We shared the Recommendations documents in the forum on the day they were published, here.
- Pay and Display has been dropped from the retail areas, ie the High Street, West Street, Weyhill and Lion Lane, (which is great, and of course the easiest to drop as it represented only 36 P&D spaces, i.e. it wasn’t a big cash raiser)
- Pay and Display to be introduced on Weydown Road, Derby Road, Courts Hill Road, Kings Road, St Christopher’s Green, Bunch Lane, Church Road and possibly sections of Beech Road: some introduced immediately, others deferred until June 2012 with amendments (no free half hour, £1 per hour/max £5 per day) (a total of approx 170 on street pay and display spaces).
- Residents permits mostly introduced as per original proposals with some deferred with amendments until June, 2012, double and single yellow lines largely introduced as per proposals.
The plans seem to generate maximum revenue, in particular targeting all-day on-street parkers, i.e commuters using the station, and those working in the town. It does not address the problem of where everyone will park. It actually makes things worse by reducing the number of on-street parking spaces by painting formal parking bays and more double yellow lines and introducing residents only parking bays. It simply shifts the parking problem around the town to other roads, directly and indirectly affecting most of us who live in and visit the town. There is no evidence that the proposals are about managing traffic or parking in the town.
From the Minutes 16 December 2011 Local Committee (Waverley) meeting:
57/11 PROPOSED ON-STREET PARKING CHARGES IN WAVERLEY (Item 11)
Members sought clarity about the proposal that parking enforcement in each area of the borough should not operate at a deficit and noted that effective enforcement would be a prerequisite in achieving this. In this respect it was hoped that there would be some flexibility in considering such matters, across the immediate boundaries of the Task Group areas.
In relation to Haslemere, the range of views was acknowledged (Editor’s note, although the bias of the range – for or against – is not stated specifically in the minutes). It was confirmed that the extent of any implemented scheme would be reviewed in the light of any future construction of a multi-storey car-park, which was seen as being in 2014 at the earliest.
The Chairman invited Mrs Carole King, Executive Member with responsibility for parking at Waverley Borough Council, to comment on the proposals. The need for effective enforcement was stressed, along with a hope that in due course synergy between the two councils in this respect may be achieved.
Officers were thanked for the quality of the report and for the local engagement that had taken place. (Editor’s note, local engagement?! Readers, do you agree? Quality of the report?! More about the report later…)
Waverley synergy…we wrote about the Weyhill car park plans, where the site will be re-surfaced and will become pay & display. Weyhill refurbishment plus P&D = revenue raising and further displacement. A question for you readers: Is it synergy in filling the coffers or is it synergy in doing the right thing, in the right way? In those minutes referenced above, indeed in all the minutes, reports, articles read by The Editor there has still been no mention of what the parking requirement is in Haslemere.
I recommend that you actually read what has been published, you look on the web and look at the maps. They are available. Some of us have looked at these things. I suggest that if more information available — no, but the information is available — if you actually looked for it and used it, then it would have been a much more informative meeting than it has been.
Oh Professor Vincent Marks, your Editor has done as you asked! I have read every document relating to it. I’ve even read my dusty old university Economics text books. I’ve looked for the evidence that the proposals are about managing traffic or parking in the town. I’ve not found any.
Surrey County Council’s research to formulate the parking strategy was mentioned in an earlier blog post about the On Street Parking Task Group report and received minuted thanks (as mentioned above.) To re-cap, establishing the case for on street parking in Surrey, it cites these references:
- Retail Assessment, 2004 (Editor’s note: No author name.)
- Retail Distinctiveness of Market Towns, 2009 (Editor’s note: No author name.)
- Parking Pricing Implementation guidelines, Litman 2010
- RAC/British Retail Consortium, 2006 (Editor’s note: No Title)
- DfT survey (Editor’s note: No date. No Title)
- Booz 2006 – Booz Allen Hamilton (2006), International Approaches to Tackling Transport Congestion Paper 2: Parking Restraint Measures, Victorian Competition and Efficiency Commission
I read 3 & 6. Very fascinating. References 1, 2, 4 and 5 – missing authors, titles, dates…no idea where to find these.
Litman 2010 states in reference 3 (albeit in the context of Victoria, British Columbia which has approximately 80,000 residents):
Parking pricing is just one of several parking management strategies…It tends to be most effective and beneficial if implemented as part of an integrated parking management program that includes support strategies such as increased parking options, improved user information, and better enforcement.
Litman makes the point that better enforcement is NOT the only element. Increased parking options and improved user information – Where is the evidence of those two elements for Haslemere? Professor, help me out here!
As for the Booz Allen Hamilton report, it was recognised in an earlier blog post:
It’s based on research of towns and cities across the world. The cities researched are in Australia, USA and Europe. Population sizes for the study are very broad. No town/city in Surrey is cited…it’s hard to know which UK city/town in the study (Sheffield, York, Bristol, Cambridge, Oxford, Manchester, Canterbury and London) might be comparable to rural Haslemere.
And! In the minutes of the 16th December 2011 meeting, that statement “thanked for the quality of the report”?! On Friday, residents will learn what the Local Committee (Waverley) thinks about the quality of the recommendations.
Oxford Dictionaries definition of *quality*: The degree of excellence of something.
Urban Dictionary definition of *quality*: (number 5) When there are no higher words to use. Perfect to use in comical situations.
What do you think, readers?