EX - page 1

ANNEX 2

PROPOSED HEADINGTON RESIDENTS’ PARKING SCHEME

Summary of Comments Received

General Comments/Requests

The following points were taken from questionnaires and other correspondence received during, and either side of, the Informal Consultation period in 2002.

Each point has been considered and incorporated into the revised proposal where possible within design standards and constraints. The comments, with our response, are in the table below.

Minor Amendments to Restrictions Within Proposed Parking Places

In a number of the following streets residents have asked for residents spaces to be replaced with time limited spaces/spaces open to more general use or visa-versa. If requests can be accommodated by simply exchanging one restriction for another, to satisfy both parties amendments have been made to the revised proposals. In order to save space in this report where this has occurred the comment has not reported below.

Ref / Comment/Request / Officer Response /

Number

Barton Lane

1.1 / Wants more no waiting in Old High or St Andrew's Road Street Road to clear sections of road / Need to provide some parking for residents and visitors, in addition clearer roads could also make these two roads into more attractive ”rat-runs / 2
1.2 / Wants more disabled parking spaces / Disabled Parking Places outside the City Centre in Oxford are governed by a separate order which will possibly be reviewed later this year. / 1
1.3 / Wants more residents spaces at expense of time limited spaces between 72a & 76 Old High Street / Unfortunately there is not enough road space to cater for both parties, as a result a balance has to be struck between residents and visitors to the area / 1
1.4 / Additional parking outside “The Barn” in Barton Lane / Parked vehicle would obstruct visibility from Larkins Lane junction / 1

Bateman Street

2.1 / Wants more no waiting in Old High or St Andrew's Road Street Road to clear sections of road / Need to provide some parking for residents and visitors, in addition clearer roads could also make these two roads into more attractive ”rat-runs” / 1
2.2 / Wants more parking spaces/believes that there will not be enough parking spaces/believes that there are too many lengths of no waiting at any time / Scheme represents the maximum number of parking spaces that can be achieved without compromising standards for emergency access, see paragraph 21 in main report. / 4
2.3 / Wants more parking space at London Road end of Kennett Road / Section of road needs to be kept clear to allow HGV’s to turn into rear of shops without using non highway land / 1
2.4 / Wants more time limited spaces at expense of residents spaces parking only / A balance has to be struck between the desire for residents to be able to park outside their property and that of visitors to the area. / 1
2.5 / Wants more residents spaces at expense of time limited spaces/ Wants all spaces in the road to be residents parking only / A balance has to be struck between the desire for residents to be able to park outside their property and that of visitors to the area. / 1
2.6 / Concerned that limited waiting spaces will create problems due to competition with church/non-resident parking / A balance has to be struck between the desire for residents to be able to park outside their property and that of visitors to the area. / 1
2.7 / Concerned that accessway would be obstructed/Wants no waiting across their access / Where accessways fall between proposed permit holders spaces it is intended to offer access owners either white access protection or no waiting at any time / 3
2.8 / Believes that there is not enough visitors permits / The visitor permit numbers corresponds to other areas in the City where it appears to be adequate. Although it is possible to give additional permits (especially the elderly or infirm) it is necessary to ration visitor permits to prevent them from being passed on to commuters etc. / 1
2.9 / Unhappy with visitor permit scheme in general / The visitor permit system conforms to that used elsewhere in Oxford City. Any changes to this should be carried out as part of a City-wide review and as a result is outside the scope of this report. / 1
2.10 / Concerned about multi-occupancy houses taking up parking space/wants some form of permit restraint / see paragraph 29 in main report / 1
2.11 / Wants additional parking space outside Number 14 Bateman Street / Agreed / 4

Cecil Sharpe Place

3.1 / Wants more parking spaces/believes that there will not be enough parking spaces/believes that there are too many lengths of no waiting at any time / Scheme represents the maximum number of parking spaces that can be achieved without compromising standards for emergency access, see paragraph 21 in main report. / 2

Dunstan Road

4.1 / Wants Space for Church attendees / Currently unable to allocate spaces to specific buildings, however, church attendees can park in Limited Waiting Spaces or on the No Waiting 8.am-6.30 Mon-Fri when not in operation. Disabled Badge Holders would be able to park in permit holders spaces while more able bodied people could use the car park in Old High Street. / 2
4.2 / Wants no waiting at any time on both sides of road / No Waiting 8.am-6.30 Mon-Fri introduced to provide additional parking space for weekend visitors to the area. / 1
4.3 / Person who tends church yard wants parking close to church. / Can park in Limited Waiting Spaces or on the No Waiting 8.am-6.30 Mon-Fri when not in operation / 1

Gardiner Street

5.1 / Believes that scheme is not necessary as there is enough parking for commuters when Residents cars are at work./ There is no parking problem in road / This may be true in some roads but not in others near-by, as a result commuters would migrate from neighbouring roads. More importantly the main function of the scheme is to encourage commuters to use more sustainable forms of transport by removing car parking spaces / 1
5.2 / Concerned about effect on local business / Time limited shared use parking will provide a greater turnover of vehicles than is possible under the current arrangements especially if commuters were to be displaced into this area. / 1
5.3 / Wants more parking spaces/believes that there will not be enough parking spaces/believes that there are too many lengths of no waiting at any time / Scheme represents the maximum number of parking spaces that can be achieved without compromising standards for emergency access particularly at road junctions. However, there would be a short fall in the number of spaces in this particular Street but this must be balanced against the need to prevent obstructive parking especially as there will probably be a surplus in roads close by. / 6
5.4 / Wants more residents spaces at expense of time limited spaces/ Wants all spaces in the road to be residents parking only / A balance has to be struck between the desire for residents to be able to park outside their property and that of visitors to the area. / 1
5.5 / Wants unrestricted parking spaces/space for non permit holders / This would not prevent commuters from using the spaces which is the main function of the scheme and would not encourage them to use more sustainable forms of transport. / 1
5.6 / Believes that there is not enough visitors permits / The visitor permit numbers corresponds to other areas in the City where it appears to be adequate. Although it is possible to give additional permits (especially the elderly or infirm) it is necessary to ration visitor permits to prevent them from being passed on to commuters etc. / 2
5.7 / Concerned about multi-occupancy houses taking up parking space/wants some form of permit restraint / see paragraph 29 in main report. / 1

Gathorne Road

6.1 / Wants dropping off points outside/for schools/nursery / The provision of no waiting at any time does not prevent the picking up or setting down of passengers. / 1
6.2 / Wants more parking spaces/believes that there will not be enough parking spaces/believes that there are too many lengths of no waiting at any time / Scheme represents the maximum number of parking spaces that can be achieved without compromising standards for emergency access, see paragraph 21 in main report. / 2
6.3 / Do not want residents to have to park away from their road/wants cars close to reduce car crime / Unfortunately road widths and other physical restraints do not allow us to provide parking outside all properties while still complying with minimum standards / 2
6.4 / Objects to no waiting at any time outside their access/property / In general no waiting at any time is required so that standards for emergency access are not compromised and to create passing places where parked cars reduce the road width to one lane. However, where accessways fall between proposed permit holders spaces it may be possible to offer an alternative. / 1
6.5 / Objects to parking in rock edge across end of St Anne's Road / Parking across the end of the junction will not obscure visibility, and vehicle turning templates suggests that parked vehicles will not obstruct turning movements since junction is wide. / 1
6.6 / Wants footway parking opposite the existing disabled persons’ parking place road (3) / To enable all types of disabled vehicles to use the space safely it cannot be a footway parking place. Unfortunately the road is too narrow to allow parking opposite. / 3

Holyoake Road

7.1 / Wants more parking spaces/believes that there will not be enough parking spaces/believes that there are too many lengths of no waiting at any time / Scheme represents the maximum number of parking spaces that can be achieved without compromising standards for emergency access, see paragraph 21 in main report. / 1
7.2 / Wants more residents spaces at expense of time limited spaces/ Wants all spaces in the road to be residents parking only / Wants more residents spaces at expense of time limited spaces/ Wants all spaces in the road to be residents parking only / 6
7.3 / Wants more short term parking outside shops/ more parking for shoppers / Scheme represents the maximum number of parking spaces that can be achieved without compromising standards for emergency access. A balance has to be struck between the needs of residents and Business in the area. / 1
7.4 / Wants short term parking outside shops in laybys in London Road where not used as bus stops / Short stay parking in these could cause congestion as vehicles try to join or leave traffic queuing at the Traffic Lights. that No Waiting 8am-6.30pm Mon-Sat in laybys would keep them free for deliveries and allow disabled badge holders to park close to shops for up to 3 hours / 1
7.5 / Wants short term parking to be a maximum of 30 minutes / This could not be effectively enforced due to the likely beat frequency of parking attendants. There were also requests from some businesses that the 30 minute spaces originally proposed by the City Council be made into 1 hour to give elderly shoppers more time
7.6 / Concerned about multi-occupancy houses taking up parking space/wants some form of permit restraint / see paragraph 29 in main report / 1
7.7 / Request for Footway residents parking on the western side of Holyoake Road / Rearrange parking at southern end of road to provide footway parking spaces. Subject to adequate Visibility from accessways. / 2
7.8 / Concerned that St Leonard's Road Carpark will no longer be available to residents free of charge / As this is a City Council owned car park this is generally outside the control of the County Council. However, it is strongly recommended that this scheme be renamed “Headington Residents Parking Zone” so that new permit scheme ties up with references to the order governing the control of the car park. / 1

Kennett Road

Ref / Comment / Officer Response /

Number

8.1 / Believes that scheme is not necessary as there is enough parking for commuters when Residents cars are at work./ There is no parking problem in road / This may be true in some roads but not in others near-by, as a result commuters would migrate from neighbouring roads. More importantly the main function of the scheme is to encourage commuters to use more sustainable forms of transport by removing car parking spaces / 1
8.2 / Concerned about effect on local business / Time limited shared use parking will provide a greater turnover of vehicles than is possible under the current arrangements where many streets are occupied by commuters / 2
8.3 / Wants more disabled parking spaces / Disabled Parking Places outside the City Centre in Oxford are governed by a separate order which will possibly be reviewed later this year. / 2
8.4 / Wants more parking spaces/believes that there will not be enough parking spaces/believes that there are too many lengths of no waiting at any time / Scheme represents the maximum number of parking spaces that can be achieved without compromising standards for emergency access, see paragraph 21 in main report. / 4
8.5 / Wants more parking space at London Road end of Kennett Road / Section of road needs to be kept clear to allow HGV’s to turn into rear of shops without using non highway land also many accessways at this end of the road leaves no room for parking spaces. / 1
8.6 / Wants more residents spaces at expense of time limited spaces/ Wants all spaces in the road to be residents parking only / A balance has to be struck between the desire for residents to be able to park outside their property and that of visitors to the area. / 2
8.7 / Concerned that accessway would be obstructed/Wants no waiting across their access / Where accessways fall between proposed permit holders spaces it is intended to offer access owners either white access protection or no waiting at any time / 1
8.8 / Concerned about multi-occupancy houses taking up parking space/wants some form of permit restraint / see paragraph 29 in main report / 1
8.9 / Wants short term parking outside shops in laybys in London Road where not used as bus stops / Short stay parking in these could cause congestion as vehicles try to join or leave traffic queuing at the Traffic Lights. That No Waiting 8am-6.30pm Mon-Sat in laybys would keep them free for deliveries and allow disabled badge holders to park close to shops for up to 3 hours. / 1
8.10 / Believes that there is not enough visitors permits / The visitor permit numbers corresponds to other areas in the City where it appears to be adequate. Although it is possible to give additional permits (especially the elderly or infirm) it is necessary to ration visitor permits to prevent them from being passed on to commuters etc. / 2

Langley Close

9.1 / Believes that scheme is not necessary as there is enough parking for commuters when Residents cars are at work./ There is no parking problem in road / This may be true in some roads but not in others near-by, as a result commuters would migrate from neighbouring roads. More importantly the main function of the scheme is to encourage commuters to use more sustainable forms of transport by removing car parking spaces / 5
9.2 / Concerned that more no waiting will clear road space and increase traffic speed / Waiting restrictions required to prevent obstruction to larger vehicles will lead to slightly clearer roads, however the strategic positioning of parking places will mitigate this without compromising emergency and service access. / 1
9.3 / Wants more disabled parking spaces / Disabled Parking Places outside the City Centre in Oxford are governed by a separate order which will possibly be reviewed later this year. / 2
9.4 / Wants more parking spaces/believes that there will not be enough parking spaces/believes that there are too many lengths of no waiting at any time / Scheme represents the maximum number of parking spaces that can be achieved without compromising standards for emergency access, see paragraph 21 in main report. / 10
9.5 / Wants more short term parking outside shops/ more parking for shoppers / Scheme represents the maximum number of parking spaces that can be achieved without compromising standards for emergency access. A balance has to be struck between the needs of residents and Business in the area. / 1
9.6 / Wants unrestricted parking spaces/space for non permit holders / This would not prevent commuters from using the spaces which is the main function of the scheme and would not encourage them to use more sustainable forms of transport. / 2
9.7 / Concerned that accessway would be obstructed/Wants no waiting across their access / Where accessways fall between proposed permit holders spaces it is intended to offer access owners either white access protection or no waiting at any time / 6
9.8 / Do not want residents to have to park away from their road/wants cars close to reduce car crime / Unfortunately road widths and other physical restraints do not allow us to provide parking outside all properties while still complying with minimum standards / 1
9.9 / Believes that there is not enough visitors permits / The visitor permit numbers corresponds to other areas in the City where it appears to be adequate. Although it is possible to give additional permits (especially the elderly or infirm) it is necessary to ration visitor permits to prevent them from being passed on to commuters etc. / 2
9.10 / Unhappy with visitor permit scheme in general / The visitor permit system conforms to that used elsewhere in Oxford City. Any changes to this should be carried out as part of a City-wide review and as a result is outside the scope of this report. / 2
9.11 / Objects to fee for business permits / Fee introduced as a way of financing business permit scheme. / 2
9.12 / Concerned about multi-occupancy houses taking up parking space/wants some form of permit restraint / see paragraph 29 in main report / 3
9.13 / Objects to fee for residents permits / No fee proposed for residents or visitors permits / 2
9.14 / Concerned that parking places outside Langley Court will cause vehicles off loading goods into swimming pool business will obstruct road / Delivery vehicles could use 2 hour shared use spaces close by. Note double yellow lines are proposed to prevent parked vehicles from causing an obstruction. / 2
9.15 / Wants parking both sides of the road / Road is too narrow to allow parking on both sides of the road and footways are too narrow to allow footway parking places. / 9
9.16 / Wants parking spaces on bends on inner circle of Langley Close in place of No Waiting 8am-6.30pm Mon-Fri / Certain combinations of parked vehicles could cause an obstruction to larger vehicles, therefore parking spaces are not an option. Indeed there is expert opinion that these bends should be protected by no waiting at any time on. / 4
9.17 / Wants one way system around Langley Close to enable parking both sides / Making one way would not allow parking both sides as road is too narrow to allow parking on both sides of the road (see above). Also one way system may lead to higher speeds as drivers could be sure that vehicles would not be coming the other way. / 3
9.18 / Wants parking on the junction with the circuit at the end of the close. Instead of outside Langley Court. / Parking will obstruct visibility slightly and may create difficulties for larger vehicles. Also only slight gain in car parking spaces especially when weighed against hazard / 3

Larkins Lane