Brighton parking scheme set to be rejected (From The Argus)
Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.
Brighton parking scheme set to be rejected
6:21pm Friday 16th July 2010 in
A controversial parking scheme looks set to be rejected after widespread opposition from residents.
Three-quarters of the people who responded to proposals to introduce a residents' parking scheme in Hanover and Elm Grove in Brighton were against the plans.
Brighton and Hove City Council consulted residents earlier this year on the scheme, which would see residents and permit parking covering another large swathe of the city.
Around 3,000 valid responses were received, from one-in-three of the people living in the 128 streets affected.
Overall 75% of people were against the proposed changes to on-street parking while 25% were in favour.
Ward councillors will now have the chance to talk to the parking team and make suggestions before a final decision will be made by the council's cabinet member for the environment, Geoffrey Theobald, on September 16.
The meeting will consider a report with a road by road analysis of the consultation.
It will also cover reviews of the existing parking schemes in the St Luke's and Queens Park areas.
Coun Theobald said: “The headline results show there is no mandate for going ahead with a parking scheme in this area. I'd like to reassure residents of what I stated at the outset, that I will not go ahead with any parking scheme where residents clearly don't want one.
“The formal decision will be taken in September because I want to make sure that residents and their ward councillors who supported the consultation have the opportunity to consider and comment on the detail.”
Wilf Nicholls, spokesman for the Elm Grove Residents Action Group, said: “This is absolutely fantastic news.
“This is the perfect example of the community speaking for itself.”
Bill Randall, the Green Party convenor and a Hanover and Elm Grove councillor, said it had been right to test public opinion.
He said: “The parking problems will not go away and we believe the council and the community should look closely at the many good ideas put forward by local residents during the consultation period to deal with parking problems, to improve the environment for pedestrians and cyclists and to expand the car club.”
Gill Mitchell, leader of the Labour group on the council, said: “It is good that people in the Elm Grove and Craven Vale area have been given the opportunity to respond to this parking consultation.
“We would like to see the Conservatives in charge make a decision that reflects this.”
Comments(21)
Roy Pennington
says...
7:04pm Fri 16 Jul 10
Living in the real world
says...
7:04pm Fri 16 Jul 10
They will just have to vote again, and again, and again until they vote the way there meant too.
The council didn't get where they are by listening to the people they are meant to represent
On_the_Level
says...
7:07pm Fri 16 Jul 10
dcsussex
says...
7:32pm Fri 16 Jul 10
acoustic
says...
8:26pm Fri 16 Jul 10
davyboy
says...
9:28pm Fri 16 Jul 10
Kit Napier
says...
10:07pm Fri 16 Jul 10
chipmunk77
says...
12:13am Sat 17 Jul 10
davyboy wrote:Bit behind the times there matey, the schemes are 8am to 8pm for a couple of years now!
resident parking schemes are ok, as long as each permit is for the street you live in, and not just an area. when we lived in hove, we often ended up 3-4 streets away from where we actually lived, because all the spaces in our road were taken when we returned. also, the times when residents need the spaces are those evenings and weekends. quite often, to stop commuter or shopping parkers, the signs say 'residents only between 8am and 6pm'. those are the times when the residents are often at work themselves, and the operational hours should read,'residents only between 6pm and 8am', to allow homeowners access to their streets when they need it.
Cunning Stunt
says...
2:37am Sat 17 Jul 10
Metro Reader
says...
7:13am Sat 17 Jul 10
Mr. Logical
says...
8:49am Sat 17 Jul 10
They underestimate me.
davyboy
says...
9:22am Sat 17 Jul 10
chipmunk77 wrote:what i am saying is that the schemes run the wrong way round. residents need the spaces at night, when they are at home, yet most of these schemes make it residents only DURING THE DAY when no-one is at home. you therefore end up with empty streets during the day, because the scheme says residents only, whereas, at night, when everyone comes home, it is a free for all, and local residents cannot get anywhere near their homes. the signd SHOULD read 'residents only 8pm-8am', to allow people to park nearer their homes.
davyboy wrote:Bit behind the times there matey, the schemes are 8am to 8pm for a couple of years now!
resident parking schemes are ok, as long as each permit is for the street you live in, and not just an area. when we lived in hove, we often ended up 3-4 streets away from where we actually lived, because all the spaces in our road were taken when we returned. also, the times when residents need the spaces are those evenings and weekends. quite often, to stop commuter or shopping parkers, the signs say 'residents only between 8am and 6pm'. those are the times when the residents are often at work themselves, and the operational hours should read,'residents only between 6pm and 8am', to allow homeowners access to their streets when they need it.
TheInsider
says...
10:42am Sat 17 Jul 10
I drove into a Hove street last year which was almost empty of cars. There was a pay and display machine so I bought a ticket. I parked up and when I returned to the car I had a parking ticket as the sign meant you could not park on the street between 8am and 6pm even though there was a parking machine; that time was for residents only.
It seemed like madness. The street was empty in the day as the residents were at work. I thought the same as you davyboy and thought the sign meant I could not park after 6pm as the street was then for residents who had returned from work.
The signs in Brighton are atrocious.
I am interested to find out if the parking problems are eased when the students have gone home.
Our street is almost empty of cars at the moment as most of the students have gone home. The kids next door to me have three cars! They often double park as they have nowhere to go. The rest of the neighbours have one car each.
This council has also allowed for too many houses of multiple occupation and houses being converted into flats which increases pressure on our infrastructure.
PeteBrighton
says...
11:29am Sat 17 Jul 10
tsimpkins
says...
2:39pm Sat 17 Jul 10
Brighton-Man
says...
3:44pm Sat 17 Jul 10
Greenlover
says...
6:04pm Sat 17 Jul 10
Dyno
says...
8:08pm Sun 18 Jul 10
PeteBrighton wrote:Maybe you should have looked into the facts of why so many rejected the scheme. I don't see how the reduction of nearly 1000 parking spaces would ease the parking problems for you? Especially as most of the Parking on Elm Grove itself was to be removed under the scheme. The councils own survey stated that parking for residents would worsen if the CPZ went ahead. (Which is why they tried not to release it and it took a "Freedom of Information" request to get it). I also doubt that the 75% of people who voted against this have guzzling vans and horse boxes. Maybe us residents didn't want a scheme that would fail the area and push out local busineses. I myself have a car which I only use when absolutely necessary and would love to replace it with an electric car when the technology is sufficient for my needs. Locally I use my bicycle to travel around or bus, and a train when going to work. A lot of us who voted against this scheme are environmentally conscious but are not willing to vote in a scheme thats detrimental to our neighbourhood and fails to address the issues its claiming to resolve.
Unfortunately the people behind the "ditch the scheme" campaign are the ones who park their gas-guzzling vans and horse boxes round Elm Grove and nearby streets taking up at least 2 spaces per vehicle making it impossible for residents with small environmentalluy friendly cars to get a look-in, there just isn't any room. Maybe those creatures ought to pay their way a bit.
Jo-scuba
says...
1:55pm Mon 19 Jul 10
There doesn't seem to be a logical reason why the parking on Elm Grove cannot be organised properly, so that cars CAN park on the pavement diagonally, and not park on the road at all.
The pavements are so enormously wide, there's plenty of space for both cars and pedestrians (with prams, wheelchairs, etc). In fact, the different colours of the tarmac on the pavement makes it look like the near-side of the pavement once may have been parking bays, which have since been turned into more pavement?
The current difficulty for drivers pulling out of the side roads comes from cars being parked on both the pavement and the road, so you can't see behind or around them, to pull out safely. The traffic comes so fast up the hill that it's really dangerous to try and nose you're way out to get adequate visability.
If the curbs were dropped and parking areas properly lined, there would be so much more parking available on Elm Grove, and drivers would be able to see up and down the road clearly when they are trying to pull out of a junction. They do this successfully on the Continent, so why not here? It would also mean that the people who live on Elm Grove, can park on Elm Grove and not in all the other side-streets.
Two parking problems solved!
lakeyboy
says...
3:04pm Wed 28 Jul 10
More News stories
- Tax credit changes hit poor families
- Airport ready for passenger numbers to soar
- Breastfeeding gets support
- Cycling safety bid in memory of Hove teacher
- Uncertain future for Southlands Hospital
- Busy Brighton street to close to traffic
- Fans arrested after trouble breaks out at Albion v Millwall game
- Pregnant woman twice turned away from hospital
- Defiant council bosses to ignore pay call
- Brighton grocery closes with loss of 15 jobs
Most popular
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Mr Pickwick says...
6:42pm Fri 16 Jul 10