Appendix 2 – Proposals where objections are recommended to not be upheld and are proposed to be implemented as advertised
1. Site 3 Albany Road, Devonshire Road, Marina and Parkhurst Road, Bexhill (Councillor Ian Hollidge)
1.1 The proposals at this location are to (i) replace the blue badge holders only bay with permit holders only bay in Albany Road, (ii) change the operational hours of the taxi bay from 24hrs to 8am to 6pm in Devonshire Road, (iii) introduce a footway and verge ban in Marina, and (iv) replace the time limited bay with a shared use permit holders or time limited bay in Parkhurst Road.
1.2 Ten objections have been received from local residents, one on the grounds that removing disabled parking is discriminatory, one on the grounds that the taxi bay is used from 6:30am, one on the grounds that removing free parking will damage already struggling businesses with three asking for an increase in the provision of free parking, and three objections to changes in general. Three items of support were received for these proposals.
1.3 The proposals follow requests from (i) the family of the resident the disabled bay was installed for, (ii) Councillor Hollidge as the taxi bay is unused outside of daytime hours, (iii) Councillor Hollidge as vehicles park on the pavement by the pedestrian crossing, and (iv) a resident whose property sits within the span of the time limited bay and is unable to park here with their parking permit.
1.4 It is standard practice to remove disabled bays that are no longer required by the resident, a usage survey was carried out which determined it was no longer needed. Whilst it is understood that peak times for taxis are 7am to 9am and 5pm to 7pm, parking is at a premium in the area and changing the operational hours of the bay in line with other bays in the road will provide additional parking for both residents and visitors in the morning and evening. The change of bay type to shared use will still allow for 2 hours of free parking for visitors. Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
1.5 Councillor Hollidge has replied to provide their support of the recommendation.
1.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposals as advertised.
2. Site 4 Buckhurst Road and Buckhurst Place, Bexhill (Councillor Ian Hollidge)
2.1 The proposals at this location are to (i) replace shared use permit holders or time limited bay with a disabled bay in Buckhurst Road, and (ii) change the operational hours of the taxi bay from 24hrs to 8am to 6pm in Buckhurst Place.
2.2 One objection was received from a visitor on the grounds that they refuse to pay for parking and has nothing to do with the proposals.
2.3 The proposals follow requests (i) for a disabled bay, the applicant has been assessed and qualifies for the provision of a bay, and (ii) from Councillor Hollidge as the taxi bay is unused outside of daytime hours.
2.4 Having considered the objection, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
2.5 Councillor Hollidge has replied to provide their support of the recommendation.
2.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objection and install the proposals as advertised.
3.1 The proposal at this location is a TRO amendment only with no physical change on street. Following the introduction of Civil Parking Enforcement (CPE) in Rother district in 2020 the restrictions were not included in the map-based order and the TRO amendment is required to legally enforce the marked restrictions on the ground.
3.2 Three objections were receivedwith comments unrelated to the proposal.
3.3 The proposal follows a need to amend the TRO to bring it in line with the restrictions on street.
3.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
3.5 Councillor Geary has replied to provide their support of the recommendation.
3.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
4. Site 6 Egerton Road, Bexhill (Councillor Ian Hollidge)
4.1 The proposal at this location is to replace a permit holders only bay with double yellow lines.
4.2 Four objections have been received from residents, three with comments unrelated to the proposal and one on the grounds that the driveway has not yet been constructed. One item of support was received for this proposal.
4.3 The proposal follows a request from the resident who has planning permission to install a double driveway at the property. The current procedure for the installation of a dropped kerb is for East Sussex Highways to agree to the dropped kerb application in principle, the TRO is then amended as part of a parking review. Once this has been completed works can be carried out. A TRO amendment is required before any physical change can be made to the road.
4.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposal to be withdrawn.
4.5 Councillor Hollidge has replied to provide their support of the recommendation.
4.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
5. Site 7 Hastings Road and De La Warr Road, Bexhill (Councillor Charles Clark)
5.1 The proposal at this location is a TRO amendment only with no physical change on street. Following the introduction of Civil Parking Enforcement (CPE) in Rother district in 2020 the restrictions were not included in the map-based order and the TRO amendment is required to legally enforce the marked restrictions on the ground.
5.2 One objection was receivedwith comments unrelated to the proposal.
5.3 The proposal follows a need to amend the TRO to bring it in line with the restrictions on street.
5.4 Having considered the objection, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposal to be withdrawn.
5.5 At the time of writing, Councillor Clark has not replied to provide their views regarding the recommendation.
5.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objection and install the proposal as advertised.
6. Site 8 Magdalen Road, Bexhill (Councillor Ian Hollidge)
6.1 The proposal at this location is to replace a shared used permit holders or time limited bay with double yellow lines.
6.2 One objection was receivedwith comments unrelated to the proposal.
6.3 The proposal follows a request from the resident to install a dropped kerb at the property.
6.4 Having considered the objection, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposal to be withdrawn.
6.5 Councillor Hollidge has replied to provide their support of the recommendation.
6.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objection and install the proposal as advertised.
7. Site 9 Manor Road, Bexhill (Councillor Ian Hollidge)
7.1 The proposal at this location is to replace the blue badge holders only bay with a shared use permit holders or time limited bay.
7.2 One objection was receivedwith comments unrelated to the proposal.
7.3 The proposal follows a request to remove the bay as it is no longer required by the original applicant. A usage survey was carried out and determined the bay was not needed by any other resident in close proximity.
7.4 Having considered the objection, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposal to be withdrawn.
7.5 Councillor Hollidge has replied to provide their support of the recommendation.
7.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objection and install the proposal as advertised.
8. Site 10 Normandale, Bexhill (Councillor Nuala Geary)
8.1 The proposal at this location is to remove a blue badge holders only bay.
8.2 One objection was receivedwith comments unrelated to the proposal. One item of support was received for this proposal.
8.3 The proposal follows a usage survey which determined that the bay is no longer required.
8.4 Having considered the objection, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposal to be withdrawn.
8.5 Councillor Geary has replied to provide their support of the recommendation.
8.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objection and install the proposal as advertised.
9. Site 11 Old Marsh Road, Bexhill (Councillor Nuala Geary)
9.1 The proposal at this location is to install no waiting at any time restrictions at its junction with Barnhorn Road.
9.2 Three objections have been received, two from The Custom Café and one from a patron of the café on the grounds that the proposals are unnecessary, unjust, that vehicles never park in this location and the road needs to be resurfaced. One item of support was received for this proposal.
9.3 The proposal follows a request from the police to prevent vehicles parking behind the café when the car park is full, as they have been called out to attend the location on multiple occasions when tractors accessing the nearby farmland have been unable to pass.
9.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposal to be withdrawn.
9.5 Councillor Geary has replied to provide their support of the recommendation.
9.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
10. Site 12 Reginald Road, Bexhill (Councillor Ian Hollidge)
10.1 The proposal at this location is to replace a shared use permit holders or time limited bay with a disabled bay.
10.2 Two objections were receivedwith comments unrelated to the proposal. One item of support was received.
10.3 The proposal follows a request for a disabled bay. The applicant has been assessed and qualifies for the provision of a bay.
10.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposal to be withdrawn.
10.5 Councillor Hollidge has replied to provide their support of the recommendation.
10.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
11. Site 13 Ridgewood Gardens, Bexhill (Councillor Ian Hollidge)
11.1 The proposal at this location is to install no waiting at any time restrictions at its junction with College Road and a bus stop clearway to service the Boxgrove Close passenger stop.
11.2 Two objections were received on the grounds that the bus stop is used by just a few people and only five times a day, and one objection stating that the yellow lines on the east side won’t make a difference as they park their vehicle there and have been told by bus drivers that the issue is on the other side. Two items of support were received for this proposal.
11.3 The proposal follows a request from Stagecoach to aid the bus service when on this route.
11.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
11.5 Councillor Hollidge has replied to provide their support of the recommendation.
11.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
12. Site 14 Station Road, Hurst Green (Councillor Eleanor Kirby-Green)
12.1 The proposal at this location is to install no waiting at any time restrictions at its junction with London Road, and the junction with McMichaels Way, outside the local shop and outside the village hall.
12.2 Two objections were received on the grounds that there isn’t enough parking in the area and the proposals will displace vehicles further into the village. One item of support was received for this proposal.
12.3 The proposal follows a request from the Parish Council for yellow lines in these locations to improve safety for residents and improve traffic flow into London Road.
12.4 Having considered the objections, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposals to be withdrawn.
12.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objections and install the proposal as advertised.
13. Site 15 Harbour Road, Rye (Councillor Keith Glazier)
13.1 The proposal at this location is to extend no waiting at any time restrictions eastwards to Kingdom Hall.
13.2 One objection was received on the grounds that there isn’t enough parking in Rye, especially in the summer months when the car parks are often full, and the bus service is too infrequent from Rye Harbour. Five items of support were received for this proposal.
13.3 The proposal follows a request from residents to improve safety on this corner of Harbour Road. When travelling east visibility is severely reduced and large vehicles regularly use this road travelling to and from the industrial estate.
13.4 Having considered the objection, officers are satisfied that there are not sufficient grounds for the proposal to be withdrawn.
13.5 At the time of writing, Councillor Glazier has not replied to provide their views regarding the recommendation.
13.6 Recommendation: To not uphold the objection and install the proposal as advertised.