29 10 April 2017
01 March 2017
File: (17/384)
Report no: TRS2017/2/99
Titoki Street - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions
Purpose of Report
1. The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions in Titoki Street, Alicetown as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.
|
Recommendations That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions in Titoki Street, Alicetown as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report. |
Background
2. Council received a request from the resident at 7 Titoki Street to improve parking etiquette and accessibility in the street.
3. The concern expressed is that at times vehicles parked on both sides of the street narrowing the carriageway to one lane only and obstructing access for service and emergency vehicles.
4. The resident also noted that at times the parked vehicles make it very difficult for residents to enter/exit their properties.
Discussion
5. The installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions as proposed will ensure an adequate carriageway width for all vehicles accessing the eastern section of the street, including emergency and service vehicles.
Options
6. The options are:
a) To leave the area as it is without any restrictions and accept the accessibility issue will remain or,
b) To install the proposed changes to improve access through the eastern section of the street, principally for service and emergency vehicles.
Consultation
7. Consultation documents were delivered to the 19 directly affected properties from 1 to 9 and 2 to 8 Titoki Street, 61 Tama Street and 1-8/52 Fitzherbert Street.
8. The consultation plan (see Appendix 2 attached to the report) allowed residents to support the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions along the entire street, part of the street (either Section 1 or Section 2) or object to all proposed changes.
· Overall 13 (68%) questionnaires were returned.
̵ Eight (62%) in support of the entire proposal.
̵ One (8%) did not specify their position.
̵ Four (30%) objected to the entire proposal.
§ From the directly affected residents from Section 1 (eastern side of Fitzherbert Street).
̵ Eight questionnaires were returned.
- Seven (88%) in support of Section 1.
- One (12%) objecting to Section 1.
§ From the directly affected residents from Section 2 (western side of Fitzherbert Street).
̵ Five questionnaires were returned.
- Four (80%) objecting to Section 2.
One (20%) did not specify their position.
§ As there is no support from the directly affected residents in Section 2 for their section of the street the proposal has been modified to only include the changes in Section 1 as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.
The reasons given by the objectors were:
̵ Cars often park on the opposite side of my driveway and the proposal will not change the situation, maybe make it No Stopping At All Times on both sides of the road.
̵ The proposal will restrict parking for visitors on my side of the road.
̵ There is only a problem during business hours because of people parking and walking to work. Maybe residents parking? Or restrictions during the week and business hours only?
̵ Good Time Music Academy just moved to the end of Titoki Street, introducing yellow lines will further reduce parking for residents as parks may be taken by visitors of the academy. Maybe assess the situation in six months after the academy has been operating for a while?
Officers’ responses:
̵ No Stopping At All Times Restrictions on one side of the street will ensure that drivers entering/exiting properties on either side of the street can do so.
̵ Implementing parking restrictions during business hours will not ensure the accessibility issues are resolved at all times therefore a comprehensive solution is necessary.
̵ The accessibility issue requires prompt resolution. The situation can be reassessed in six months to determine if any further restrictions are necessary.
Legal Considerations
9. These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of the Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2007 (Amended 20 November 2014).
Financial Considerations
10. These changes can be funded from Council’s 2016/2017 road markings budget.
Other Considerations
11. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government in that it ensures access for emergency vehicles at all times. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings.
|
No. |
Title |
Page |
|
1View |
Titoki Street - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions 17/384 |
33 |
|
2View |
Titoki Street - No Stopping At All Times CONSULTATION PLAN |
34 |
Author: Sylvio Leal
Traffic Engineer
Reviewed By: Zackary Moodie
Traffic Engineer
Approved By: Lyle Earl
Traffic Assets Manager