents were against this therefore this particular location will be subject to a second consultation to address requests from the initial consultation.

This proposal is an absolute farce and will make it completely impossible for me and my wife [information redacted for data protection] to park our cars in the road in which we live. This will also have a significant impact on the value of our property and will essentially

Thank you for your comments. The proposal drawings show Buckingham Place, near the junction with Westerleigh


8

Nigel Riglar





make it completely impossible to sell in the future. This proposal is a clear and obvious attempt to drive extra revenue in the form of handing out more parking tickets and at no point has it taken into consideration residents of the street itself. The only people who currently use the time restricted bays are shoppers in Downend centre. Where there is a plethora of free parking. This is of no benefit for public safety reasons which leads me to the above conclusion that you are merely trying to generate more income through fines and do not actually care about residents that pay council tax directly to you.

Road, the current restrictions remain unchanged. An additional 20m of limited waiting parking was proposed in the initial consultation, which would have in turn allowed visitors or residents to park outside of the prescribed posted hours. Respondents were against this therefore this particular location will be subject to a second consultation to address requests from the initial consultation.

As a homeowner without a driveway the current restrictions already make it difficult to park after work and usually end up parking streets away. The expansion of limited bays are a good idea but the times appear unrealistic to benefit users who live on the street going to and from work. Those who start work later or finish earlier would struggle to benefit from the available spaces, I would propose restriction times more in the range of 9/10am - 4/5pm to account for people's different schedules. that way there would be adequate spaces for people who live on the street to park for the evening. Ideally I would fully support a parking permit scheme so that I could park on my street, however as I am one of the few without a driveway this wouldn't be beneficial for the council to implement so would only ask that consideration be taken for those us that don't have the luxury of an off road parking space when making your decisions.

Thank you for your comments. The proposals included converting no waiting at any time restrictions into limited waiting bays, which would have provided extra parking, however respondents were against this. Due to the responses received regarding the proposals for Buckingham Place, the proposals will be reviewed and a second consultation will take place in the near future. Unfortunately, residents parking is beyond the remit and budget of the scheme, plus the criteria for residents parking would not be met on this road.

We have a dropped kerb which should allow us to park outside our home. We have young children and to park away from the house and cross this very fast road, is too unsafe. Please use the money for better crossing of the double roundabout.

Thank you for your comments. At present, there are limited waiting bays on the western side of Buckingham Place, which causes conflict between residents and shoppers and other motorists who choose to park in these spaces. Providing motorists are not causing an obstruction, they are permitted to park in these locations. This in turn prevents residents from parking on their driveways during the day, however, the proposals included single yellow lines to keep driveways clear for residents to have access, and park in front of their drives outside of the prescribed hours. Limited waiting bays were proposed on the eastern side of the road to accommodate visitors, however these proposals were rejected.


9

Nigel Riglar





This road will be subject to its own consultation.

I am unable to understand in any of your details what the benefits are or how this would improve the situation/street or most importantly to me the safety of those on our street. This is a extremely busy and fast road and as a mother of 2 young children where I cross the road by foot daily on the school run and use my car Daily I do not see the benefits, unless this is purely to make money, how does it really benefit those that actually live on the street? You say it's to look at parking issues, what are these issues Please and how have they been reported to you, can we see evidence of this? As when we had parking restrictions before outside our house (only a year two ago) we had MORE issues then than we do now and even the parking wardens (who we got to know very well as they were up and down our road daily,) said it was a hassle due to the number of drop kerbs and things are better now! they also mentioned all we could do was to report parking problems to the police (not yourselves) and I think the police have more pressing issues to deal with!!!! On a personal matter I am a resident of BP I have a drop kerb and I feel access to my house/drive should not be restricted without personal discussion to explain purpose and benefits better As this is not what I was aware of when I purchased our property. Will this effect our house price??? I feel there are many users of the road who park on the street to access the shops and pubs and you should consider targeting this more and penalising them for not using the free car park than targeting residents. Maybe reduce the waiting time in the 3 parking spaces by westerleigh road? Why not offer residents Access/parking permits so we can ensure we get priority over shoppers and pub users who won't pay to park in the pub car park! Why not look more at speed ramps and the safety of this road and safe crossing than making money from it! Please consider reviewing this restricted parking scheme and look carefully at your reasons for doing so and the benefits it will have on its residents! Thank you

Thank you for your comments. There have been over 60 requests to address parking issues in the Downend Area. Requests are not published to adhere to General Data Protection Regulations. At present, there are limited waiting bays on the western side of Buckingham Place, which causes conflict between residents and shoppers and other motorists who choose to park in these spaces. Providing motorists are not causing an obstruction, they are permitted to park in these locations. This in turn prevents residents from parking on their driveways during the day, however, the proposals included single yellow lines to keep driveways clear for residents to have access, and park in front of their drives outside of the prescribed hours. An additional 20m of limited waiting bays were proposed on the eastern side of Buckingham Place in the initial consultation. This would have in turn allowed visitors or residents to park outside of the prescribed posted hours. Respondents were against this therefore this particular location will be subject to a second consultation to address requests from the initial consultation. Residents parking is beyond the remit of the scheme, plus the criteria for residents parking would not be met on this road.

I fail to understand what the purpose and benefit of this is for residents of the area or in fact like me a regular visitor. I help my family (the grandchildren) with school runs and childcare and visit on a nearly daily basis. I park on the road outside their house/driveway (they have a drop kerb) but understand I would not be able to if you went ahead with these plans. Why would you want to restrict this or block me and others from doing so? It has to be purely to make money from us. Could we not have parking permits for residents and their families if you are adamant on this scheme as my wife would not be able to walk from the library car park; if not please consider

Thank you for your comments. The western side of Buckingham Place is subject to limited waiting bays. These bays are currently across driveways, which ultimately means all motorists can park in these bays providing they are not causing an obstruction. The proposals show single yellow lines to keep driveways clear for residents to have


10

Nigel Riglar





spending money on reducing the speed of road users and safety of crossing the near by double roundabout.thank you

access, and park in front of their drives outside of the prescribed hours. An additional 20m of limited waiting bays were proposed on the eastern side of Buckingham Place in the initial consultation. This would have in turn allowed visitors or residents to park outside of the prescribed posted hours. Respondents were against this therefore this particular location will be subject to a second consultation to address requests from the initial consultation. Residents parking is beyond the remit of the scheme, plus the criteria for residents parking would not be met on this road.

As a homeowner without a driveway the current restrictions already make it difficult to park after work and usually end up parking streets away. The expansion of limited bays are a good idea but the times appear unrealistic to benefit users who live on the street going to and from work. Those who start work later or finish earlier would struggle to benefit from the available spaces, I would propose restriction times more in the range of 9/10am - 4/5pm to account for people's different schedules. that way there would be adequate spaces for people who live on the street to park for the evening. Ideally I would fully support a parking permit scheme so that I could park on my street, however as I am one of the few without a driveway this wouldn't be beneficial for the council to implement so would only ask that consideration be taken for those us that don't have the luxury of an off road parking space when making your decisions.

Thank you for your comments. The proposals included converting no waiting at any time restrictions into limited waiting bays, which would have provided extra parking, however respondents were against this. Due to the responses received regarding the proposals for Buckingham Place, the proposals will be reviewed and a second consultation will take place in the near future. Unfortunately, residents parking is beyond the remit and budget of the scheme, plus the criteria for residents parking would not be met on this road.

Carpenters Shop Lane – Proposed double yellow lines at the junction with Downend Road

No comments received

Christchurch Avenue – Proposed single and double yellow lines.

Rather than having all these restrictions in the Christchurch Lane/Avenue area, it would be safer to convert it to a one-way system, and allow parking on one side of the street at all times. This would improve safety for the school children (all traffic would be going the same way, and drivers would be concentrating on the road ahead and looking out for pedestrians, without having to reverse because of oncoming traffic in a very narrow road).

Thank you for your comments. Converting Christchurch Lane/Avenue to a one-way system is beyond the remit of this scheme. One way systems generally result in vehicles travelling faster because they no longer have to allow for meeting oncoming vehicles. Higher vehicle speeds within close proximity of a school would be counterproductive.


11

Nigel Riglar





Downend Road by the Duck and Willow/Cricket Club. There is not enough parking here for customers and residents (6 parking spaces only, for 17 houses, the pub, the cricket club, the church, the barbers and the hairdressers). This leads to lots of dangerous and illegal parking during the day, with vehicles parked on the pavements and delivery vehicles for the businesses blocking the pavements, so that children and disabled people are having to walk in the road, which is dangerous as it is a busy A-road. My suggestion is that parking should be allowed on the stretch of Downend Road OPPOSITE the Duck and Willow during the daytime, from Christchurch Lane to Carpenters Lane, excluding the church and cricket club entrances, with single or double yellow lines on the other side of the road.

It is not always effective to remove single yellow lines, especially in this location. It is a traffic sensitive route whereby the flow of traffic will be impeded and may cause an inconvenience for motorists during peak hours. This in turn may encourage erratic driving habits and increase speeds for the road as vehicles try to manoeuvre around parked vehicles. Parking is permitted opposite the Duck and Willow pub outside of the prescribed hours as displayed on the signs.

Although I have a drop kerb both delivery drivers and school run parents block my driveway by parking across ot on the pavement which also causes pedestrians to walk in the road to get past. I consider this dangerous parking considering the proximity to Christchurch Infants school. I would appreciate double yellow lines to prevent it.

Thank you for your comments. Double yellow lines can be installed in the location requested, therefore they will be added to the proposals for the next stage.

Numbers1 to 8 do not have any off road parking. The road is too narrow to park on both sides of the road. It is a quiet road apart from school drop off and pick up. To take out the proposed parking spaces will adversely affect the residents of the road and no one else. This is a pointless change in this road. Please do not take away my parking .


Christchurch Avenue has a large number of families, who are mostly car owners, but also want their children to walk and play safely on the street. At the moment there are far too many cars parked on this road, and not all belonging to residents. The corner of Christchurch Avenue and Christchurch Lane can be difficult to navigate on foot and bicycle due to the parked vehicles. The pavement is very narrow, and not suitable for double buggies. Parents with non-standard buggies have to use the road. The major parking problem occurs at school drop off/pick up times, and when there are events on at the nearby Church or Cricket Club. Parents walking their children between the Infants school and Junior school have a very difficult route because of parked vehicles and the speed of traffic. There is a problem of pavement parking too. If parking is reduced at the current physical pinch points people will drive faster along the street, thus making it less safe for pedestrians, cyclists, and children who may be playing out. Reducing parking will be beneficial in someways, but there could be other unintended consequences.

Thank you for your comments. The responses were split with regards to being in favour of the proposed double yellow lines and not supporting the double yellow lines at all. The second highest majority agreed that the double yellow lines should be longer and based on these results, the decision has been made to proceed to the advert stage with the proposed double yellow lines in this location. With regards to the proposed single yellow lines, the majority of respondents did not agree with the proposed length, or times of operation, therefore, the decision has been made not to proceed with the single yellow lines in this location.


12

Nigel Riglar





I am concerned that current parking would make it very difficult for emergency services to access the road in the event of a house fire


As a resident of [information redacted for data protection] we have seen increasing amounts of dangerous and irresponsible parking on the yellow zig zag lines outside [information redacted for data protection]. Drivers frequently park irresponsibly blocking the entrance to our private car park and obstructing the front of my house and making it dangerous for children walking to Christchurch Infants School opposite our house and Christchurch Junior School at the end of the road. We would welcome stricter parking restrictions and a parking attendant monitoring the new restrictions once they are in place. It is a narrow street with many of our neighbours driving bigger 4x4 vehicles which they park in the street and the current zig zag lines have faded along the road.

Thank you for your comments. The current school keep clear zig zags have been refreshed to comply with current regulations prior to the waiting restrictions being implemented. The Councils Parking Services Team will be informed of the new restrictions and will be able to enforce them as and when needed. Double yellow lines have been proposed to cover the entrance to the private car park to alleviate the issue of inconsiderate parking and aid visibility for safe access and egress.

I do not agree with the implementation of single yellow lines on Christchurch Avenue. If this is enforced there will be extremely limited parking for the residents who live on Christchurch Avenue. Many of whom do not have off street parking. I do not see how the 8-6pm no waiting rule will be of benefit to anyone. As the issues with parking are only during school drop offs and pick ups from school for approximately 10 minutes twice a day. Other than these times there are no issues with dangerous of inconsiderate parking on Christchurch Avenue. The dangerous and inconsiderate parking is caused by parking at school times on the existing yellow zig zags line, illegally parking on pavements and illegally double parking on both side of the streets. None of which will be stopped by introduction of additional and new restrictions. As the current restrictions are not enforced the parents dropping of at school times who cause the issues will simply continue to illegally park on the proposed yellow lines during drop-off/pick-ups and take the risk that the restrictions will not be enforced. Instead, these proposals will leave the residents who live on the street having to face restrictions on where they can park for the entire period 8am to 6pm. [information redacted for data protection] and need to access my house from my car at multiple times during the day for various different reasons. Me and my family will be negatively impacted by these changes and I struggle to understand the reasons behind them. I strongly oppose them and would like further consultation on these proposals. I would suggest that the existing school markings are re-painted as these are very unclear and are enforced. If there is further concern about parking on Christchurch Avenue then residents parking should be implemented.

Thank you for your comments. Access for larger vehicles is limited during the day at Christchurch Lane/Avenue, due to vehicles parked along the road and many vehicles have to mount the kerb to pass. The single yellow lines aim to provide access during the day, and out of the prescribed hours, residents are able to park on the single yellow lines. The current school keep clear zig zags have been re-marked to obey current regulations prior to the implementation of the waiting restrictions and will be enforced by the councils Parking Enforcement team as and when required. The Councils Parking Services Team will be informed of the new restrictions and will be able to enforce them as and when needed. The overall majority of responses received agreed that double yellow lines were needed in Christchurch Ave. Based on these results, the decision has been made to go ahead with the proposed double yellow lines in this location. Regarding the proposed single yellow lines, the majority of respondents did not agree with the proposed length, or times of operation. Furthermore, the decision has been made to not proceed with the single yellow lines in this location. Residents parking is beyond the remit of the scheme, plus the criteria for residents parking would not be met on this road.


13

Nigel Riglar





You do not make it clear in the questionaire whether you intend to put double yellow lines in the Avenue and Lane or single yellow lines. The map also states the colour to be green? My opinion if you should have a single line at the proposed narrow part of Christchurch Avenue it will be fine for the day, but is is equally busy in the evenings, which would also prevent emergency services reaching the houses on the narrow section. I think there should be double yellow lines there and not single.

Thank you for your comments. The key on the proposal drawing explains the restrictions. As shown on the plan, single yellow lines are displayed in green, and proposed double yellow lines are in a bolder red. The single yellow lines allow for residents to park outside of the prescribed hours. The majority of respondents did not support the proposed single yellow lines, however the proposals for the double yellow lines will advance to the next stage.

As a street we DO NOT want the "No Waiting "restrictions put on the road. We know it's busy from 8.45am - 9am and 3pm -3.15pm when parents are dropping off/ picking up children at the school. By putting these waiting restrictions it penalizes the residents for the sake of 20-30mins each end of the day. It would mean that some residents would have to move their cars before 8am and not return before 6pm and with the consultation including the surrounding roads too, there will be nowhere to park between these times. The proposed double yellow lines as marked on the consultation would be a great benefit to our street Hopefully these will stop school parents parking on the bends, blocking vision of pedestrians crossing the road for the school PLEASE PLEASE DO NOT RESTRICT PARKING DURING 8am AND 6pm FOR THE RESIDENTS

Thank you for your comments. It is very difficult to link waiting restrictions to school hours such as the suggested 8.45am – 9am and 3.00 - 3.15pm respectively, as these would be enforceable outside of term hours, which can be more problematic. Having term time only restrictions is very difficult to manage as these can change from year to year. Traffic sign regulations do not allow us to use the words “Term time only” on signs. The majority of respondents chose that they did not agree with the proposed single yellow lines or the times of operation proposed, therefore these will be removed from the proposals in this location.

My only concern is that because of restrictions/proposed restrictions on Downend Road and Christchurch Avenue, Christchurch Lane will continue to be a car park full of cars belonging to non-residents of Christchurch Lane.

Thank you for your comments

I do not believe that removing parking spaces from this road would be beneficial. There are areas of the road which are narrower which mean that it can be a little tighter to fit past the parked cars - but at worst this acts as a traffic calming measure, ensuing cars travel slowly and safety. This is an avenue, and the majority of traffic and parked vehicles are from the residents. There is the exception of during school rush in which parents drop off/pick up children. Which is a different problem altogether. I believe if parking was replaced with single yellow lines we would see a dramatic increase in this school traffic during the rush waiting at these areas idleling car engines waiting for their children. Which I do not think would be a good idea for the local air quality.

Thank you for your comments. The responses were split with regards to being in favour of the proposed double yellow lines and not supporting the double yellow lines at all. The second highest majority agreed that the double yellow lines should be longer and based on these results, the decision has been made to go ahead with the proposed double yellow lines in this location. With regards to the proposed single yellow lines, the majority of respondents did not agree with the proposed length, or times of operation, therefore, the decision has been


14

Nigel Riglar





As it stands I think there are just about enough parking spaces for the residents of the road. Removing as many as this proposal is suggesting would likely lead to these cars having to find neighbouring streets to park on. I count at least 14 houses without off street parking in this area and with the proposed changes would leave fewer than 10 spaces. I would expect many of these households to have more than one car - in addition even those with driveways often park on street. Personally I believe there must be alternatives that do not drastically reduce the number of parking spaces.

made not to proceed with the single yellow lines in this location.

This proposal will affect me on a daily basis. I appreciate that there is a wider concern, and that provision should be made for safer conditions, for everybody who lives and works here. The school and the nearby doctor's surgery put extra pressure on parking and accessibility, and perhaps measures need to be taken - but I do not just live in my house at night. [information redacted for data protection] and so do many of my neighbours. There is no alternative parking for residents, and these houses are family homes that should remain family homes, accessible to modern day living. Would it be possible to introduce a residential parking scheme instead? To be clear, I object in the strongest possible terms to these proposals, which to my mind and in this instance solve very little, while creating enormous difficulties for your residents.

Thank you for your comments. The responses were split with regards to being in favour of the proposed double yellow lines and not supporting the double yellow lines at all. The second highest majority agreed that the double yellow lines should be longer and based on these results, the decision has been made to go ahead with the proposed double yellow lines in this location. With regards to the proposed single yellow lines, the majority of respondents did not agree with the proposed length, or times of operation, therefore, the decision has been made not to proceed with the single yellow lines in this location. A resident permit scheme was not offered as the Council policy is to offer a permit scheme when “Normally, 50% of dwellings have no off street parking, i.e. a garage and/or driveway available for one or more vehicles”. (The term “Normally” was inserted so that in the event that an area falls just above the 50% it could still be considered.)

[information redacted for data protection] and we need easy access to our car,there are 12 houses in our avenue requiring street parking.School staffwho are not allowed in the grounds need to park.We are already used as an overflow park for cricket.doctorsand funerals.Extending the no waiting zone will only send cars to our area. No waiting should be restricted to the 2 entances of Christchurch Avenue and Christchurch Lane. A better scheme would be residents only parking.

Thank you for your comments. Residents parking is beyond the remit and the budget of the scheme. The responses were split with regards to being in favour of the proposed double yellow lines and not supporting the double yellow lines at all. The second highest majority agreed that the double yellow lines should be longer and based on these results, the decision has been made to proceed to the advert


15

Nigel Riglar





stage with the proposed double yellow lines in this location. With regards to the proposed single yellow lines, the majority of respondents did not agree with the proposed length, or times of operation, therefore, the decision has been made not to proceed with the single yellow lines in this location.

There is already very limited parking for residents on Downend Road, Christchurch Lane and Christchurch avenue. Having [information redacted for data protection] we have not seen significant issues with inconsiderate parking even with a slight increase of car owners in our row of houses. Our main problem is with increased volume of parking on Sundays 8uwhen restrictions don't apply and the proposals would not change this. [information redacted for data protection], my experience has been less a problem with poor parking but rather people driving without sufficient care, particularly when turning to corner outside the school. If waiting restrictions were imposed on these roads it would make more sense for these to be linked to school open and close ie 8.30-9.30am and 2.30 - 3.45pm. The proposed changes would make it very difficult for me to find a space and collect my children at 5pm (which is not a peak time for traffic on Christchurch lane/Ave as school has finished 2 hours earlier) and would also make it difficult for us to find a safe parking space to get our children in and out of the car when we need to on Saturdays. We are only aware of [information redacted for data protection] who has complained of parking issues in the area and this is because they do not think that anyone else should park in either of the 2 car spaces currently available in front of their house despite only owning one car ie not a safety related issue. [information redacted for data protection]


It is very difficult to link waiting restrictions

to school hours such as the suggested

8.30-9.30am and 2.30 - 3.45pm

respectively, as these would be enforceable

outside of term hours, which can be more

problematic.

Comments received from Staple Hill WRR regarding Christchurch Ave/Lane

[information redacted for data protection] and where the street is at it's narrowest (in front of no's 22, 23 and 24) it is an accident waiting to happen. The path on both sides is very narrow, it is not wide enough for say a double buggy so people frequently walk on the road. Christchurch Infants School is at the other end of the road so there is plenty of traffic especially between 8:45am and 9:05am and 3pm-3:30pm. There is a 20mph restriction on this road which is frequently ignored and things are worse if the weather is poor meaning more people drive to school. In front of no's 22, 23 and 24 cars regularly drive on the pavement to get through. Service vehicles have to mount the pavement as a matter of course as that is the only

Thanks for your comments.

Single yellow lines were proposed opposite

these properties, however the responses

were divided with regards to agreeing with

the proposed double yellow lines and not

agreeing with the double yellow lines at all.

The second highest majority agreed that

the double yellow lines should be longer.

Based on these results, the decision has

been made to go ahead with the proposed

double yellow lines in this location. This will


16

Nigel Riglar





way they will get through. This is with normal parking, if someone parks poorly the street can be impassable. I have seen the owners of no's 22, 23 and 24 have to jump back into their garden where a car is coming along Christchurch Avenue mounted on the pavement. Even without that there will be an accident before long between a car / bike / pedestrian at this point and I would urge the council to consider putting double yellow lines (replacing the "free parking" and "keep clear") in front of no's 22, 23 and 24 to make the area clearer and safer for pedestrians.

include the conversion of the advisory keep

clear line as mentioned in your comments.

Regarding the proposed single yellow lines,

the majority of respondents did not agree

with the proposed length, or times of

operation. Furthermore, the decision has

been made to not proceed with the single

yellow lines in this location.

I am unsure as to why Christ Church infants on Christchurch Avenue, is not getting school markings as this is often an issue for bad parking on blind corners etc. We believe that the road markings we currently have are not indeed of the legal length

Thanks for your comments.

The current school keep clear zig zags

have been recently re-marked to comply

with current regulations prior to the

proposed waiting restrictions being

installed. A second consultation will take

place regarding the times of operation.

Double yellow lines have been proposed

opposite the current school keep clear

markings, and will be progressed to the

next stage.

Christchurch Lane North – Proposed double yellow lines

Although my house is on [information redacted for data protection. Currently access to our properties is protected with an advisory white line, this includes the gate to [information redacted for data protection]. Sometimes I need to park outside my property and there are also occasions when for example a contractor needs to park there. The current proposals include double red lines outside my garage which will make access difficult and parking illegal. The current white line is respected and generally I don't experience any access or parking issues. I feel the current proposals are unnecessary and will make life difficult for residents and anyone else who requires access. I also fear the current proposals are likely to encourage parking elsewhere on the avenue e.g opposite my garage entrance. This section of the road is unrestricted parking and currently cars are rarely parked there. If it is used for parking it is extremely difficult to maneuver in and out of my entrance. So in summary I currently do not see any problems and need to change, whereas the proposed changes are likely to cause many. Photos attached for reference.

Thank you for your comments. Advisory white keep clear markings are used as a short term solution to a parking issue. Every time a waiting restriction review takes place it is standard procedure to convert all existing advisory white lines to enforceable restrictions. If the advisory white lines are not converted to enforceable restrictions they will not be maintained in the future and will be allowed to fade away. In this instance the proposed double yellow lines will be removed from across the access way as requested and will not be maintained.


17

Nigel Riglar





Christchurch Lane South – Double yellow lines and converting advisory keep clears

Often when attempting to turn into Christchurch Lane to access either the Medical Centre or Britannia Court there is already a queue of cars waiting to turn out onto North Street. Sometimes the white line area on the corner is empty, so a car can turn into Christchu5rch Lane and wait there hoping the queue will disperse for long enough to drive the short distance into either car park. At busy times this can take a long time, meanwhile a queue of cars can build up on North Street behind cars waiting to turn in. Exiting either car park can be just as difficult with cars entering the Lane as you are driving up towards North Street. Sometimes theres a complete deadlock.Only a completely clear Christchurch Lane allowing a flow of traffic both ways will sort this out.

Thank you for your comments. The proposed drawings show the advisory keep clear’s (white lines) to be converted to double yellow lines. The double yellow lines will allow cars to pass each other as opposed to using this area to park and wait for a space to become available.

Croomes Hill – Proposed double yellow lines

No further comments

Dial Lane – Proposed double yellow lines and converting advisory keep clears

I agree with making the mandatory lines double yellow lines, but am concerned that it will make parking in Lodge Walk as it is difficult to park in this road already.


If these proposed restrictions are enforced I agree whole heartedly. Currently and historically the two commercial premises in Dial Lane regularly park HGVs and LGVs on and blocking the pavement. These businesses also use

Thank you for your comments. The width of the road in Dial Lane is not wide enough to accommodate parking on


18

Nigel Riglar





Dial Lane as their loading bay with fork lifts running in and out of the premises across the footpath Also, visitors to Grace Court park blocking, or on the pavement at that intersection particularly at week ends and evenings. It is inevitable that sooner or later there will be an accident involving other vehicles or a pedestrian. Currently the footpath is a minefield for the many elderly and mothers with young living in Dial Lane and Lodge Walk. My one concern with the proposed restrictions is will they encourage visitors to Grace Court or attending functions at the cricket ground and employees of the three businesses (including the garage) to seek parking spots in Lodge Walk, a street already overburdened with parking soon to increase given the additional residences in it, and in Dial Lane.

both sides of the road, and by installing double yellow lines in these locations will enable safe access in and out of Dial Lane. It is also standard practice to convert the advisory keep clear lines to double yellow lines during a waiting restriction review.

[information redacted for data protection] I already find it difficult to find a parking space on Dial Lane, even though we are a single vehicle household. Restricting the parking options further, as outlines in your proposal, will exacerbate this issue and is disproportionately disadvantaging the few resident on the road that do not have allocated parking. It will also restrict family and friends who live far away from visiting. This is due to the fact that a) many non-residents park on the road, and b) many residents from nearby streets park on the road due to already limited parking on their road. In regards to a) non-residents parking - there are many businesses situated on or very close to Dial Lane and this causes customers and employees to use Dial Lane as a convenient parking road. Businesses include Westerleigh Car Centre, Ablemove Wottons and South West Storage Business, which are all situated on Dial Lane itself. In addition, the carers and visitors of residents at Grace Court Retirement Home often use the road for parking. Other businesses within 200 meters of our property include Tikka Raaz, Danny's Barber Shop, Love is in the Hair, Top Groom, Kip McGrath, Belle Dame Hair and Beauty Salon, The Duck and Willow pub,

Thank you for your comments. The majority of respondents who answered the online consultation agreed with converting the advisory keep clears to double yellow lines on Dial Lane, and the majority also agreed with the length of the proposed double yellow lines. Therefore, the proposals in this location will proceed to the next stage. Whilst recognising that there are issues with parking on Dial Lane, we have a responsibility to ensure that visibility is not compromised whilst entering and departing Dial Lane for motorists, and that roads are accessible for emergency and refuse services alike.


19

Nigel Riglar





the Downend Cricket club and Christ Church. Parking is already particularly bad on Dial Lane when cricket matches are being played at Downend Cricket Club as both home and away team members use the road as a convenient place to park directly opposite the pitch. Extending to 500 meters would incorporate the high number of businesses on Downend High Street. With regards to b) residents from nearby streets parking on Dial Lane - many residents from nearby roads, particularly Downend Road, regularly park on Dial Lane due to already limited parking and parking restrictions on Downend Road. Many of these residents are from multiple vehicle households, which means one household is taking up a number of parking spaces on the road. In addition to the above[information redacted for data protection] is a front line employee of the emergency services and has to have easy access to the car at short notice when called into work. Restricting parking on the road could cause a delay in his response time if he has to walk to surrounding areas to get the car in order to respond to a emergency. By further restricting the parking options in Dial Lane and the surrounding roads, there is a very high probability that I will not be able to park anywhere near my property, especially considering the difficulty I already have without these parking restrictions in place. This will be particularly problematic in situations where I have to carry heavy bags from the car to my house, or when I am minding my young niece and nephew, where we may have to walk a considerable distance from the car to the house. In addition, any visitors we have - [information redacted for data protection] - will encounter lack of parking spaces. Furthermore, I firmly believe that restricting the parking options on Dial Lane would reduce the value of my property as it would not be an attractive or viable option for households with small children, disability or restricted mobility.

[information redacted for data protection] there are multiple factors that contribute to restricted parking. With the introduction of this scheme this will be exacerbated even further. By implementing this scheme, it would seriously disadvantage the residents of Dial Lane further. The parking is already heavily reduced on the street by 1. Non-residents park on the road 2. Residents from nearby streets park on the road due to already limited parking on their road. 3. Employees, residents or customers of businesses on Dial Lane; - Westerleigh Car Centre, - Ablemove Wottons - South West Storage Business - Grace Court Retirement Home

Thank you for your comments. The majority of respondents who answered the online consultation agreed with converting the advisory keep clears to double yellow lines on Dial Lane, and the majority also agreed with the length of the proposed double yellow lines. Therefore, the proposals in this location will proceed to the next stage. Whilst recognising that there are issues with parking on Dial Lane, we have a responsibility to ensure that visibility is not compromised whilst entering and departing Dial Lane for motorists, and that roads are


20

Nigel Riglar





4. Employees, residents or customers of businesses with 200 meters of Dial Lane; - Tikka Raaz, Danny's Barber Shop, Love is in the Hair, Top Groom, Kip McGrath, Belle Dame Hair and Beauty Salon, The Duck and Willow pub, the Downend Cricket club and Christ Church. 5. Cricket matches being played at Downend Cricket Club as both home and away players and spectators use the road as a place to park due to Dial Lane's location opposite the ground. 6. Employees, residents or customers of Businessess with 500 meters of Dial Lane; - This extends to Co-Op Supermarket and pubs, business etc. On Downend High Street. 7. Residents nearby who have multiple cars but are restricted outside their property so park extra vehicles on Dial Lane By implementing this proposal it would by design restrict the parking further, as there will be a higher concentration of cars on an already limited street to park. This would reduce the access to my car which is vital. [information redacted for data protection], when called in not during shift hours due to emergency reasons, parking further away could jeopardise my journey time into station, which would have a very serious knock on affect to the wider community. Furthermore I use my car when looking after my niece and nephew or entertaining other family where nearby parking is essential and will be problematic as immediate family members are disabled or of severely reduced mobility. To put double yellow lines would exacerbate all the factors listed above even further especially without measures to be put in place to compensate this.

accessible for emergency and refuse services alike.

Firstly as a resident, I find it awful that I should find out by a notice on the street rather than being notified. [information redacted for data protection], it has always been and increasingly more so very hard to park anywhere near my house. To add more parking restrictions would make it a complete nightmare, especially for older residents. I wrote to the council about 28 years ago to ask about residents parking permits, which would make the council money & the council would still be able to implement parking fines to supplement the council income on non residents. This would be the most sensible solution & I am very surprised that the council have not adopted this scheme, which was a sign of the times in the uk over 28 years ago, let alone now. Maybe you could make some suggestions for where residents would be able to park rather than restricting parking further, I am positive that the residents would be very grateful for them. Restricting parking further for residents is by no means a solution.

Thank you for your comments. Residents parking is beyond the remit of the scheme, plus the criteria for residents parking would not be met on this road.


21

Nigel Riglar





Parking in Dial Lane is at a premium. At present, both sides of the road and the entrance to Grace Court are used not only by residents of the road but by those of 52, 54, 56 & 58 Downend Rd and by employees both of Wottons/Ablemove and of SWS Developments. Although the proposed DYLs on the right-hand side of the road meet with my approval, their implementation will increase the pressure on the left-hand side of the road. It would help therefore for the proposed DYL on the left of the road to be only 6 m long (1/3 of that proposed). That would be sufficient to give access to the new tile store. Note that vehicles never use the back lane alongside 1 Dial Lane. It would also help for the road in front of 1, 3, 5, and 7 to be allocated to residents of Dial Lane only. I have other observations that I will make separately from this submission. During the per [information redacted for data protection], parking has been increasingly problematic. Throughout that time, Wottons/Ablemove have had four large and one medium-sized furniture lorries and one small van. Except for the van, these are normally parked off the road but sometimes the medium-sized lorry is parked along the road opposite their premises. The van, on the other hand, is often parked on the road, sometimes for a day or two outside one of the four terraced houses numbered 1 to 7. Furthermore one of the large lorries is occasionally parked – usually for less than 24 hours – on the gross in front of 2 Dial Lane. The March 2009 Street View is typical of the early years when the problem was not too serious. The only Wottons/Ablemove vehicle parked on the road was their small van. As may be seen it was close to a ramshackle garage belonging to the company which has since been demolished. Parked in that position the van caused no inconvenience. Note that the picture is inclined to jump erratically between the 2009 and 2014 views. To get a convincing comparison, look at the inset at the top left and click between 2009 and 2014. Later in 2009, [information redacted for data protection], started parking his vehicles in the road. The photograph below, taken on 3 August, 2009, shows his Mitsubishi recovery vehicle parked outside the old garage.

Since 2009, with very occasional exceptions, the vehicle has been parked in one position or another in Dial Lane for periods of months and sometimes years. Except

Thank you for your comments. The current advisory keep clears on Dial Lane have been proposed to be converted to double yellow lines, which is standard practice during a waiting restriction review. The double yellow lines aim to provide safe access and egress onto Dial Lane, whilst also allowing passing places for vehicles as the road is not wide enough to accommodate vehicles parked on both sides of the road. The extent of the proposed double yellow lines at the entrance to Grace Court cannot be extended as this is not within the highway boundary. Motorists are permitted to park in any location providing they are parked legally. Any complaints regarding obstructive parking and parking on the pavement should be directed to the Police by calling 101. The councils parking enforcement team can be contacted to report an illegally parked car, i.e parked on double or single yellow lines when restrictions are in place, and parking over a dropped tactile kerb or dropped kerb on a pedestrian footpath. The majority of respondents who answered the online consultation agreed with converting the advisory keep clears to double yellow lines on Dial Lane, and the majority also agreed with the length of the proposed double yellow lines. Therefore, the proposals in this location will proceed to the next stage.


22

Nigel Riglar





perhaps once or twice in 2009 it has never been used in earnest. [information redacted for data protection], has had three other vehicles which are frequently parked in Dial Lane. The May 2014 Street View shows a maroon Range Rover, a pale blue Rover Freelander and the recovery vehicle parked on the left-hand side of the road between Downend Road and the first of the four terraced houses. There is a record of events relating to covering vehicle at https://sites.google.com/site/dlrvsaga/home?pli=1. Residents of [information redacted for data protection], Downend Rd also often park in the road. In the 2009 Street View two vehicles are parked in the entrance to Grace Court but in the 2014 View, four vehicles are there. There have been no street views in Dial Lane since 2014. However on 18 August, 2016, as shown in the photograph below, four vehicles were parked in the entrance making access to Grace Court by a refuse vehicle almost impossible.

[information redacted for data protection], [information redacted for data protection], [information redacted for data protection]. This, and all the foregoing has increased the difficulty that the residents of Dial Lane have experienced in parking their cars. Increasingly in recent years vehicles have been parked illegally on the pavement on the right-hand side of Dial Lane between Downend Road and the Wottons/Ablemove premises. Sometimes they are even parked on the grass. If the proposed double yellow lines are incorporated along this stretch of road, such parking will become doubly illegal. More vehicles will attempt to park on the left-hand side of the road and parking by residents of the four terraced houses will become very difficult indeed. There are two things that could be done to help. Firstly, the stretch of road in front of the terraced houses could become reserved for residents only at all times and, secondly, a bylaw could be passed prohibiting long-term parking – say for more than six months. When you are assessing the possibility of implementing double yellow lines in Dial Lane you should consider extending them into the entrance to Grace Court to prevent repetitions of the incident of August 2018 when it


23

Nigel Riglar





took at least fifteen minutes for the refuse vehicle to gain access to the forecourt. [information redacted for data protection]. If you were to do this, unless the existing defunct vehicle were to be removed, there would undoubtedly often be two such vehicles parked in Dial Lane. The introduction of a ban on long-term street parking would bring benefits to the whole of SouthGlos, not merely Downend.

Downend Road – proposed double yellow lines outside the Duck and Willow pub and with various junctions

I found it difficult to see any large changes between the two provided maps and don't feel I have any real issue with inconsiderate parking. I would not expect, in general, changes to the number of double yellow lines to significantly reduce the number of cars in an area and therefore I expect it to simply move the problem of inconsiderate parking to elsewhere/other nearby streets. However the small changes I was asked questions about I do agree with - double yellow lines on areas of a road around a roundabout and on junction corners are obviously a good idea.

Thank you for your comments. Whilst understanding the proposed restrictions will not enable motorists to park in these locations which, potentially has an effect on residents parking, the double yellow lines are installed to help prevent inconsiderate and obstructive parking whilst making entrances, exits and junctions safer for pedestrians and motorists alike.

The single yellow lines outside [information redacted for data protection] on Downend road from Monday -Saturday 8am - 6pm are ridiculous. We are having to park on Christchurch lane/ avenue which is why it's causing problems for residents on those roads. If the existing parking restrictions on Downend road were lifted it would solve the problems. Putting even more double yellow lines everywhere is going to make it even more difficult for residents, especially those with small children like myself.

Thank you for your comments. It is not always effective to remove single yellow lines, especially in this location. It is a traffic sensitive route whereby the flow of traffic will be impeded and may cause an inconvenience for motorists during peak hours. This in turn may encourage erratic driving habits and increase speeds for the road as vehicles try to manoeuvre around parked vehicles. Whilst recognising there is a demand for parking, the single yellow lines allow parking outside of the prescribed hours displayed.

The problem has developed because the Red Bus nursery was granted planning permission without adequate provision for staff parking which has resulted in parking on the pavement and over the cycle lane and within adjacent side streets all exasperated by parental drop off especially at busy times. A particular problem and danger is parking close to the road junctions especially with Grace Road and Overnhill Road. The danger is extreme for pedestrians crossing these roads because of reduced visibility for drivers to see pedestrians due to cars parked at or near the junctions, which ignore the existing white lines. Parking on the verges beyond Overnhill Road despite the installation of wooden barrier posts restricts visibility for traffic exiting the side road. The broad pavement outside and near the Church of Jesus Christ and Latter Day Saints is used as a car and, commercial and HGV parking lot very frequently virtually

Thank you for your comments. The junction of Grace Road and Overnhill Road has recently been subject to its own review of waiting restrictions which have already passed the legal advertisement stage. Installation of waiting restrictions at this junction have been programmed and will be implemented in the near future. Traffic calming measures on Grace Road and Overnhill Road are beyond the remit of the scheme. The majority of respondents agreed with the conversion of advisory keep clear


24

Nigel Riglar





blocking or severely pedestrian use especially for pedestrians with pushchairs,school children on scooters, the disabled using mobility scooters and the elderly with wheeled shoppers. Finally, may I remind the Council that an elderly pedestrian was killed by a motor vehicle when crossing Downend Road about ten years ago, unfortunately between parked cars. I also recommend the use of traffic calming measures in Grace and Overnhill Roads which are used as "rat runs" and along Downend Road, where traffic travels at speed.

markings to double yellow lines at the junction of Overnhill Road and Downend Road (adjacent to the wooden posts), therefore this will be progressed to the next stage.

[information redacted for data protection] Downend Road which has restricted parking during the daytime. There a large number of houses here that do not have any off road parking so need to use Christchurch Lane. While I agree with ensuring the corners are kept clear I don't agree with the extensions of the yellow lines along the road. This will further limit spaces for all residents on both Downend Road and those that live on Christchurch Lane. This will just move the amount of parking to other busier streets nearby and cause further friction between residents who feel that people have to park a considerable distance from home and in front of other people's houses.

Thank you for your comments. The proposed double yellow lines at junctions with Downend Road are to aid visibility and safe access and egress from the junctions onto busy A roads as requested by residents. They are proposed generally in areas where motorists should not be parking i.e within 10 metres of a junction as stated in the Highway Code. The single yellow and double yellow lines proposed other than those at the junctions are to ensure that cars can pass unimpeded.

Extend the No Waiting zone to the North side / North east direction - of the Downend Road at the Grace road junction ( up to the existing island safety crossing - near Overnhill Rd ). The side of road is used as a car park by staff at the Red Bus Pre-school & Nursery & the Special Needs School. Seemingly, original room for staff parking has been reduced within nursery grounds - north & east corner, forcing staff to park on Downend Road ( as well as Grace Road / Overnhill Road ).

Thank you for your comments. This particular junction has recently been subject to its own review of waiting restrictions which have already passed the legal advertisement stage. Installation of waiting restrictions at this junction have been programmed and will be implemented in the near future.

Edmund Close – proposed double yellow lines

No further comments

Hill House Road – proposed double yellow lines

Please see responses for Salisbury Road & Longden Road.

North Street – proposed double yellow lines at Knightsbridge Court and conversion of taxi bays to limited waiting bays

We constantly have vertical's parking over our driveways & blocking us in so we are reluctant to park off road, to avoid this we park on the road instead, at the moment there are white lined across neighbouring drives & the lain access, to houses behind our property if these are removed & no restricted parting is in place things will only get worse

Thank you for your comments. Double yellow lines can be installed in the location requested, therefore they will be added to the proposals for the next stage.


25

Nigel Riglar





As we have a large motorhome we started off parking on the drive but in the past when we have wanted to use it has been blocked in, so we know longer park it on the drive but on the road instead is does causes a bit of a problem for buses & large lorry's as this is a main road to staple hill My only concern is with parking over our drives not with parking in general


26

Nigel Riglar





I disagree with planned limitations at weekends. The

North Street area does not warrant such limitation as it is not a busy high Street, and the only sufferers are the locals who get stung very early on a Saturday morning as they try to enjoy a lie in on their weekend after a hard weeks work. I think a 9am start for regulations is plenty early enough.

Thank you for your comments. The existing limited waiting bays allow for parking up to 9am, as the restrictions start from 8am for up to an hour.

We [information redacted for data protection] which has unrestricted parking outside the door. The whole street should be unrestricted parking for residents. People reverse up the busy road to get to the few Unlimited spaces and park very badly as so few spaces for residents. We would ideally like residents permits for north st but opening the restricted spaces is a good start. We do not agree with double yellow lines outside knightsbridge court - this would reduce the on street parking.

Thank you for your comments. The proposed double yellow lines at the entrance to Knightsbridge Court would not reduce on street parking as this is an entrance off a main A road. Vehicles should not be parked in this location to allow safe access and egress for residents. The majority of residents did not know whether they agreed with the proposed double yellow lines in this location, and the second highest response agreed that the double yellow lines should be shorter. Furthermore, the proposed double yellow lines in this location will be amended and forwarded to the next stage.

Resident parking is very limited on North Street. Christchurch medical centre, Christchurch School and Brittania Court all have private car parks, plus it seems, a restricted parking bay along North Street to accommodate visitors whilst resident on that side of the street have no option to park near their homes without risking a fine. I do not see that there are taxis parked regularly enough in the taxi bay at the end of North Street for it to warrant a dedicated area. The way in which people now request taxis has rendered this as unnecessary.

Thank you for your comments. Converting the current taxi bays to limited waiting bays to make provisions for extra parking have been proposed.

Overndale Road – proposed double yellow lines

Considering the wide area covered by this consultation I am surprised that the junction of Cleeve Park Road and Cleeve Hill does not feature. [information redacted for data protection], I frequently use this turning when

Thank you for your comments. As the Downend ward is a large area to cover, it has been agreed to split the review


27

Nigel Riglar





visiting. Very often there are vehicles parked too close to the end of Cleeve Park Road to make entering a safe manoeuvre especially if cars are coming in the opposite direction trying to turn on to Cleeve Hill. White line exist on the corner of the road at present, which I believe are only advisory, but these markings are not long enough to keep the junction clear even when they are being adhered to. I think this junction should definitely be added to your list of proposals!

into 3 phases, (phases 1, 2 & 3) and this particular consultation is focusing on phase 1, which are displayed in the proposal drawings on the consultation page. Cleeve Hill and Cleeve Park Road will be included in phase 2 of this scheme.

Overnhill Court – proposed double yellow lines and converting advisory keep clears

No further comments

Overnhill Road – proposed double and single yellow lines

Due to the trees overhanging the road along the road at William court, parking in a space which will not result in my car being covered in bird droppings and/or tree sap is very difficult. The visitors, healthcare staff and other deliveries etc to William court already frequently take up available spaces on this area. The gateway to William court is already more than adequate to allow anyone who is proficient at driving to enter/leave the car park. I do not believe that neighbours on Overnhill road should be inconvenienced simply because the more elderly residents may struggle to use the already generous entrance. It is my understanding that the William court developers received planning permission on the proviso that there would be no adverse effects to traffic and/or parking for local residents. The proposal to restrict parking adjacent to William court will cause daily inconvenience to homeowners living opposite who do not have off street parking and rely on available on street spaces. I object in the strongest terms to this, yet another attempt to disrupt the parking in this vicinity purely to benefit the residents of William court.

Thank you for your comments. Overnhill Road is a public highway, and all motorists (visitors, healthcare staff and delivery drivers included) are within their rights to park along this road, providing they are parking legally. The proposed double yellow lines at the entrance to William Court are to aid visibility and safe access and egress. It is also standard practice to convert advisory keep clear markings to double yellow lines when undertaking a waiting restriction review of this kind. Residents will still have the opportunity to park either side of these double yellow lines.

The proposed single yellow lines and waiting time outside Williams Court ("WC") will undoubtedly have an adverse affect on parking for residents of overnhill road on already a busy road. Often it is difficult to park on the road due to the Visitors of WC and yet it is the residents of WC that wish to put forward more restrictions to their entrance - which is not from a general safety reason but more due to them allegedly being able to enter/ exit their entrance confidently. This issue has previously been addresses and white lines inserted either side of the

Thank you for your comments. Advisory keep clear lines are not enforceable and therefore no action can be taken towards motorists who persistently abuse these road markings. Motorists will have the opportunity to park either side of these double yellow lines.


28

Nigel Riglar





entrance. This should be suffice. There is no need for these proposals other than to satisfy the more elderly drivers amongst us. The issue of the entrance (if any actual good reason exists) should be met by the developer/owner not at the public purse expense to include parking for visitors to WC. Myself and other residents of overnhill will seek to appeal any proposals again as there's simply no public interest for these to be put in place on a public highway in an already 20 mph zone.

I disagree to the proposed changes outside of William Court. Access in this area is already reasonable. Further improving access with the introduction of parking restrictions will reduce the total parking on the street and leading to greater congestion on an already busy street. This scheme appears to favour the residents of William Court, where there is already substantial parking. It would have a disproportionate impact of families further along the street, many of whom have young children and require good access to their own properties.

Thank you for your comments. The majority of respondents disagreed with the proposed double yellow and single yellow lines. It has been recommended to replace advisory keep clear markings with double yellow lines. The introduction of double yellow lines are deemed more appropriate as visibility in this particular location is restricted at the entrance and without sufficient room either side, with the addition of vehicles parked directly opposite, it makes safe access and egress problematic. This will ensure that the section of highway is kept clear at all times, and there should be minimal impact as residents have become accustomed to not parking across the entrance.

The residents of William Court were never supposed to need additional considerations when the plans were originally passed. They could make more parking available on their site. The residents around them are mindful of leaving room for them to get out of their driveway, which is already generous. If the yellow lines go ahead it would be preferring one set of residents over another when there is enough room for us all at the moment, so long as we keep each others needs in mind. This would also set a precedent for yellow lines on a residential road which changes the nature of the road altogether.

Thank you for your comments. All responses and requests received during the consultation period are considered and are of equal importance. Unfortunately not all road users are considerate and restrictions need to be put in place.

The stated purpose of this scheme is to (1) implement additional restrictions where inconsiderate parking is an issue, (2) remove unnecessary restrictions and (3) address requests from residents to accommodate additional parking provisions. In relation to 1 above, I am not aware of any inconsiderate parking that occurs where the single and double yellow lines are proposed outside William Court. On a number of occasions however, and on a daily basis, I witness vans unloading in this area to deliver to residents of William Court. My understanding of the Highway Code is that loading for a duration of upto 20 minutes is permisible so perhaps the solution is to have a loading/unloading bay within William Court rather than these proposed lines which will have no effect in this case.

Thank you for your comments. The highway boundary stops at the entrance of William Court, therefore no proposals can be made within William Court.


29

Nigel Riglar





Items 2 and 3 are not relevant in this case. Thank you for creating this consultation. It is a great improvement over the last case of changes to parking arrangements in my street when 'Advisory Keep Clear' lines were imposed without any notice or consultation.

Double yellow lines at the ends of Overnhill Road to aid visibility are a good idea. The "existing advisory keep clear lines" outside William Court on the "existing" document are INCORRECTLY DRAWN. They are shown on the drawing as SIGNIFICANTLY longer than they are in real life. I can supply photos if that would help you correct your drawings. Double yellow lines in front of William Court's driveway are unnecessary; I regularly use the road and have never seen this blocked by a vehicle, just as none of the other driveways on the road are ever blocked. Double yellow lines here will be a) a waste of money, b) spoil the look of the road and c) confuse motorists who see other driveways without double yellow lines. I do not agree with the short sections of single yellow lines outside William Court. There are existing "advisory keep clear" lines present and I have never seen a car parked on them, therefore the existing markings are perfectly adequate. Implementing single yellow lines here and accompanying signage would both spoil the look of the road and be a waste of money. Additionally, as William Court is a retirement home, from personal experience most visitors, i.e. when the parking and vehicle movements are high, is at weekends not weekdays. So the proposed yellow lines would allow parking at just the time having parked cars around the entrance wouldn't be ideal. However in any case the lines are not needed as the existing provision is perfectly adequate.

Thank you for your comments. The advisory keep clear markings were extended and removed previously, therefore some markings are still on the highway, which is why they are displayed on existing drawings. The majority of respondents disagreed with the proposed double yellow and single yellow lines. It is standard practice to replace advisory keep clear markings with double yellow lines during a waiting restriction review of this kind. The introduction of double yellow lines are deemed more appropriate as visibility in this particular location is restricted at the entrance and without sufficient room either side, with the addition of vehicles parked directly opposite, it makes safe access and egress problematic. This will ensure that the section of highway is kept clear at all times to improve visibility.

The double yellow lines to William court have been contested several times before. The building only achieved planning permission on the proviso adiquate parking and access on site was provided for both tenants and visitors. We should be able to park outside our home and walk with ease along the pavements without having to juggle excessive parking due to unecessary yellow line restraints.

Thank you for your comments. The conversion of advisory keep clear lines to double yellow lines are standard practice during a waiting restriction review to ensure markings in these locations are enforceable. When cars are parked close to an entrance, it reduces visibility and makes access and egress extremely difficult. From a safety point of view, without restrictions, many motorists may believe they are able to safely park in these areas, which compromises the visibility for those entering and leaving.


30

Nigel Riglar





The proposals around William Court (WC) contradict the clear strong view of Planning and Highways Committee I witnessed when approving the WC development. The judgement was the development would neither cause nor experience traffic issues. In my view as a long standing resident the volume and speed of traffic has decreased since then and as the 20 mph speed limit has been introduced. The original developer stated and Council accepted that residents over 55 would not use cars. The number of reserved parking spaces in WC has about doubled since original approval. To me this increase is not a reason to give special treatment to WC car users. WC car users have reserved spaces. Residents opposite WC cannot have such reserved parking due to the long standing mature trees in their front gardens. IMHO the proposals are disproportionately in favour of those with reserved parking spaces in William Court. Currently there are white lines outside William Court which in my view are generally respected. The proposals mean much longer and enforceable areas outsde WC which would operate overall for most of the week and have major impact on other residents.. WC already has a very wide entrance set up by the original developer. To the left of WC exit the proposal is to extend 3 car lengths which to me is excessive and unnecessary. If there is currently inconsiderate parking on the white lines outside WC how much is this linked to various visitors to WC for family, personal or health care reasons or business reasons. WC has no car parking provision for visitors. Why? A more balanced proposal would include such visitor provision within WC. If car users from WC with its current wide exit need such protected no waiting areas outside most of the week then it does raise the sensitive issue of the ageing nature of the car drivers from WC and secondly how competent are they to drive in modern traffic conditions? Is there something else that has changed to WC or on the road since the initial development was approved that is relevant? I am not aware of it. White lines have been installed in consultation with residents over the road from WC and this was a more balanced methodology than what is now proposed. I also think this proposal creates a precedent for other residents on the road with exits onto Overnhiill Road. Will all residents with drives be able to have no waiitng areas of at least three car lengths to each side of their drives? Overall the proposals favour those in WC with reserved parking spaces, do not balance the needs of different residents and contradict the judgement of the planning authority when no adequate reasons exist. The attached docoument restates some of these points in more detail. Response 22 Oct 2019 Issues Do those residents of William Court with reserved parking spaces in William Court require special measures to help them drive out of William Court? As compared to the residents of houses opposite who do

Thank you for your comments. The majority of respondents disagreed with the proposed double yellow and single yellow lines. It is standard practice to replace advisory keep clear markings with double yellow lines during a waiting restriction review of this kind. The introduction of double yellow lines are deemed more appropriate as visibility in this particular location is restricted at the entrance and without sufficient room either side, with the addition of vehicles parked directly opposite, it makes safe access and egress problematic. This will ensure that the section of highway is kept clear at all times to improve visibility. The proposed double yellow lines across this entrance and other locations across this review are generally in areas where motorists should not be parking i.e within 10 metres of a junction as stated in the Highway Code below:

DO NOT stop or park:

anywhere you would prevent access for Emergency Services

opposite or within 10 metres (32 feet) of a junction, except in an authorised parking space

where the kerb has been lowered to in front of an entrance to a property

on a bend

All of the above are applicable in this case and the Traffic Regulation Order will enable the double yellow lines to be enforceable.


31

Nigel Riglar





not have and cannot have such reserved parking spaces. Why change/expand from the current measures of advisory white lines? Does the proposal for double yellow lines outside William Court and beyond them a significant no waiting area from 8 am to 6pm Monday to Saturday achieve a fair balance between those with those reserved parking spaces and other residents of Overnhill Road who do not? Factors to consider

1. As a long-standing resident I have seen the

development of William Court over the last

decade. It was designed by a major developer

with experience with such housing schemes in

conjunction with the planning and highways

authority. Have traffic conditions on the road

worsened since William Court opened? It is my

impression that the volume of traffic even in rush

hour has reduced in recent years. It is also the

case that since the introduction of 20 mph speed

limit that the general speed of vehicles using the

road has decreased.

2. Traffic issues particularly parking are such that

difficult to please everyone. What other options

have been considered which would assist

everyone on the road? Rather than giving special

protection to one group to the detriment of other

residents who already have poorer parking

facilities?

3. William Court already has a very wide

exit/entrance and advisory white lines around the

entrance. How wide a space on both sides do the

residents need to exit?

4. Sensitive issue coming up: If the residents of

William Court with reserved parking spaces are

an ageing cohort and struggle to exit William

Court safely, then that raises the difficult issue of

how confident and competent they are to manage

on modern roads. I think it is unreasonable for

the other residents to have to have special

measures to help one group of older residents

who are ageing together.

5. Other residents opposite must park on the road.

They have very little choice as their front gardens

have long had mature trees which they would not

be allowed to remove even if they had the money

to change the situation.

6. It is argued that some people are parking

inconsiderately. It is not clear whether some of

those are visitors to William Court, perhaps for

social care or personal care, family callers or to


32

Nigel Riglar





provide other services. Why is there no provision

for them within William Court especially as other

changes have been made to the number of

parking spaces within William Court?

7. The planning background is that the Council as

planning and highway authority explicitly

considered traffic issues in approving the original

development of William Court without making an

even wider exit. The original developer who left

the scene long ago argued that folk over 55

allowed to move into William Court would not

want to drive. The Council strongly asserted

there would be no traffic issues nor related need

for special arrangements for residents within

William Court. The Council with good motives

was keen to approve new housing units and to

accept a financial benefit from the developer to

invest elsewhere. It is my view is that the traffic

volumes and speeds have decreased since

William Court was approved.

8. William Court has been able to increase the

number of reserved parking spaces since it first

opened – doubling them? It has also made no

provision for visitors. These changes to the car

park were agreed to assist the residents of

William Court. The number of car users does not

to me mean that WC needs special help or a

wider guaranteed exit. It now appears the car

users of William Court need extra help that other

residents on the road do not have. This is to be

achieved by introducing double yellow lines and

an extended length of no waiting all day six days

out of seven a week.

9. This move to have double yellow lines and no

waiting areas most of the week creates a

precedent for elsewhere on the road. Can all

residents with drives have long stretches of

double yellow lines and no waiting areas outside

their houses? Why treat those with reserved

parking spaces within William Court specially as

compared to those opposite who must park on

the road?

Conclusion In my view the present white lines are enough. To move to double yellow lines etc means those with reserved parking spaces are given too much special treatment compared with other residents. It is not a balanced proposal as between all residents. It will disproportionately affect other residents on the road who already have poorer parking facilities. The existing white lines provide enough assistance and more than other


33

Nigel Riglar





residents with drives are given. My own view is traffic volumes and speeds have improved.

I live directly across from the proposed waiting restrictions outside William Court and object to the idea as already there is limited space for residents. Drivers who don't live here are already parking their cars outside for several days. This proposal would further limit our chances of getting space outside our home. We have small children and I don't like parking across the street or a distance away from our house for they're safety. Cars do not abide by the speed limit. I would be happier for the waiting restrictions to go ahead only, if residents directly opposite were not penalized from parking there or given specific parking permits.

Thank you for your comments. Residents parking is beyond the remit and budget of the scheme, plus the criteria for residents parking would not be met on this road.

Park Road & Salisbury Gardens – proposed double yellow lines

Being a resident living [information redacted for data protection], I have complained numerous times regarding people totally ignoring the current single white line around this corner. It is very difficult to move safely onto Park Road from Salisbury Gardens in a safe manner because of the obstructed view from parked vehicles and the bend in the road. It is good to see that a proposal has been made to remedy this problem before there is a serious accident. I would be grateful if the length of double yellows could be considered. From the map I would feel that they should be lengthened more up Park Road to produce a safe viewpoint.

Thank you for your comments. The results from the consultation show that the majority of respondents agreed that the length of the double yellow lines should be longer, therefore this will be considered in the forthcoming stages.

Parking on the streets around my house is already a nightmare [information redacted for data protection] and there is no possibility of parking off road). So many houses now have multiple cars [information

redacted for data protection]. So many houses have dropped their curb and paved their front garden over the past few years. The proposed double yellow lines do nothing to improve traffic flow and parking in these places does not represent any obstacle or hindrance. All you achieve is the restriction even further of the places I will be able to park my car overnight. The more you do this, the more likely people like myself will end up having to park partly on the pavement, at a distance from my house. For example, parking even further up Salisbury Gardens will inevitably result in BOTH sides of the road having parked vehicles. This will restrict the width of road available to moving traffic and people will resort to putting their car half on the pavement. This is a MUCH more serious parking issue (ask any mother with a pushchair trying to get past).

Thank you for your comments. Illegal parking, including obstructive and pavement parking should be reported to the Police by contacting 101. The councils parking enforcement team can be notified for any illegal parking, i.e parking on double yellow lines, parking on single yellow lines when restrictions are in place, and parking over a dropped tactile kerb or dropped kerb on a pedestrian footpath. The majority of respondents agreed that the proposed double yellow lines at Salisbury Gardens and Park Road should be longer in this location, therefore the proposals will advance to the next stage.

If double yellow lines are enforced at the junction of Park Road and Salisbury Gardens it will make parking for local residents even more difficult than it is at the moment. The increase in numbers of vehicles per

Thank you for your comments. The results from the consultation show that the majority of respondents agreed that the


34

Nigel Riglar





household has meant that over the years there has been more and more pressure to find a parking space near my home. This is not a busy junction and I do not feel that it requires double yellow lines. I have [information redacted for data protection] whereas most other households have two or more and I have experienced some very unpleasant behaviour from other residents including verbal abuse and damage to my vehicle because I have 'parked in their place'. I am very anxious that this proposal will escalate this kind of behaviour.

length of the double yellow lines should be longer at this junction, therefore this will be considered in the forthcoming stages.

Why only the bottom of Park Road - why not the top near the traffic lights where there are cars parked both side of the road . The cars parked on the right hand side make it impossible for buses or any other vehicle's to pass so actually jamming up traffic on the lights making it very dangerous/impossible to use the crossing to cross the road. This place is an just an accident waiting to happen.

Thank you for your comments. This location is out of the scheme boundary and therefore beyond the remit of the scheme.

We would like the double yellow lines to extend between number 2 and 4 for the following reasons 1 Transit vans parking on the pavement that are using the public House obscuring our view when pulling out of the drive and for elderly people using the pavement on mobility scooters. 2 On a number of occasions we have Lorry drivers/refuse collectors knocking on the door because someone has double parked on the pavement and on occasions just double parked on the road and resulted in the driver reversing up the length of the road 3 The road is being used to leave cars overnight for the use of the public house and constant banging of car doors on Friday and Saturday nights

Thank you for your comments. The majority of respondents to the consultation agreed that the double yellow lines proposed at Salisbury Gardens should be longer, therefore the request to extend the double yellow lines will be added to the proposals for the next stage.

Peache Road – proposed double yellow lines

No further comments

Salisbury Road & Longden Road – proposed double yellow lines

[information redacted for data protection] but find myself excluded in part from this consultation,story of politics these days. My point is this the double yellow lines on the coronation road junction with salisbury road should be reduced to mirror the restriction on the south east side,Also weight restrictions should be reduced on large commercial vehicles parked in the road, If drop down kerbs keep being granted those of us who would choose to preserve the areas character and eco system need to be supported,

Thank you for your comments. Coronation Road was not included in this phase due to having no requests or complaints raised relating to waiting restrictions. The road is not wide enough to accommodate parking on both sides of the road, therefore the current double yellow lines are staggered to allow for safe access and egress onto Coronation Road. The parked cars act as traffic calming therefore helps reduce speeds entering Coronation Road.

It's a great idea, the number of huge lorries/work vans parked at the end of Longden Road is a safety hazard, you cannot see when crossing Salisbury Road into



35

Nigel Riglar





Hillhouse Road. These vehicles do not even belong in the road, I do not think they even live in the road. Similarly at the bottom end of the road there are often huge vans very near to the junction of Peache Road making turning left very difficult at times, again this van owner has been parking there for decades and does not even live in the road. The number of people with droop down drives adds to the problem as people are constantly parking outside my house whereas [information redacted for data protection]. So glad something is being done about this. Well done

The results from the consultation show that the majority of respondents agreed that the length of the double yellow lines should be longer at this junction, therefore this will be considered in the forthcoming stages. The majority of respondents also agreed that the proposed double yellow lines on Hill House Road should be implemented, with 25% agreeing they should be longer.

As I am both a motorist and pedestrian, visibility is greatly reduced because vehicle parking is too close to corners of Hill House Road/Salisbury Road and Salisbury Road/Longden Road. These roads are heavily used by residents, school runs, patients at Willow Surgery, service no. 7 First Bus, learner drivers, home and food delivery vehicles, emergency service vehicles. It is difficult for abled and less-abled people to cross these roads using the drop-kerbs provided for wheelchairs due to poor visibility. Long-length double yellow lines are needed to help overcome these difficulties.

Thank you for your comments. The results from the consultation show that the majority of respondents agreed that the length of the double yellow lines should be longer at this junction, therefore this will be considered in the forthcoming stages. Respondents also agreed that the proposed double yellow lines on Hill House Road should be implemented, with 25% agreeing they should be longer.

I believe that the double yellow lines need to be extended such that the view on the crossroads (LongdenRoad/ Salisbury Road, Hill House Road) for

Thank you for your comments. The results from the consultation show that the majority of respondents agreed that the


36

Nigel Riglar





motorists is as good as possible. Currently this is a very dangerous crossing.

length of the double yellow lines should be longer at this junction, therefore the proposals will be amended and will proceed to the legal advertisement.. The majority of respondents agreed that the proposed double yellow lines at Hill House Road were the right length, less voted for the restrictions to be longer, therefore the proposals will proceed to the next stage as advertised.

Sunridge & Woodlands Rise – proposed double yellow lines

While I support the parking restriction initiative I feel I must comment on the state of the road surface on Overndale Road. Painting yellow lines on the present road surface is a waste of time and money. The current surface is appalling and very very dangerous. It is only a matter of time before a cyclist, motorcyclist (pot holes and patched surface) or pedestrian (due to the state of the zebra crossing) is seriously injured or killed. This road is long overdue council funds and attention, and definitely before new markings.

Thank you for your comments. The maintenance of Overndale Road is beyond the remit of this scheme. You can report poor road conditions on our website by following this link: https://my.southglos.gov.uk/ServicePage.aspx?servicePath=&JScript=1 Or by visiting the ‘Report it’ section of the website.

To my knowledge, [information redacted for data protection], there have been no problems with parking except on one occasion when a person who does not live in the street was parking on the pavement in such a manner as to force pedestrians into the road. One resident, I don't know who, contacted the police who spoke to the woman in question and then left her continuing to park on the pavement, presumably having given her permission to do so. They later wrote to residents advising us not to park on the pavement threatening us with "robust action" and saying that they were aware that parking can be difficult on the street. It isn't. No resident in Sunridge ever parks on the pavement. It would be far better if the police enforced existing laws rather than bring in new restrictions. Adding parking restrictions could potentially lead to pressure on parking in the street, causing a problem that currently doesn't exist. I have significant mobility problems and without my vehicle I am effectively housebound. Making parking more difficult for me could impact negatively on my quality of life. I am aware that I could ask for a disabled parking bay. However, the existing ones in Downend are regularly abused and are not policed in anyway. It would be helpful if existing parking restrictions were enforced.

Thank you for your comments. Requests have been made from residents in this area to address inconsiderate parking, and have a history of issues relating to obstructive parking. The double yellow lines are proposed in places where drivers shouldn’t be parking anyway i.e. on bends/junctions, therefore it shouldn’t create more pressure on parking because no legitimate spaces are being removed. The proposals have included formalising the disabled bays by the shops in Downend, which will then be enforced by the Councils Parking Services team.

[information redacted for data protection] and have only been aware of very rare occasions when others parking has been an issue. Most residents are very considerate and respectful of each others parking needs and circumstances. occasionally when a resident has visitors there is no where to park near our house and so the corner of

Thank you for your comments. Requests have been made from residents in this area to address inconsiderate parking, and have a history of issues relating to obstructive parking.


https://my.southglos.gov.uk/ServicePage.aspx?servicePath=&JScript=1

https://my.southglos.gov.uk/ServicePage.aspx?servicePath=&JScript=1

37

Nigel Riglar





Sunridge can be useful in these circumstances for all of us. Most people in this area approach this junction sensibly and visibility is acceptable for car drivers and pedestrians. I am not aware of nuisence parking in this area on a regular basis so I do not feel that these proposed measures are necessary and could in fact cause more problem to residents not less.

Furthermore, double yellow lines are only proposed in areas where motorists should not be parking anyway i.e within 10 metres of a junction as stated in the Highway Code, therefore no legitimate spaces are being removed.

I am positively in favour of this scheme. It is long overdue. The turning from Overndale Road into Woodlands Rise/Sunridge often is creating a dangerous situation caused by inconsiderate and unnecessary parking on these corner positions and on the pavements. Pedestrians, disabled mobility scooters,etc often can't use the pavements.


I do not see the value of a restriction on the corner of Woodside Road near the post box. There is adequate room to stop safely there in the small lay by.

Thank you for your comments. There will still be the opportunity to stop/park in the small layby.


DOWNEND Waiting Restriction Review Phase 1 - Consultation ... · single yellow lines. It is...

Documents

Transcript of DOWNEND Waiting Restriction Review Phase 1 - Consultation ... · single yellow lines. It is...