1.1 The proposal at this location is to install new blue badge holder 8am-8pm bays in Arlington Road, and replace a section of taxis only at any time with no waiting at any time in Old Orchard Road.
1.2 Eighteen objections have been received, 4 provided no comments, 13 objected on the grounds that the taxi bay is needed and should not be shortened, one resident also stated that the taxis will continue to park on the double yellow lines. One objection was on the basis that the blue badge holder parking should be time limited parking available for use by everyone visiting the surgery and not just blue badge holders. Two items of support were received for the blue badge holder only bays.
1.3 The proposal follows a request for blue badge holder parking close to the doctor’s surgery, and a request to shorten the taxi rank and extend the no waiting at any time due to provisional permission being granted by East Sussex Highways for the installation of a dropped kerb to access a residential properties hardstanding.
1.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
1.5 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
2.1 The proposal at this location is to replace an advisory ambulance bay by extending an existing section of no waiting at any time in Belmore Road.
2.2 Two objections have been received, one on the basis that the length of the restriction is excessive, and one on the basis that there is not enough parking available for people working nearby. One item of support was received.
2.3 The proposal follows an initial request to formalise the ambulance bay as it is frequently misused and parked in for long periods. Extending the no waiting at any time restriction will allow a wider range of uses, while still preventing parking and providing a suitable place for emergency vehicles to stop.
2.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
2.5 At the time of writing, Councillor Holt has not replied to provide their views regarding the recommendation.
2.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
3.1 The proposal at this location is to install no waiting at any time at the junction of Birch Road and Birch Close and extend the existing no waiting at any time restriction in both directions along the southern side of Birch Close.
3.2 Five objections have been received, 4 on the basis that it will make parking more difficult, one supported the proposal but has been treated as an objection as they asked for additional restrictions on the northern side of Birch Close. Two items of support were received, stating that the proposed changes are necessary for safe access and deliveries to businesses.
3.3 The proposal follows requests to prevent parking on the junction and southern side of Birch Close, due to Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) and deliveries being unable to safely access businesses and a large number of vehicles parking on the pavement.
3.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
3.5 At the time of writing, Councillor Tutt has not replied to provide their views regarding the recommendation.
3.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
4.1 The proposal at this location is to remove a section of no waiting at any time to join 2 existing sections of shared use bays, and to install additional shared use, permit or time limited Mon-Sat 8am-6pm, bays and a small section of no waiting at any time on another section of the southern side of Blackwater Road.
4.2 Two objections have been received, one from a resident on the basis that they do not agree with installing more bays and one stating that there is no need for the change and that it will deter visitors. Five items of support were received, including one from Councillor Wright.
4.3 The proposal follows a request to remove a section of no waiting at any time as it is no longer required due to a property development, and requests to install time limited bays on the southern side of this section of Blackwater Road, due to issues with long-term parking. This will provide additional spaces for both residents and visitors.
4.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
4.5 Councillor Wright has confirmed his support for the proposal to be implemented as advertised.
4.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
5.1 The proposal at this location is to replace a section of no waiting at any time with a blue badge holders only bay 8am-11pm on the northern side of Carlisle Road, and to replace a blue badge holders only 8am-11pm bay with a taxi only bay, maximum stay 30 minutes, on the northern side of Wilmington Gardens.
5.2 Seven objections have been received, all 7 stated that they supported the proposals but are being treated as objections as they asked for the proposal to be modified so that the taxi only bay does not have a maximum stay. One of the representations being treated as an objection is from Councillor Holt. One additional item of support was received.
5.3 The proposal follows a request to review blue badge holder parking in Wilmington Square, reducing the number of short-stay and increasing the number of long-stay spaces. It also follows a request to provide a bay for taxi pick-up and drop-off to ease access to local amenities. The Eastbourne Hackney Taxi Association fully supported the proposed changes at the informal stage of the parking review stating that they align with their operational needs and would serve the Eastbourne community effectively.
5.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
5.5 Councillor Wright has confirmed his support for the proposal to be implemented as advertised.
5.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
6.1 The proposal at this location is to extend a section of no waiting at any time on the eastern side of Cavendish Avenue.
6.2 Two objections have been received on the basis that the proposal will remove parking spaces and increase pressure on parking.
6.3 The proposal follows a request from the Road Safety team based on their annual Local Safety Site work. The location was identified through this programme of work due to the number of crashes that had occurred in the study period, 4 or more personal injury crashes within a 3-year period. The proposal aims to improve lines of sight at the junction.
6.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
6.5 At the time of writing, Councillor Holt has not replied to provide their views regarding the recommendation.
6.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
7.1 The proposal at this location is to install a blue badge holders only bay on the southern side of Langney Road replacing a section of permit holders only bays 8am-6pm, formalise a car club bay on the northern side of Langney Road, extend an existing no waiting at any time restriction on the southern side of Pevensey Road, and extend an existing no waiting and no loading at any time restrictions to replace a section of shared use, permit or time limited Mon-Sat 8am-6pm, bays on the eastern side of Cavendish Place.
7.2 One objection has been received which did not refer to the proposed changes but requested further restrictions in other nearby locations. Two items of support were received, both stating that the junction of Pevensey Road and Cavendish Place is currently very dangerous.
7.3 The proposal follows a successful application for a blue badge holder bay from an eligible resident, a request to formalise the car club bay to make it enforceable, and a request from the Road Safety team based on their annual Local Safety Site work. The junction of Cavendish Place and Pevensey Road was identified through this programme of work due to the number of crashes that had occurred in the study period, 4 or more personal injury crashes within a 3-year period. The proposal aims to improve lines of sight at the junction.
7.4 Having considered the objection, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
7.5 At the time of writing, Councillor Holt has not replied to provide their views regarding the recommendation.
7.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
8.1 The proposal at this location is to install new sections of no waiting at any time on both sides of the junction between Cobbold Avenue and Willingdon Road, and to install a new school keep clear Mon to Fri 8am-9.30am and 2.30pm-4pm on the southern side of Cobbold Avenue.
8.2 Three objections have been received, 2 stated that they supported the proposals but are being treated as objections as they asked for the proposed no waiting at any time restriction to be extended further, the third objection did not refer to the proposed changes but requested changes to a car park located around two miles away. One of the objections asking for the proposed restrictions to be extended has since been withdrawn.
8.3 The proposal follows a request to consider installing parking restrictions due to a change of use of the rear school entrance. The construction of a new primary school, in addition to the existing secondary school, has resulted in a significant increase in traffic and the number of students using the entrance.
8.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
8.5 At the time of writing, Councillor Ungar has not replied to provide their views regarding the recommendation.
8.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
9.1 The proposal at this location is to install a new dual use good vehicles only loading bay 7am-7pm and taxi only bay 7pm-7am, to replace a section of shared use, permit or pay and display Mon-Sat 8am-6pm, bays on the western side of Cornfield Road.
9.2 Five objections have been received, one made no comments on the proposal, 3 on the basis that they would prefer an alternative location for taxis, and one on the basis that the loss of parking will negatively impact accessibility for businesses and visitors. Three items of support were received.
9.3 The proposal follows a request to install a loading bay on Cornfield Road due to HGVs having difficulty making deliveries, and feedback from the informal consultation stating that this location would also be suitable for use by taxis.
9.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
9.5 Councillor Wright has confirmed his support for the proposal to be implemented as advertised.
9.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
10.1 The proposal at this location is to install new no waiting at any time restrictions on and between the junctions of, Hazelwood Avenue and Dutchells Way, and Hazelwood Avenue and Malvern Close, and on the junction of Hazelwood Avenue and Woburn Way.
10.2 Three objections have been received, one on the basis that the proposal is a waste of public money, and one on the basis that there will be a significant loss of parking spaces. One objection has since been withdrawn. One item of support was received.
10.3 The proposal follows a request from the Transport Development Planning team based on a need for additional parking restrictions being identified as part of a Stage 3 post construction Road Safety Audit for highway works associated with the Brodericklands residential development (planning application reference WD/2016/0986/MAO). This is so sufficient sightlines for crossing pedestrians are provided. At present some large vans park too close to the crossing point and block visibility. This was noted on site during site visits and was mentioned by residents.
10.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
10.5 Councillor Swansborough has confirmed his support for the proposal to be implemented as advertised.
10.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
11.1 The proposal at this location is to extend existing no waiting at any time restrictions on Hazelwood Avenue, to the southwest of its western junction with Croxden Way.
11.2 Two objections have been received, one on the basis that the proposal is a waste of public money, and one on the basis that there will be a loss of parking spaces.
11.3 The proposal follows a request from the Transport Development Planning team based on a need for additional parking restrictions being identified as part of a Stage 3 post construction Road Safety Audit for highway works associated with the Brodericklands residential development (planning application reference WD/2016/0986/MAO). This is so sufficient sightlines for crossing pedestrians are provided.
11.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
11.5 Councillor Swansborough has confirmed his support for the proposal to be implemented as advertised.
11.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
12.1 The proposal at this location is to install a motorcycle only bay on Station Street, replacing a goods vehicle loading bay 7am-7pm, extend a blue badge holders only bay on Hyde Gardens, replacing a section of no waiting and no loading at any time, and install a motorcycle parking area on Hyde Gardens replacing 2 taxi only bays and sections of no waiting and no loading at any time.
12.2 Twelve objections have been received, 2 made no comments on the proposal, 6 on the basis that taxi bays should be provided on Cornfield Road, one objection was received from Councillor Holt in support of the taxi drivers, one on the basis that the motorcycle only bay and parking area should have a 30 minute time limit, 2 stated that they supported the proposals but are being treated as objections as they asked for additional taxi bays on Cornfield Road. Twelve items of support were received, nine stated that these changes will benefit delivery drivers.
12.3 The proposal follows a request to review the existing taxi bays as they are currently unenforceable, misused, and not fit for purpose. There were also requests to review loading bays in the area and deal with the problem of motorcycle delivery drivers parking on the pavement in an inconsiderate and potentially dangerous manner. Changes were proposed at the informal stage to make the existing taxi bays enforceable, more accessible, and to increase capacity. The informal proposals received a large number of objections and The Eastbourne Hackney Taxi Association stated that the location was not suitable.
12.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
12.5 Councillor Wright has confirmed his support for the proposal to be implemented as advertised.
12.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
13.1 The proposal at this location is to extend existing no waiting and no loading at any time restrictions on the southwestern side of the junction of King Edwards Parade and Jevington Gardens, replacing a section of shared use, permit or pay and display Mon-Sat 8am-6pm, bays on King Edwards Parade, and to extend existing no waiting at any time on the northwestern side of King Edwards Parade, replacing a section of shared use, permit or pay and display Mon-Sat 8am-6pm, bays.
13.2 One objection has been received on the basis that there will be a loss of parking spaces in a busy area.
13.3 The proposal follows a request from the Road Safety team based on their annual Local Safety Site work. The location was identified through this programme of work due to the number of crashes that had occurred in the study period, 4 or more personal injury crashes within a 3-year period. The proposal aims to improve lines of sight at the junction and exit from the Grand Hotel car park.
13.4 Having considered the objection, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
13.5 Councillor Wright has confirmed his support for the proposal to be implemented as advertised.
13.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objection and install the proposal as advertised.
14.1 The proposal at this location is to extend existing no waiting at any time restrictions on the western side of Meads Road, which will fill 2 gaps that currently allow parking on both sides.
14.2 Seven objections, including from Councillor Wright, were received, 5 on the basis that the restriction should be installed on both sides of the road, one on the basis that the restriction should be installed on the eastern side of the road, and one stated that they supported the proposals but is being treated as an objection as they asked for an extension to the permit scheme. Three items of support were received.
14.3 The proposal follows requests to prevent vehicles from parking on both sides of Meads Road, close to the junction with Blackwater Road, to ease traffic flow by preventing vehicles from parking on the eastern side.
14.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
14.5 Councillor Wright has confirmed that he does not support the proposal being implemented as advertised, as he believes the restrictions should be installed on the eastern side of road.
14.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
15.1 The proposal at this location is to extend an existing bus stop clearway on the western side of Meads Street, replacing a section of shared use, permit holders and time limited Mon to Sat 8am-6pm, and extend its operating hours from 7am-7pm to at any time.
15.2 Four objections have been received on the basis that there will be a loss of parking spaces in a busy area. One of the objections has since been withdrawn.
15.3 It is acknowledged that this proposal will reduce available parking by one space. The proposal follows a request from the Transport Hub team to extend the bus stop clearway and its operating hours, to improve access to a dropped kerb for bus users and make it easier for buses to manoeuvre.
15.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
15.5 Councillor Wright has confirmed his support for the proposal to be implemented as advertised.
15.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
16.1 The proposal at this location is to formalise an existing blue badge holders only bay on the western side of Seaside.
16.2 One objection was receivedwhich did not refer to the proposed changes and instead referred to a separate non-parking related proposal. The objector did not respond to officers’ attempt to clarify if they had intentionally objected to this proposal. One item of support was received.
16.3 The proposal follows a request to formalise the bay as it is regularly parked in by vehicles not displaying a blue badge.
16.4 Having considered the objection, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
16.5 At the time of writing, Councillor Holt has not replied to provide their views regarding the recommendation.
16.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objection and install the proposal as advertised.
17.1 The proposal at this location is to install a new no waiting at any time restriction at the eastern end of Slindon Crescent.
17.2 Seven objections have been received on the basis that there will be a loss of parking spaces in a busy area. One item of support was received.
17.3 The proposal follows a request to keep the turning area clear, protecting access to a fire hydrant and the entrance to a field used by horses.
17.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
17.5 At the time of writing, Councillor Tutt has not replied to provide their views regarding the recommendation.
17.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
18.1 The proposal at this location is to install a section of no waiting at any time over a vehicle access located between 2 shared use bays.
18.2 Two objections have been received on the basis that they believe vehicles will park in a way that still obstructs access.
18.3 The proposal follows a request to protect the access due to vehicles parking over it, this is the only dropped kerb in the central area that provides access but is not protected by double yellow lines. The proposed change aims to make the access clear to motorists and be consistent with the rest of the area.
18.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
18.5 At the time of writing, Councillor Holt has not replied to provide their views regarding the recommendation.
18.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
19.1 The proposal at this location is a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) amendment to make a section of no waiting at any time, on both sides of Victoria Gardens, permanent.
19.2 One objection has been received on the basis that the existing restriction should not be extended any further.
19.3 The proposal follows a request from the Transport Development Planning team. When the medical centre was being constructed the existing no waiting at any time restriction was temporarily extended to ensure unobstructed access to the site. The proposal is to make the restriction permanent to ensure free flow of traffic to and from the site, as parking in this section of Victoria Gardens would obstruct access and visibility when exiting the car park.
19.4 Having considered the objection, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
19.5 At the time of writing, Councillor Ungar has not replied to provide their views regarding the recommendation.
19.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objection and install the proposal as advertised.