Agenda item

To receive members’ questions under procedure rule no.11.  The procedure rule provides that any member may ask the chairman of a board or group any question on any matter in relation to which the Council has powers or duties which affect the District, provided that three clear days’ notice in writing has been given to the Head of Legal and Support Services.

Councillor T Eynon put the following question to Councillor T J Pendleton: 

“"Residents in my ward, living in Coalville and Hugglescote's traditional Victorian terraced properties, rely on finding on-street residential parking for the vehicles they need to participate in the local economy.

"Residents are experiencing the loss of public garage spaces and on-street residential parking due to new housing developments.

"I understand from County Highways that the Planning Authority is responsible for determining local planning policy regarding the loss on on-street parking and its mitigation.

"What options for retaining, replacing or improving access to on-street residential parking are available to this Authority and what are the barriers and enablers to adoption?"

Councillor T J Pendleton gave the following response: 

“The Council as local planning authority takes in to account issues relating to highway safety when determining proposals for development. This is not just about the access to a site but what impact will the proposed development have on the wider highway network. In forming a view on this matter, regard is had to the comments of the County Council as the highway authority. A planning application can only be refused for evidenced, legitimate planning reasons. Possible reasons to refuse a planning application therefore might include highway safety. Where no issues have been raised by the highway authority it would be extremely difficult to successfully defend a reason for refusal on planning grounds.

On-street parking might be lost as a result of creating a new access where vehicles currently park or where it is necessary, in highway safety terms having regard to the views of the highway authority, to introduce restrictions (for example double yellow lines). It should be appreciated that there is no right to be able to park on the highway. It may, in some circumstances, be possible to secure the provision of off-street parking for existing residents as part of a proposed new development, for example through the provision of rear accesses to existing properties. In instances where proposals would result in the loss of on-street parking, this would need to be a balanced against all other considerations, and it would be inappropriate to have a blanket approach to such cases as it will depend upon the circumstances of the application, for instance the scale, shape, levels or layout of the site may not facilitate the provision of any additional off-street car parking.  

It is worth bearing in mind that some of the older residential areas were built at a time when car ownership was not widespread, and particularly in terraced streets this can result in on-street parking pressure. Changes to the built environment, which take place over time and on their own do not make much difference, can nonetheless have a cumulative impact on the availability of parking. One example of such a change is a growing trend for subdivision of houses, to accommodate multiple households. There are planning and other mechanisms to manage the impacts of this, and we will carefully consider the optimal policy approach as part of a review of the local plan. Robust empirical evidence concerning these issues is not available, and until it is, we are not able to implement a policy”. 

Councillor T Eynon stated that she was surprised at the quality of the response.  As a supplementary question, she asked if the Portfolio Holder was aware of the requirements in the guidance note published by the Chartered Institute of Highways Engineers in 2014 and the National Planning Policy Framework which required local authorities to implement a residential parking policy and to take account of expected car ownership levels and opportunities for public transport in setting the policy.  She commented that the lack of empirical evidence had not prevented other local authorities from implementing a policy. 

Councillor T J Pendleton responded that he was well aware of the requirements set out in the National Planning Policy Framework, however evidence was still being gathered and he assured Councillor T Eynon that once enough evidence had been gathered, the Planning Department would be considering further methods to control the particular parking issue she was referring to.  He added that he would continue to liaise with Leicestershire County Council on this matter. 

Councillor J Legrys put the following question to Councillor A V Smith:

“Mantle Lane Rail Bridge Coalville – Improvement to Environment

Despite previous questions relating to poor environmental outlook on Mantle Lane in the vicinity of the rail bridge and cuttings, there is little improvement that the public can see.

I accept that the bridge, retaining walls & highway belong to Network Rail & Leicestershire County Council. But litter, overgrowing vegetation, vermin mess and general deterioration leaves this key access into Coalville Town Centre an unpleasant and off-putting feature for all.

I am asking the Portfolio Holder to seek out third party grants to fund (at least) removal of vegetation, jet wash the bridge structure and internal tiling. Also, could funding found to paint the bridge structure with suitable bright colours showing Coalville Town Centre features?”

Councillor A V Smith gave the following response:

“I agree that Coalville should benefit from the best possible entrances to town, and that includes along Mantle Lane. It is the case that there is no easy fix to the issues that you have identified in your question, I am sure you will agree that periodic action is required to improve and maintain the quality of the environment related to the bridge.

The Council has been working with Network Rail in relation to the condition of the area around Mantle Lane Bridge since 2010. The Council has undertaken a number of initiatives which are summarised below:

·         The Street Environment Officers arranged a big clean-up of the steps including removal of rubbish and cutting back of shrubs etc.

·         Liaison with Network Rail resulted in Network Rail undertaking various works in the autumn and winter months of 2013. It culminated in the bridge being treated with a pigeon deterrent chemical (this makes the bridge look like it is on fire to the pigeons) and also the footpath side of the bridge being totally enclosed to prevent pigeons roosting under the bridge and fouling the footpath below. The final part of this enclosure work was completed in November 2013 and the bridge was monitored for a period of a few months after this to ensure the pigeons had not returned.  At the time it appeared that the work had been very successful and the footpath had never looked so clean

·         The Big Spring Clean organised by the Street Environment Officers, which has taken place over the last 2 years, always includes Mantle Lane Bridge steps and surrounding area of Thornborough Road and Baker Street

·         The Environmental Protection Team has been working with East Midlands Housing in 2017 to improve the housing area frontage, leading up to the bridge from the clock tower as bins were being left out

·         To cleanse the area under the bridge requires traffic management and in March 2017 during the Spring Clean the road was closed so that street cleansing operatives were able to clean the area

·         Community Focus staff visited a number of local businesses prior to the Spring Clean 2017, to encourage them to get involved, but unfortunately no such support was forthcoming

·         Discussions have taken place with Network Rail with a view to brightening up the area including planting hanging baskets which was well received, but never progressed by Network Rail

There are things that Network Rail can still do to brighten up the area including the plants or painting the bricks.

The current position is that we have been working behind the scenes to secure some improvements, however we have recently received some information about the Litter Innovation Fund (LIF), is a £450,000 programme, funded by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) which aims to reduce litter by funding innovative approaches to pilot, implement and evaluate small scale local research projects that could be replicated more widely.

http://www.wrap.org.uk/content/litter-innovation-fund

If you are interested to apply to the grant, we can support you to put an application together”.

Councillor J Legrys thanked Councillor A V Smith for the positive response to his question.  He expressed support for the new initiatives such as the Litter Innovation Fund.  As a supplementary question, he asked when an application to the Litter Innovation Fund could be progressed.

Councillor A V Smith thanked Councillor J Legrys for his question and agreed that the state of the bridge was appalling.  She advised that a litter pick and clean-up of the bridge had been arranged before the next large event in the town centre on remembrance Sunday.  She added that officers would work to support the Coalville Special Expenses Working Party to make a grant application.