OBJECTOR / SUPPORTER

OBJECTION / COMMENT

OFFICER'S COMMENTS

1. Meadowhall

Management Services Limited

Southwood Lodge

Boldre Lane

Pilley

i) A new vehicular access is proposed onto St Thomas Park. The existing 9am-6pm and proposed `no waiting at any time' restrictions terminate at the side of the new access. Can the proposed no waiting be extended 5 metres eastwards (with corresponding reduction in the parking bay) to cover the new access.

i) The new vehicle access will have statutory rights of access to the highway, which means the loss of the existing parking space. An extension of the adjacent proposed `no waiting at any time' to cover the access and adjustment to the proposed parking bay would be the most appropriate arrangement.

2. Mr and Mrs Edwards

25 St Thomas Park

Lymington

i) Support the proposed restriction opposite, which will assist access into the narrow driveway to No. 25, but request it be extended across the whole of the house frontage to prevent mounting of the narrow margin adjacent to property.

ii) Length of stay restrictions should be imposed on the parking bays in St Thomas Park to prevent day and night long parking. The road should not be used as parking for residents of adjacent roads.

i) The proposal has been designed to help ease access/egress to No. 25. There is sufficient road space to accommodate parking and one traffic lane without vehicles mounting the margin area fronting No. 25, which is fully kerbed.

ii) The current proposals take into account objections made to the earlier advertised proposals which were to introduce a maximum 2 hour stay. Although no time limit is now proposed, the type of vehicles that may park is limited to cars, motorcycles and invalid carriages.

3. Litchfield Gallery

6 Southampton Road

Lymington

i) The existing parking spaces opposite No. 25 are of benefit to businesses in Southampton Road. The loss of approximately three of these will affect customers. The vehicular access through the No. 25 archway is shared by the Litchford Gallery and they have no difficulty in reversing off the road towards the property.

ii) There is no need to change the restrictions from 9am-6pm to `at any time' on the bend as parking does not occur on the west side due to dropped kerb accesses.

iii) Traffic in the road will be substantially reduced now that the Wisteria surgery has moved out, to be converted to dwellings.

iv) Attracting customers to this end of town is difficult and the existing parking should be left unchanged. It is not a serious accident area.

v) Support the proposed `at any time' restrictions between Southampton Road and the public car park.

i) The archway access at No. 25 is relatively narrow and close to the road and, with the narrow margin on that side and vehicles parked opposite, turning space is restricted.

ii) To assist in retaining some evening and Sunday parking, two 28-metre sections of the road here and at the eastern end of the road, where there is no one-side parking, could be retained as existing (no waiting Mon-Sat 9am-6pm), rather than changed to `no waiting at any time'.

iii) This will be the case, but the measures are aimed at providing reasonable protection for residents' accesses and control of on-street parking close to the town centre.

iv) There is no accident issue here - see Officer's comment 3. iii) above.

v) Noted.

4. R, P and C Lee

24a Queen Street

Lymington

i)There is a grave shortage of parking for many residents of Queen Street and parts of Southampton Road, who do not have off-street parking.

ii) There is no problem caused by the existing parking fronting the public car park, visibility is not restricted.

iii) The reduction in parking spaces on the east side (car park to No. 25) is not justified.

iv) The proposal does not take account of the demolition of the garage unit.

v) The proposed double yellow lines will hinder business people who can currently park evenings and Sundays. The public car park is of little use to residents due to sports ground use in the evenings and the short time limit (two hours) during the day. More parking is needed in Lymington to deal with increased demand from infill development.

i) This has been addressed by amending the proposals originally advertised, to no time limit in the designated parking bays. The implementation of the Lymington (Various Roads) Traffic Order in September 2002 included the removal of waiting restrictions in sections of Eastern Road nearby, amounting to an increase in parking of some twenty or so spaces in that area.

ii) This section of `no waiting at any time' is included to assist access/egress to integral garages immediately fronting the highway.

iii) The restrictions are to assist access to properties on the west side. See Officer's comments 2. i), 3. i) and 4. iii) above.

iv) See 1. above.

v) See Officer's comment 3. ii) above. New Forest District Council is currently undertaking a Traffic Management Study, one aim of which is to identify ways of making better use of existing town centre off-street parking space.

RECOMMENDATION -

It is recommended that the proposals be implemented as advertised except as follows:

(revised proposals shown on plan R412/ 2(a) Revision 1).

i) The `no waiting at any time' on the south side be extended 5 metres eastwards to cover the new access referred to at 1. i) above and the parking bay be reduced in length respectively.

ii) The `no waiting at any time' on the sections of road referred to at 3. ii) above should not be proceeded with (these lengths of road to remain as existing `no waiting Mon-Sat 9am-6pm').