Delegated Decisions

This report considers the objections received in respect of the proposed Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) changes listed.

DECISION:

1. To receive and note Report C/24/56.

2. That officers proceed with making the TRO as proposed with Godwyn Road changed from Permit Holders Only to Permit Holders Only Past This Point in order to reduce street furniture and omit the need for bay markings.

Reasons for decision:

The Cabinet Member for Transport, Regulatory Services & Building Control is asked to agree the recommendations because the proposals will help alleviate problems experienced by residents in these areas.

This report sets out applications recommended for approval for the Rural England Prosperity Fund Grant Scheme and seeks confirmation for the grant award.

DECISION:

1.          To receive and note Report C/24/43

2.          To approve the recommended grant applications to the Rural England Prosperity Fund Grant Scheme as summarised this report.

Reasons for decision:

The Leader is asked to agree to the recommendations of the Decision Panel on grant awards, because agreement is needed on these applications to the Rural England Prosperity Fund Grant Scheme.

This report explains the findings of the recent informal parking consultation on proposals to introduce parking controls in Grimston Avenue and surrounding roads as shown in appendix 1. The recommendations reflect the responses received. 

DECISION:

1.          To receive and note Report C/24/36.

2.          That subject to a statutory consultation, parking controls are implemented in all but the section of Sandgate Rood, where a majority of respondents do not support the proposed parking restrictions.

3.          That the proposed TRO include ‘permit holders only’ parking as the majority of respondents have indicated support for this restriction, which will maximise parking for residents living in the area.

4.          That the hours/days of operation for the permit restrictions replicate roads in the adjacent Zone H i.e. Monday to Sunday (including bank holidays), 8am -8pm, as the majority of respondents have indicated support for this.

5.          That officers monitor the 'permit holder only' arrangements once the scheme is up and running, followed by a review if necessary.

6.          That an overnight motorcaravan ban is included for all roads in the proposed TRO to address the issue of parked caravans raised by many residents.

7.          That each household or business be restricted to a maximum of two resident or business permits.

8.          That the number of residents’ visitors’ permits per household be limited to 100 in any year, but this limit be extended in exceptional circumstances.

9.          That residents and businesses with more than one car be entitled to buy a shared permit for the number of vehicles registered to them.

10.      That the fees for permits and eligibility criteria replicate current arrangements for existing schemes as follows:

Residents’ Permit                                £42 per year

Additional resident permit                             £42 per year

Shared Resident permit                      £42 per year

Resident Visitor permit                       £8.00 per 5 sessions

Business permit                                  £80 per year

Replacement permit                                      £6.15

Special permit (Health & care workers)         Free

Eligibility criteria:

I.        Resident permit

a) The applicant’s usual place of residence should be in the CPZ

b) The vehicle is either a passenger vehicle or a goods vehicle of a height less than 3.2 metres (10ft 6ins) and length less than 6.5 metres (21ft 4ins) a gross weight not exceeding 5 tonnes.

II.       Resident visitor permits

             Applicant’s usual place of residence should be in the CPZ

III. Business permit

a) The business operates from an address within the CPZ

b) The vehicle is essential for the efficient operation of the business

11.      That a proposed traffic regulation order be advertised as soon as possible for the implementation of the recommended parking controls, and that the Transportation Specialist reports back to the Cabinet Member for Transport if there are any objections.

12.      That officers after implementation of the recommended controls, regularly monitor parking in adjacent unrestricted roads such as Pelham Gardens and Dixwell Road and make recommendations to the Cabinet Member for Transport.

Reasons for decision:

The Cabinet Member for Transport, Regulatory Services & Building Control is asked to agree the recommendations because:

a)                  The responses received indicate a majority of respondents are in favour of parking controls to be introduced.

b)                  Many of the roads in the area have been affected by long-term commuter and displacement parking problems. Parking controls will help address the issues residents are experiencing.