Resident parking vs new development (Roads)

Fri 26 Jun, 16:48 (last edited on Fri 26 Jun, 16:53)

What struck me when I read Austin's original concern was that it was more likely to be abused the other way round.  That residents of the town with parking permits use the new estate as their station car park.  Distinct codes for distinct areas would avoid that and so would rising bollards.  I did find it strange though that residents parking permits are being issued to residents who don't rely on roadside parking.  We'll all be wanting one, even us with a garage and a space.

I don't think the current scheme has area identifiers though.  I wondered why?  Too small perhaps.

I would be happy for the pavement to be widened all the way up into town.  Maybe that could be a useful allocation of infrastructure funding from the developer.  

Fri 26 Jun, 14:33 (last edited on Fri 26 Jun, 14:33)

“What feels unfair is granting an out-of-town development access to this exact same central town parking pool”

It doesn’t have to – all the residents’ parking schemes have their own distinct code, so if you have, say, a ‘DV’ (Divinity Road) permit in Oxford, that doesn’t give you access to ‘EO’ (East Oxford) or ‘FP’ (Florence Park). Absolutely the same could be done here – call it ‘RB’ for Rushy Bank or something.

Mon 22 Jun, 13:11

When I was a Town Councillor, the developers were questioned about pedestrian access to the development, and at that time, they agreed to widen the footpath over the bridge and create a pedestrian crossing to access the development on the other side.

If the pavement did become wider over the bridge, then that could lead to the bridge becoming single traffic only and would therefore slow cars coming into and leaving Charlbury.

Obviously, this info may now be out of date. 

Fri 19 Jun, 15:45

They might have suggested rising bollards at the entrance instead.   That would have been a better solution to the problem that will definitely happen.

Tue 16 Jun, 13:30 (last edited on Fri 19 Jun, 11:17)

Austin, you only have to look at certain areas of Charlbury (in particular the upper end of Church Street adjacent to the Estate Agent) on Friday and Saturday nights to see that double yellow lines are totally ineffective in this town, because the fines levied at present are cheaper than what many of them pay in London to park anyway! 

IMHO what might work would be if parking fines comprised a *percentage* of the perpetrator's salary; I suggest that 5% of their annual salary might be a good "starter for ten".

As they say ... discuss!

Tue 16 Jun, 13:08

Following the approval of the contentious planning application yesterday, I wanted to open a discussion on a specific, related parking issue that came out of the meeting rather than the decision itself. Stay on the topic of resident parking eligibility, please.

During the session, councillors suggested that the new homes will require "Resident Parking" permits to stop commuters from using their new cul-de-sac for station parking.

While a simplistic solution to this peculiar location, it raises a key issue for the town. Currently, resident parking eligibility is strictly limited to the town centre (Church, Park, Sheep, Market, and Thames Streets) because they have little to no off-street options. It works well as a shared, localised resource.

What feels unfair is granting an out-of-town development access to this exact same central town parking pool. Residents living on The Green, or up Ditchley Road, or on the Woodstock Rd don't get town-centre parking permits, yet under this logic, residents from the new development could legally park outside The Bell indefinitely if they so desired. It isn't a reciprocal arrangement either—nobody living in the middle of town is ever going to drive over and park on the far side of the station.

This means that this new slightly distant development is potentially being handed preferential parking in the heart of town. Instead of encouraging walking, it will likely encourage more car use into the centre and actively reduce the already scarce spaces meant for residents.

Surely a much better solution for new developments right next to the station would be to implement double yellow lines, rather than squeezing the town centre's existing residents even further?  Or is a resident parking scheme solely for that one development a possibility, without granting rights to the centre of town?

I’m interested to know the views of others, solely around the topic of parking, and nothing else.