Agenda item

9.1

The Executive Director, Place submitted a report setting out the public response to the advertised Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) to introduce waiting restrictions at several locations in respect of small highway schemes being promoted by the Community Assemblies.

9.2

Members of the public made a number of representations on the various schemes as follows:-

Hemsworth Road/Warminster Road/Bunting Nook/Bunting Close

Councillor Ian Auckland commented that he was broadly supportive of the proposals. He requested that the waiting restrictions on Hemsworth Road be extended opposite the two houses on the cul-de-sac. He also requested that a review of the Hemsworth Road/Warminster Road scheme be undertaken six months after implementation. In relation to the Bunting Nook/Bunting Close proposals, he commented that should they lead to issues of displacement parking  the introduction of further restrictions be discussed with local Ward Councillors and affected residents before they are implemented on street.

Vicarage Road, Dore

Councillor Colin Ross commented that, following discussions with local residents, he would request that Members resolve that the proposed waiting restrictions should be reduced to 5 metres on each side of the junction of the cul-de-sac serving properties Nos. 22-38 and on the main carriageway of Vicarage Lane;

Carr Bank Lane/Carr Bank Close/Armthorpe Road

Barry Tickell, a local resident, submitted a petition at the meeting containing 28 signatures of local residents. He commented that, along with the other petitioners, he did not feel there was a need for the extent of waiting restrictions shown in the various scheme options now under consideration. He claimed that a special meeting of local residents and representatives of the South West Community Assembly, including local Ward Councillors, which had recently been held to discuss this matter, had achieved a consensus that only a minimum of waiting restrictions were necessary on the corner of Carr Bank Close and Carr Bank Lane as indicated in a plan attached to the petition. Mr Tickell also expressed the view that the access/manoeuvrability for refuse collection vehicles was not a problem and felt that the main issue was the lack of clear road markings and Give Way/Stop signs.

Paul Haywood, a local resident, commented that he supported the representations made by Mr Tickell and many local residents did not wish to see double yellow lines in the area and did not believe there was a need for them.

9.3

RESOLVED: That the Committee:-

(a)

overrules the objections to the proposed traffic regulations on Hemsworth Road and Warminster Road and the restrictions be introduced as shown in the plan in Appendix A-1 of the report;

(b)

requests that a review of the scheme at Hemsworth Road/Warminster Road be undertaken six months after implementation with a view to introducing additional waiting restrictions on Hemsworth Road, Warminster Place and Warminster Road (with any amendments related to the bus hot spots work to be funded by that budget);

(c)

upholds, in part, the objections to the proposed traffic regulations for Cadman Street/High Street, Mosborough, and Latham Square/Trap Lane and resolves that the restrictions be introduced as shown in the plans in Appendices C-1 and C-3 of the report;

(d)

upholds, in part the objections to the traffic regulations for Vicarage Lane, Dore and the extent of the restrictions to be introduced be reduced to 5 metres on each side of the junction of the cul-de-sac serving properties Nos. 22-38 and on the main carriageway of Vicarage Lane;

(e)

defers a decision on the proposed traffic regulation orders on Carr Bank Lane/Carr Bank Close/Armthorpe Road and requests that the proposals be referred back to the South West Community Assembly and a site visit be arranged with Veolia, the Chair of the South West Community Assembly and local residents and, following this, a preferred scheme be referred back to this Committee for consideration;

(f)

overrules the objections to the proposed traffic regulations to introduce a 30 minute limited waiting restriction adjacent to properties Nos. 52-66 (inclusive) High Street, Mosborough and the replacement of a restriction of waiting Monday – Saturday 8am -6.30pm by a prohibition of waiting at any time adjacent to properties 109-125 High Street, Mosborough and introduce the restrictions as shown in the plan in Appendix A-5 of the report;

(g)

overrules the objections to the proposed traffic regulations on Bunting Nook and Bunting Close and approves, initially, the introduction of the restrictions as shown in the plan in Appendix C-4 of the report with an extension of the double yellow lines on both sides of Bunting Close to the boundary between properties Nos 6 and 8;

(h)

approves the introduction of additional waiting restrictions on Bunting Nook and Bunting Close, if considered necessary as a result of displacement parking, subject to consultation with affected residents and local ward councillors;

(i)

resolves that the Traffic Regulation Orders, as amended, be made in accordance with the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984; and

(j)

requests that the petitioners, objectors and other respondents be informed accordingly.

9.4

Reasons for the Decision

9.4.1

The Traffic Regulation Orders for all the schemes included in the report were considered necessary to introduce parking restrictions at each of the locations with a view to resolving problems which had been brought to the attention of the City Council.

9.4.2

Local Ward Councillors and officers had given due consideration to the views of all the respondents in an attempt to find acceptable solutions. The recommendations were considered to be a balanced attempt to address residents/business concerns.

9.5

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

9.5.1

The schemes had been designed to meet local needs/priorities as identified by Community Assembly members. The proposals put forward were considered to deliver the required outcomes to resolve the problems which had been brought to the attention of the Assemblies.

9.5.2

The schemes had since been amended, where necessary, to try and address the concerns raised by residents/businesses.