Issue - items at meetings - Citywide Parking Review

Report of the Strategic Director, Place (copy attached).

That the Cabinet Member for Transport & Public Realm, in accordance with Part 6, paragraph 16.10 of the Council’s constitution, and having considered the resolution of ECSOSC on 14 October and the additional information provided to ECSOSC and in this paper:

(a)         Confirms the Cabinet Members decision 2.1 a, b, c & d of 4 October 2011 in relation to the Citywide Parking Review.

(b)         Clarifies and confirms that in recommendation 2.1e the proposed start date for external consultation in respect of the strategic citywide parking review is immediately following a decision at this meeting and to take approximately 12 months with a report on progress to be made to the Cabinet Member for Transport & Public Realm within 6 months.

43.1   The Cabinet Member considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place on the Citywide Parking Review that related to the decision by the Environment & Community Safety Overview and Scrutiny Committee (ESCOSC) to call-in the Cabinet Member decision of 4 October 2011.

43.2         The Lead Commissioner, - City Regulation and Infrastructure and the Project Manager introduced the report, provided background information to the original Cabinet Member decision and gave an overview of the timetable for the proposed Citywide Parking Review.

43.3         Councillor Peltzer-Dunn explained that he had a number of concerns with the advice and recommendations provided by officers and the knock-on effect this would have on any decision taken regarding parking in the Wish Park area. He expressed his belief that the consultation process had been confusing for residents and that they would have voted in favour had the potential results been clearer. Furthermore, there had been no communication about the scope for the proposed Citywide Review.                                                           

           Councillor Peltzer-Dunn referred to successive reviews from 2005 that had failed to address the matter and that Wish Park, as a special case, needed to be considered more urgently than the City Wide Parking Review would allow.

           Councillor Peltzer-Dunn requested that the Cabinet Member give consideration to the recommendations from ECSOSC but most importantly, to the concerns of residents of Wish Park.

43.4         Councillor Pissaridou noted her agreement with the statement made by Councillor Peltzer-Dunn. She believed that the current situation in Wish Park was comparable to the three areas identified as urgent and requested the relevant information to make that comparison. Councillor Pissaridou added that she was very concerned about the lack of clarity regarding the City Wide Parking Review timetable particularly as the review had undergone extensive delay in the past. Additionally, she expressed her fear that, such was the level of distress felt by residents of Wish Park; a continuation of the current order may lead to incidents of anti-social behaviour.

43.5         The Cabinet Member responded that he was aware of the sensitivity of this subject and he had been contacted by residents across the city about parking issues. He realised there had been a lack of progress on parking issues in the past two years due to the previous administration suspending the most recent consultation. The Cabinet Member gave assurance that he was determined to find the best solutions to the parking problems in the city including the Wish Park area.

43.6         The Lead Commissioner, - City Regulation and Infrastructure stressed that it was very important that consultation be undertaken more widely across wards due to the need to minimise overspill to neighbouring areas. In response to Councillor Pissaridou, the Project Manager confirmed that he had visited the Wish Park area and whilst he agreed that there were potential safety concerns, these problems were more acute in the three areas recognised as needing urgent work.

43.7         Councillor Mitchell expressed her opinion that the Citywide Parking Review would not deliver the needs or wishes of the residents of Wish Park. The report had blurred the distinction between a citywide traffic review and an assessment of Controlled Parking Zones. She noted her confusion that a decision had been made to undergo work in three areas whilst at the same time, beginning a wholesale review. Councillor Mitchell stated her disagreement that financial constraints had necessitated the suspension of the previous review and the decision was clearly political evidenced by the fact that parking schemes are self-financing. She requested the Cabinet Member and officers to urgently devise and implement a properly designed scheme.

43.8         Councillor Janio noted his agreement with the requests from residents of Wish Park. He asked if the information contained within 4.8 of the report meant the Citywide Parking Review would take three years to undertake.

43.9         The Cabinet Member replied that the Citywide Parking Review would begin immediately after the meeting if the proposed recommendations were accepted.

43.10    Councillor Mitchell queried how long the review would take.

43.11    The Project Manager answered that the review would be undertaken for 12 months with a progress update in 6 months time. The findings of the review and a schedule of action to be undertaken would be presented to the Cabinet Member in 12 months time. The Lead Commissioner, - City Regulation and Infrastructure cautioned that the results of the review could not be pre-determined.

43.12    The Cabinet Member conveyed that for reasons outlined in the report he believed that the recommendations of the 4 October Environment, Sustainability and Transport Cabinet Member Meeting should stand, although with a modification to 2.1e. However he wished to emphasise that West Hove & Portslade, including the Wish Park area remained a priority of the administration and would be considered as part of the Strategic Citywide Review. He would be asking officers to begin this process immediately which would take no longer than 12 months, and that officers would give a progress report to this meeting within 6 months.

43.13    RESOLVED- That the Cabinet Member for Transport & Public Realm, in accordance with Part 6, paragraph 16.10 of the Council’s constitution, and having considered the resolution of ECSOSC on 14 October and the additional information provided to ECSOSC and in this paper:

(a)         Confirms the Cabinet Members decision 2.1 a, b, c & d of 4 October 2011 in relation to the Citywide Parking Review.

(b)         Clarifies and confirms that in recommendation 2.1e the proposed start date for external consultation in respect of the strategic citywide parking review is immediately following a decision at this meeting and to take approximately 12 months with a report on progress to be made to the Cabinet Member for Transport & Public Realm within 6 months.