Appendix C: Response to Petition from Sharrow Vale Traders

As part of the review process, a petition was received signed by 42 businesses in the Sharrow Vale Road area. This requested 13 changes to the Sharrow Vale Permit Parking Scheme, one local traffic management change and a review of the peripheral parking zone policy. This Appendix includes a response to each point within the petition. However, the traders are keen to stress that this is a package of measures and not a list of measures where one or two could be delivered in isolation.

1) There should be no permit holders in the pay and display bays on Hickmott Road and Sharrow Vale Road during business hours

Broadly agree with this request.

All permits are already excluded from the echelon bays outside the school, on Ecclesall Road and in Stewart Road car park. In addition, business permits are not valid for use in (among others) any of the bays on Hickmott Road and Sharrow Vale Road (between Junction Road and Lynton Road).

On Sharrow Vale Road, between Junction Road and Lynton Road, there are around 120 residential and 70 business properties. On Hickmott Road there are around 17 residential and 16 business properties. Sample daytime surveys following the introduction of the on scheme on Hickmott Road have shown that there are around three resident permit holders on the road (reduced to one during University holiday times), with around 13 resident permit holders on Sharrow Vale Road, nearly half of which park in the area between Hickmott Road and Cowlishaw Road.

Feedback from businesses in this area (particularly on Hickmott Road and the section of Sharrow Vale Road between Stewart Road and Jarrow Road) highlight the fact that spaces for visitors and shoppers in the area is still at a premium, but relatively small changes in the area will help. The main emphasis is in achieving more short term spaces in the Sharrow Vale Road/Hickmott Road area. This can be achieved in more than one way:

Further discussions will take place with traders and the outcome will feature in a future report in early 2009.

2) 15 minutes free in every pay and display bays on Hickmott Road and Sharrow Vale Road

Broadly agree with this request.

Discussions with traders show that their main concerns relate to:

Charging for car parking in the area provides for:

However,

One of the aims of the permit-parking scheme is to make parking easier for visitors and shoppers. Surveys undertaken (midweek, 10.00am - 2.00pm) have shown that:

This is encouraging, but the traders request relates to the provision of free parking for 15 minutes in every pay and display bay. Allowing the first 15 minutes free is difficult to enforce as it would require a greater presence of parking attendants to prevent abuse of the bays. However, the practicalities of a scratch card (made available through local retailers) providing 15 minutes free parking will be explored.

The maximum permitted stay in all bays is being explored as part of the scheme review and we will also consider changing the minimum charge from 20p for one hour to 10p for 30 minutes parking.

3) Parking permits should be the same price for businesses and residents £36 each and not doubled up if there is further requirement as this does not work as a deterrent. People in need of additional permits to run their affairs have to pay whatever the costs

Disagree with this request.

Business permits are not intended to be used simply to allow members of staff to park all day in the permit parking zone. They are for a vehicle which is being used in connection with the running of a business, which may not have its own off street parking. In many circumstances businesses operating a vehicle which was coming and going throughout the day could make use of the Pay & Display parking, at a cost of 20p per hour. Alternatively we make a visitor permit available which allows more flexibility when parking, at a nominal cost of 20p per day, and avoids the inconvenience of having to repeatedly Pay & Display.

The permit charge, in particular the higher rate for the second permit, is intended to encourage business users to consider operational methods which require fewer rather than more vehicles. This can reduce the number of vehicles being brought into the area, particularly at peak times, eases parking problems facing residents and frees up parking spaces for shoppers and business customers.

We will contact businesses who were provided fewer permits than they requested in order to determine how this has affected how they operate, or how their staff now travel to work. We have had some hearsay evidence that some staff now car share, while others park just outside the scheme.

4) Businesses should not be limited to one or two parking permits or be denied similar numbers of permits in subsequent years as this is having a detrimental effect on businesses maintaining their key and highly trained staff. It is also strangling business growth and causing firms to relocate further into the outskirts where draconian parking measures are not in place.

Partially agree with this request.

One of the aims of the permit-parking scheme is to make parking easier for visitors to local businesses and shoppers. Tighter restrictions on business permit use were therefore introduced following requests from the business community - and endorsed at Area Board - on 19 March 2007.

It was always anticipated that some businesses would require additional business permits to allow them to carry out their day-to-day operations. A procedure for assessing the provision of additional permits was developed. This procedure aims to assess the travel needs of a business and provide additional permits where necessary, based upon a set of criteria that provides an understandable, consistent and fair outcome. The procedure takes several key factors into account, which are detailed below:

Should a business currently have more private parking than would be permitted under current UDP guidelines, then the request for additional permits may be refused. If private parking is below current UDP standards, the Council will consider the provision of permits up to the number that would be permitted under current UDP standards.  More permits than the UDP standard may be granted initially to allow businesses to reorganize parking operations with their staff, then reduced over time.

However, discussions have been had with representatives from Norwich Union about ways to further support local businesses. Therefore, the following proposals will be explored further.

5) Bollards must now be introduced on the junction of Hickmott and Sharrowvale Road as delivery vehicles are not taking any notice at all of the no loading or unloading restrictions between 0800 and 1830.

Agree with the request for better enforcement of the existing restrictions

Vehicles often used this area to park in whilst deliveries were made or drivers obtained and consumed food from nearby shops. The scheme made this section of Hickmott Road between Sharrow Vale Road and Eastwood Road a `No loading or waiting at any time' restriction, aimed at easing this problem.

Shopkeepers are requested to assist with this by asking delivery vehicles to use the designated new loading bays wherever possible. Parking attendants were made aware of the particular need for enforcement at this location, but enforcement has been difficult. Therefore, should the loading and waiting restriction remain in place, alternative ways to enforce it (including CCTV cameras or bollards) will be considered as part of the changes arising from the review of the scheme.

6) Designated loading bays should be relocated and clearly marked so customers don't park in them inadvertently

Broadly agree with this request

Following discussions and consultation with local traders (particularly on Sharrow Vale Road between Hickmott Road and Jarrow Road) changes have been made to two of the loading bays on Sharrow Vale Road, providing additional short term parking spaces in the area. Consultation told us that most businesses in the area undertook their loading and unloading on single or double yellow lines.

Proposals for the remainder of the loading bays (and the longer term future of the changes to the bays on Sharrow Vale Road) will be considered as part of the scheme review.

7) There is a need to introduce some four hour bays on Sharrow Vale Road opposite the car park which will serve hairdressers, restaurants and the more casual shopper visiting our area

Broadly agree with this request

Although there are existing four hour bays within 100 metres of this area, this request will be considered as part of the review of the scheme.

8) As the resident/permit holder parking bays up Sharrow Vale Road from Ora Gallery have spaces during the day, these could be utilised more effectively if they were made 4 hour pay and display and/or clock disc bays as well.

Broadly agree with this request

Although there are existing four hour bays within 150 metres of this area, this request will be considered as part of the review of the scheme.

9) Students in multiple occupancy housing in this particularly densely parked area should not be allowed resident parking permits.

Agree with the request to consider this further

The restrictions on additional permits have helped to ease this problem.

Surveys in this area (during term time) have shown that resident parking on Eastwood Road, Bruce Road and Neill Road accounted for about 48% of use (41 out of 86 spaces), and this was as low as 25% (5 out of 19 - excluding unrestricted parking) on Bruce Road. These surveys will be repeated in November as part of the wider scheme review.

The surveys have shown that there are still parking opportunities for people visiting the area, as the basic restriction to two permits and the increased cost of an additional permit will provide a further disincentive for students bringing their vehicles.

However, the number of permits in multiple occupancy housing will be explored further, with the consideration of the effects of displaced parking on the wider area being an important factor that will be taken into account.

10) Signs in the car park next to the launderette do not have valid parking times printed on them. Customers are confused by this and are putting money in outside valid times.

Agree with this request

This is accepted, although the main signs in the car park have always included day and times that the scheme operates: the smaller car park entry sign on Sharrow Vale Road has now had this information added to it.

11) There needs to be an emphasis on existing pay and display signage to clearly show parking is only 20p per hour

Broadly agree with this request

The principle that we need to emphasise that existing pay and display opportunities are available at 20p per hour is accepted. Unfortunately we are unable to do this via the Pay and Display signing as national regulations do not allow it.

However, there are a number of ways that information could be improved:

12) Eastwood Road, part of Bruce Road and Neill Road must now be made one way, as previously requested

Agree with the fact that this request should be considered further

This request was made to ease some of the vehicle conflicts that exist on these narrow streets.

One-way operation could lead to an increase in traffic volumes on these roads, if drivers seek to avoid the busier Ecclesall Road/Hickmott Road junction. Although the lack of vehicle `conflict' could also lead to higher speeds, the high volume of parked cars does also act as a deterrent to speeding. Accident statistics are low, but as permit parking schemes have considered local traffic management schemes before, evidence of the extent of the problem will be gathered and if appropriate, a scheme will be developed in tandem with the current permit parking scheme review. However, no design, budget or timescale has yet been identified for such a scheme in this area.

13) All yellow lines in the area need reviewing as it has already been established by council officers that more parking spaces could be provided

Agree with this request

It is agreed that all yellow lines in the area will be looked at, this is a primary aim of the scheme review.

14) A single designated disabled bay is required outside Porter Antiques, 227 Sharrow Vale Road, for the couple who run the shop and live above. They both have great difficulty walking.

If the occupiers of 227 Sharrow Vale Road wish to apply for the provision of a disabled bay near their property they may do so. However, this will not be reserved for them and cannot legally be enforced.

Vehicles displaying a valid blue badge may be parked:

However, vehicles displaying a valid Disabled Person's badge are not exempt from the restrictions relating to the Permit Holder only parking bays, and as such we would recommend that they purchase a permit for within the scheme as this provides the maximum number of parking opportunities without cost or time limit.

15) In response to your survey, we agree to your proposal to change the loading bay outside the Post Office into a parking bay and the maximum stay should be 2 hours

This has been carried out and the bay changed use on 8 August 2008. It now provides six additional Pay and Display spaces, with a maximum stay of 2 hours.

16) We also call for a review of the Sheffield City Council's policy to implement peripheral parking zones and reconsider the detrimental aspects these implemented schemes are having on satellite shopping centres and communities and take the necessary corrective action now before irreversible spiralling decline occurs.

Broadly disagree with this request

Any change of Policy such as this would need to be referred to the Cabinet for a decision. There is currently no changes proposed to the way that permit parking schemes are (and will) operate, as a review of existing parking policy is not currently a Council priority.

As has been mentioned before, charging for car parking in the area provides for:

Better management of available space to meet local needs and support the vitality and viability of the local shopping area;

Users paying for the `service' of provision and management of car parking;

A good link with national and local policy on reducing car usage and encouraging sustainable alternative modes;

However, a balance needs to be struck between residents (who generally like the changes that the scheme brings) and some businesses (who see the schemes as reducing the attractiveness of the local shopping areas), despite parking opportunities actually increasing and independent research with London Road traders showing that they over emphasise the amount of their customers arriving by car. In addition, during a recent questionnaire distributed by the Broomhill, Central and nether Edge area panel, a number of London Road traders made comments in favour of having permit parking and pay and display parking in their area.

Parking restrictions form a complementary tool to other aspects of the Council Transport strategy, which ultimately aims to improve alternatives to the single occupancy private car trip, thus reducing congestion which costs both residents and businesses a significant amount through lost time. As such, there is no current intention to review the policy of having the PPZ, but the scheme reviews give opportunity to amend the restrictions within the zone, taking care to balance the needs of residents, businesses and visitors to the area.