Meeting documents

To consider a report by the Service Director - Environment, Infrastructure & Economy.

The Committee considered a report by the Service Director – Environment, Infrastructure and Economy on proposals to introduce no waiting at any time restrictions on the C8, West Road, West Lulworth; in extending those which already existed northwards to the junction with Daggers Gate and southwards to the junction with Church Road. This proposal was designed so as to facilitate access to the village more readily, ease congestion which was being experienced; improve the means by which traffic could more readily flow; and on safety grounds, particularly for those vulnerable road users accessing the road and to allow unfettered access for emergency service vehicles, as necessary.  The proposals had been initiated by West Lulworth Parish Council who considered them to be necessary for the reasons given. Following the advertisement of the proposals, objections had been received and, as a consequence, the Committee was now being asked to consider whether the proposals should be implemented as advertised.

With the aid of a visual presentation, and having regard to the provisions of the Update Sheet and statements from third parties provided to members prior to the meeting, officers explained the reasoning behind the need to impose the waiting restrictions, what these entailed and the basis of the objections received. Photographs and plans were shown to the Committee by way of illustration. This showed where the proposals would be situated, the characteristics of the road and its setting within the village. It also showed the relationship between the road and commercial and residential properties; where off street car parks operated by the Lulworth Estate were situated; what other opportunity there was for on street parking within the village and the effect congestion was having on access arrangements.

Objections received considered that the proposed arrangements would be detrimental to their parking needs and affect trade. However officers considered that the proposals were, on balance, the best achievable to meet competing needs and addressed the issues currently being experienced.

Primary consultation had been carried out on the proposals and was supported by the local County Councillor for South Purbeck, Purbeck District Council, West Lulworth Parish Council and the Dorset Police. There was an alternative view that any additional restrictions should be on a seasonal basis only, as much of the congestion being experienced only happened during the summer season. However, with ever increasing parking needs given the popularity of the village - owing primarily to its access to Lulworth Cove as a destination – maintaining accessibility was seen to be fundamental to the prosperity of the village and it was essential for emergency services to be able to gain access on every occasion needed.

However, objections received had cited the loss of much needed on road parking spaces as the reason why the proposals were not beneficial to either the business interests of the village nor on an individual basis in meeting residents own parking needs.

Officers acknowledged the contribution made by the Lulworth Estate towards the management of parking in the village; being critical to how off-street car parking could be managed throughout the village. This cooperation was much valued and could not be underestimated.

How parking needs should be assessed was seen to be a balanced choice; in what arrangements were considered to be the most beneficial. Whether there was a significant problem with access for emergency vehicles was seen to be somewhat debateable, but still needed to be given careful consideration.

The opportunity was provided for public speaking with the Committee first hearing from James Weld of the Weld Estate who welcomed what was being proposed as a means to manage the traffic being generated by what the village and Lulworth Cove  had to offer. He considered the proposals would benefit residents and visitors alike and enable access to be more readily achieved. Congestion had been experienced in the recent past and this was detracting from the overall experience for visitors and inconveniencing residents. He confirmed that the Estate would continue to play its part in proving what parking was necessary and particularly now, to ensure that those displaced vehicles could be accomodated. He was confident that this could be achieved.

Carole Matthews, a local business owner and Parish councillor, considered the proposals not to be in the interests of the village and would adversely affect trade by the loss of on street parking provision and the ability to readily access the church. She said that double yellow lines on one side of the road would be acceptable, but not on both sides. Moreover, displaced traffic would create increased congestion in the centre of the village by motorists seeking alternative on street parking and cause accessibility issues to residential properties. The resultant decrease in parking options would be detrimental to the prosperity of the village and its vibrancy and disenfranchise residents.

Jon Davey, the Chairman of the Parish Council, considered the proposals to be necessary and would complement what parking management already existed. There had been a significant increase in the number of visitors over the previous five years. He confirmed that the Parish Council had taken into consideration local opinion and had come to the view that the proposals, as advertised, would best meet the parking needs of the village. He acknowledged there to be sufficient car parking to deal with demand, provided that motorists were considerate in how they parked. However, this had not always been the case and had led to the need for the restrictions now proposed. It was essential that access was maintained for emergency vehicles and these proposals would serve to achieve that.

The County Councillor for South Purbeck, Cherry Brooks, was provided with the opportunity to address the Committee but was satisfied that her statement in Appendix 3 to the report set out her position clearly. Whilst she considered the proposals to be adequate as they stood, she thought that these would not necessarily solve all the parking issues being experienced.

The Committee were then provided with the opportunity to ask questions of the officer’s presentation and about what they had heard and officer’s provided clarification in respect of the points raised as necessary.

In asking what consideration had been given to some variation of the proposals to provide for waiting restrictions on the northern side of the road only, some members felt this compromise would go some way to satisfying the needs of all concerned. Officers confirmed that various alternative options had been explored but it was felt that these would not achieve all that was necessary and what was proposed was the only option agreed upon by all the primary consultees.  Moreover, the Senior Solicitor confirmed that, should the Committee be minded to pursue an alternative option, there would be a need for the process to start afresh to allow for the necessary consultation on this.

Nevertheless, some members considered such a compromise to be a viable option in the circumstances, so a resolution was proposed and seconded on that basis, in that whilst there was concern about congestion on the road, there was a need to recognise the absence of alternative, suitable parking facilities.

Other members considered what was being proposed to be satisfactory in meeting the parking needs of the village and in addressing the issues being experiences. Whilst there was recognition that vehicles might well be displaced, there was felt to be adequate alternative provision to deal with this. On the basis of the alternative resolution, on being put to the vote, the proposal was lost.

Then, having considered the objections received and in being mindful of how displaced vehicles might be accommodated, the Committee considered that the proposed waiting restrictions were necessary to address the issues being experienced and were seen to be both reasonable and proportionate in achieving this. Given this, and taking into account the views of the primary consultees and, in particular, those of West Lulworth Parish Council - in being the best representation of local opinion, thought and will - on being put to the vote, it was decided that the proposals should be implemented, as advertised.

Recommended

That the Cabinet agree that the Traffic Regulation Order for extending the current waiting restrictions northwards and southwards on West Road (C8) at West Lulworth be introduced, as advertised.

Reason for Recommendation

To avoid danger to persons or other traffic using the road and preventing the likelihood of any such danger arising and for facilitating the passage on the road, of any class of traffic, including pedestrians.