Agenda and minutes

Further to Minute No. G72 of 2^nd December, 2013, a further report was submitted with regard to permitting cyclists to use the town centre Vehicle Restricted Area (VRA) and to extend the hours of access for loading/unloading.

When submitted to Cabinet on 13^th January, 2014 (Minute No. C164 refers), the Cabinet of the risk to pedestrians and parents with children, blind or partially signed and elderly people.

In order to address the above concerns, it was proposed that cyclists be allowed to access High Street on an experimental basis for a 12 months period with access restricted to the times that motor vehicles can access High Street for loading/unloading purposes.  This would enable an assessment to be made as to whether permitting cyclists in the town centre VRA caused any problems.  High Street was to be used for the experimental TRO as it was on the fringe of the town centre VRA and would be in accordance with the proposed Westgate to Clifton Park Cycle Route.

Permitting cyclists to cycle both ways on High Street would enable the implementation of the proposed Westgate to Clifton Park Cycle Route Phase 1 scheme (Minute No. G81 refers).  Should the Cycle Route be not implemented, the environmental improvements which complemented those made as part of the proposed Town Centre Heritage Improvement Scheme on High Street would not be delivered and, therefore, the environmental enhancement of this part of the town centre would be incomplete.

Should the experimental TRO on High Street prove to be successful, it was further proposed that cyclists be allowed to access the town centre VRA on Frederick Street.

Discussion ensued on the following issues:-

-          Proposed change to hours of access – once the access time had elapsed High Street would revert to being a fully pedestrianised area

-          The “fear” factor was not demonstrated in statistical evidence for the number of incidences of pedestrians being struck by cyclists

-          Signage to reflect the changes

-          Opportunity for environmental improvements to upgrade the existing paving adjacent to the Imperial Buildings to provide a high quality streetscape complementing the proposed Townscape Heritage Improvement works on the pedestrianised section of High Street

Resolved:-  (1)  That the proposed changes to allow cycling in the town centre Vehicle Restricted Area be revised to now permit cycling in both directions on High Street only.

(2)  That the change to hours of access for loading/unloading to the town centre Vehicle Restricted Area from 17.00 to 10.00 to 16.00 to 10.00 be implemented.

(3)  That the proposed changes to permit cyclists to use High Street in both directions between 16.00 and 10.00 be made on an experimental basis for a period of 12 months and during the experimental Traffic Regulation Order period monitoring be undertaken and liaison take place with interested groups on its operation and that objectors be informed of the revised proposal.

(4)  That the proposed Westgate to Clifton Park Cycle Route Phase 1, as reported to Cabinet Member on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 92.

Andy Butler, Senior Traffic Engineer, reported on the outcome of resident consultations on the proposed Rotherham Hospital Residents Parking Zone following complaints received regarding parking difficulties experienced by residents living on Queensway and adjacent roads surrounding the Hospital.

Residents on the Duke of Norfolk estate and in the Broom Valley area had been written to seeking their views on a potential scheme that would create Residents Only Parking Zones (see Drawing No. 126/18/TT234 attached to the report).  In total, 1,059 letters and questionnaires were sent out to residents.

The proposed operation hours and terms and conditions would be the same as other Residents Parking Zone around the Town Centre i.e. Monday to Friday 9.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. and the ability to purchase up to 2 permits to be displayed in vehicles parked on street during the operational hours.

531 responses had been received from Broom Valley and Duke of Norfolk estate residents together with a 33 signature petition from Rencliffe Road objecting the proposal.  A sample of the comments received were set out in the report submitted.

The responses indicated:-

Duke of Norfolk estate (including Sitwell Grove and Sitwell Drive)

-          331 responses received – 62% return rate

-          Overall only 41% were supportive of the proposal so an area-wide Parking Zone could not be justified

-          5 roads where 50% or more supportive responses with 2 roads (Queensway (78%) and Sitwell Drive (64%)) significantly higher support

-          Lymister Avenue, Norfolk Way and Sitwell Grove had 50% or more responses in support

It was, therefore, proposed to create a smaller residents’ parking zone based on the boundaries of Queensway and Norfolk Way with Moorgate Road and include part of Hallam Road (Drawing No. 126/18/TT505).  There would be further consultation during the Statutory Consultation process.  A separate Residents Parking Zone would be created on Sitwell Drive.

Lymister Avenue had been excluded as the supportive responses only represented 35% of all residents.

The support for such a scheme on Sitwell Grove was not considered sufficient to justify Resident Only Parking.  Whilst there were 50% supportive responses, this only represented 18% of all residents.  However, a number of responses suggested that No Waiting at any Time parking restrictions should mitigate their concerns (Drawing No. 126/19/TT589).

Broom Valley Area

-     200 responses had been received – 19% return rate

-     Of these only 3 roads where there were a large percentage of supportive responses – Mile Oak Road (70%), Oakwood Road West (67%) and Beaconsfield Road (60%)

-     When considered against the number of properties on each street, the overall support was quite small

-     On all other roads consulted, the majority were not in favour of parking controls

In view of the above, it was considered to be insufficient support to justify implementing a Residents Parking Zone in the Broom Valley area.  However, there were parts of Beaconsfield Road, in the vicinity of its junction with Carlingford Road, where non-residential parking was obstructing the safe and free flow of traffic.  It was,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 93.