This is an opportunity for members of the Committee to discuss with the Portfolio Holder for Community Safety, Street Scene and Rural the current situation regarding the residents parking schemes in Bicester and Banbury.
Minutes:
At the Committee’s request Councillor Morris, Portfolio Holder for Community Safety, Street Scene and Rural and the Head of Urban and Rural Services were present at the meeting to brief members on the latest developments concerning the proposed residents parking schemes in Banbury.
The Portfolio Holder explained that the public consultation exercise had closed on 11 May and that the responses were with the consultants for detailed analysis. The overall response rate was 30% which was in line with the consultant’s expectations. The consultation exercise had been directed only to those households and properties in the proposed residential parking zones. The Executive had previously agreed to proceed with some or all of the proposed schemes if more than 50% of the respondents to the consultation voted in favour of a scheme
The next phase of work would involve further analysis of the responses and detailed working up of the various options available for the provision of residents parking schemes in parts of Banbury.
In discussion the Committee raised a number of points and where appropriate the Portfolio Holder agreed to provide additional information outside the meeting.
The Committee asked for further details on when and where the parking problems occurred. They wondered whether the introduction of a residents parking scheme would result in empty streets by day. They were also concerned about the extent of any displacement parking and the knock on implications for streets outside the residents parking zones. They suggested that other initiatives such as short-term pay and display on street parking should be considered in parallel with the residents parking schemes.
The Committee suggested that the problems associated with commuter parking in the vicinity of the rail station should be addressed in other ways. They cited the positive experience at Bicester and the constructive dialogue with Chiltern Rail which had resulted in an extension to the station car park and the introduction of a commuter shuttle bus.
There were also concerns about the possible detrimental impact on the town’s retail trade as a result of the recent increase in parking fees and the introduction of residents parking schemes. They asked for further information on the level of take up in Council car parks since the increase in charges.
The Committee also pointed out that it was important that any income from residents parking schemes should be kept separate and was not used to subsidise the Civil Parking Enforcement arrangements; although they recognised that there would inevitably be some commonality of resources and activity.
Finally the Committee expressed concern that many residents would inherit by default a scheme that they could not afford and did not want, especially in areas with low incomes and a transient population.
In conclusion the Committee expressed serious reservations about the criteria set by the Executive on which to take the decision to proceed with residents parking due to the fact that as little as 10 per cent might have been in favour. They did not think that it was truly representative to go ahead on the basis of a majority of the responses being in favour of residents parking. They felt that this would result in a significant number of residents inheriting the scheme by default and being unable to afford to park near their home.
The Committee was not convinced that a residents parking scheme would solve the fundamental parking problems in Banbury. They felt that further work should be undertaken to explore alternative options and to look at the extent to which any residents parking scheme could be tailored to meet the needs of specific communities.
The Committee were in agreement that until the Civil Parking Enforcement arrangements were in place it would be inappropriate to introduce any residents parking scheme in Banbury.
Resolved
1) That the Executive should be informed of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee’s reservations regarding the approval criteria set for the residents parking scheme consultation ;and
2) That the Executive should be asked to defer any decision on the implementation of residents parking schemes in Banbury to coincide with the introduction of Criminal Parking Enforcement (CPE) arrangements and to allow officers time to explore alternative options and proposals to address the parking problems in parts of the town.