Agenda item

Report of the Corporate Director of Environment & Resident Experience. To be presented by the Cabinet Member for Resident Services and Tackling Inequality

The Cabinet Member for Resident Services and Tackling Inequality introduced the report.

It was explained that the report explained the plan to deliver parking controls and management in the programme areas under my portfolio. With safety playing a key role, it was important that, where the Council provided parking for motor vehicles, it did not create a safety risk. It was explained that the Council was keen to provide a safe and accessible space for those using footways, whether on foot, wheeling or pushing prams. It was highlighted that enforcement played a part in creating a safe environment, whilst ensuring parking and servicing only took place where permitted, and the Red Route trialled in Brantwood Road had shown improved compliance with parking controls through the replacement of enforcement by foot with remote enforcement. This scheme was since made permanent and this report brought forward two other areas that would have benefited from a similar approach. It was recognised by the Council that parking was an essential public service and that residents needed safe and fair access to their homes, whether they were drivers or users of other forms of transport. It was stressed that provision of parking for those with a Blue Badge was especially important to ensure they had access to their local high streets and amenities whether leisure or otherwise. It was explained that it was important to take a balanced approach whilst being mindful of the various policies and objectives of the Council, including those that prioritised walking and cycling.

It was explained that the report set out the 5-year investment plan and referenced other developments planned or underway that would impact parking provision. The Cabinet Member explained that, to deliver change and manage parking in the future, it was important that funding was set aside from Council Capital beyond the then-current 5-year investment plan period to facilitate this.

In response to comments and questions from Cllr Connor, the following information was shared:

• It was questioned whether no-idling signs could be included as part of the plan. The Cabinet Member agreed that this could be implemented. It was additionally explained that the Council was working with Trade Unions to discuss with Council drivers to discourage idling wherever possible.
  
  
• That the Council had worked with residents to ensure a good balance of road yellow road markings in local areas. However, it was stressed that there was a priority to minimise risk of accidents at road junctions through the utilisation of yellow road markings for pedestrian safety.
  
  
• That the Council would consult with local Councillors on developments and adjustments to street furniture on adjacent wards. It was stressed that engagement in areas which would have an effect on multiple wards would take place with Councillors from those wards. 

RESOLVED:

That Cabinet:

1. Agreed the 5-year Parking Investment Plan for 2025/26 – 2029/30
   
   
2. Delegated, where appropriate, authority to the Head of Highways and Parking:
   1. To make decisions relating to scheme design and implementation.
   2. To carry out consultations and, in compliance with the Constitution, with regards to objections received during statutory consultation, consulted with the Cabinet Member for Tackling Inequality and Resident Service; and
   3. Agreed that, having followed the legal process, make traffic management orders to give effect to those schemes.

Reasons for Decisions

This report sought approval for the 5-year Parking Investment Plan 2025/26 – 2029/30, which set out the priorities and funding levels for the next 5 years. The Council had a statutory obligation to manage its road network, and parking played a key role in congestion reduction and improving road safety. It could also encourage healthier travel options, while optimising use of limited kerb space.

Alternative Options Considered

A ‘Do Nothing’ option was considered and rejected, as this would not have allowed the Council to deliver changes to parking controls necessary to meet its policies, address resident and business concerns, and respond to requests over the next 5 years. It would also not have allowed schemes approved in the 2024/25 Parking Investment Plan to be progressed to delivery in 2025/26.