Archived decisions

Hampshire County Council

Executive Member - Spatial Strategy

11 November 2003

Traffic Regulation Order - Andover Town Centre

Report of the Director of Environment

Item 7

Contact: Peter Bayless, ext 6882 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 The following decision is sought:

      That approval be given to the Traffic Regulation Order, as detailed in paragraph 2.3 or this report, required to complement the proposed Order to be made by the Secretary of State under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in respect of Andover High Street.

2. Reason

2.1 On 19 June 2000 the former Roads and Development Sub-Committee considered a report on the Test Valley Borough Council's proposals for pedestrianisation and environmental enhancement of Andover High Street. The Borough Council was considering an application to the Secretary of State for an Order under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Advice had been received from the then Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions that, should the Secretary of State make such an Order, it would be advisable to make complementary Traffic Orders to enable the Police to enforce the scheme. The Borough Council had sought an assurance that should it proceed with an application, potentially involving an expensive and time consuming procedure including a public inquiry, and the Secretary of State decided to make an Order, the County Council would not then refuse to make the necessary complementary Traffic Orders.

2.2 The Sub-Committee resolved "That Test Valley Borough Council be advised that in the event of the Secretary of State deciding to make an order under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in respect of Andover High Street, the County Council would be prepared to make any necessary complementary Traffic Regulation Orders to enable a scheme to be implemented in accordance with the Secretary of State's Order".

2.3 The Borough Council proceeded with the application on this basis and, although the Inspector at the Public Inquiry had recommended not proceeding with the scheme, the Secretary of State decided to make the Order under the Town and Country Planning Act. The County Council has therefore undertaken the statutory public notice and advertising procedures for the complementary Traffic Regulation Order. Details of the proposed Order are given in Appendix 1. Four objections have been received, and details, together with comments by the Director of Environment, are given in Appendix 2.

3. Other Options Considered and Rejected

3.1 Not to make the Traffic Regulation Order. This would not be appropriate in view of the Roads and Development Sub-Committee resolution on 19 June 2000.

4. Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Decision Maker or a Member or Officer consulted - None.

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee - Not applicable.

6. Reason(s) for the Matter being dealt with if Urgent - Not applicable.

Approved by: Date:

Councillor J K Glen

Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers

The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.

NB the list excludes:

1.

Published works.

2.

Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.

TITLE

None.

LOCATION

8238/PDB

APPENDIX 1

Hampshire County Council proposes making a Road Traffic Regulation Order as follows:

EFFECT OF ORDER:

(i) To designate that length of High Street, Andover between Bridge Street and the southern end of the Guildhall forecourt, as shown on drawing number T/2/4/1/101, as a pedestrian zone.

(ii) To prohibit all vehicles from proceeding or waiting in the zone except:

      (a) vehicles being used in connection with the operation of a business situated in High Street which has no adequate rear access, provided the vehicle shall not enter the zone between 10.00 am and 6.00 pm, Monday to Saturday or while a market is being held in the High Street Parking Place;

      (b) vehicles being used in connection with the market held in the High Street Parking Place on any day on which the market is being held provided the vehicle shall not enter the zone between 10.30 am and 3.00 pm;

      (c) disabled person's badge holder's vehicles proceeding to or from, or parking in the High Street Parking Place, in accordance with the relevant parking place order, provided the vehicle shall not enter the zone between 10.00 am and 6.00 pm on any day on which the market is being held in the High Street Parking Place;

      (d) in appropriate circumstances vehicles being used in connection with the emergency services, statutory undertakers, building or demolition works, deliveries or collections of mail by Royal Mail, securities and valuables and deliveries or collections to or from the Guildhall; and

      (e) hackney carriages being used to pick up or set down a disabled persons badge holder within the zone

    as shown on drawing number T/2/4/1/103.

(iii) Vehicles exempted from the prohibition under (a), (b) and (d) of (ii) above, except emergency services, Royal Mail and statutory undertakers vehicles, will be required to display a permit issued by Test Valley Borough Council as a means of identification.

(iv) Except where essential in connection with any exemption specified in (ii) above, all vehicular movements within the zone will be restricted to a single carriageway on the west side of the High Street Parking Place with a turning area at its northern end.

APPENDIX 2

Name

Address

Issue/Objection

Response of Director of Environment

Cllr David Kirk

Belmont Road

Andover

(a) It is manifestly not according to the wishes of the majority of the population as confirmed by the Government Inspector in his recent report.

(b) That the County Council gave an undertaking to be bound by the conclusions of the Government Inspector not the changes imposed by the Secretary of State based on the spurious evidence of the Borough Council's Executive Summary to the Independent Consultant's Report.

A - In his report the Inspector commented that "Market research has indicated that the proposed scheme, a key part of which is the pedestrianisation of the lower High Street, is the one which probably fits closest to the aspirations of the majority." This referred to independent research undertaken for the Borough Council which consulted 1,436 of the area's 40,000 population. He also acknowledged the level of objection to the advertised Order, with 689 outstanding objections at the start of the enquiry, a petition from 37 local businesses and 22 further objection letters during the inquiry, as against 18 letters of support.

Minute 438 of the 19 June 2000 Sub-Committee refers to the Secretary of State's decision rather than the Inspector's conclusions.

Mr G W Spencer

Saor Mews

Wessex Gardens

Andover

(a) Safety and security after dark would be compromised if the scheme was approved, particularly the safety of people visiting cash machines. Fear of crime will have an adverse effect on the prosperity of the town.

(b) There is a strong depth of feeling both for and against . The proposal will deepen division within the Community without a referendum.

(c) Cost is spiralling and is an unnecessary burden on council Tax and is resented.

This issue was considered at the Public Inquiry, the Inspector gave weight to it. The Secretary of State (SoS) considered that more weight should be given to the positive aspirations of the Borough Council's proposal.

See A above

The cost was considered by the Inspector to be a matter for locally elected members and consideration of it outside of his duties and responsibilities. The SoS did not query this judgement.

Name

Address

Issue/Objection

Response of Director of Environment

Mrs J Lloyd

Chapel Lane

Enham Alamein

Agree pedestrianisation is ideal from many points of view, but so many exemptions to the order will make the proposal unsafe for pedestrians because of the amount of traffic that will be generated for access and for disabled parking.

The Inspector did not consider that this was a reason not to make the order, but was concerned about the visually impaired. The SoS concluded that this concern could be dealt with in the design. Weight was also given by the SoS to the fact that the drivers would be in a purpose-built pedestrian priority area in which it was obvious that pedestrians would be moving freely and driver care would be necessary.

Mr D Mellor

High Street

Eastleigh

Objects to the removal of market traders vehicles by the proposal. This would affect the security of his vehicle if it was to be left elsewhere.

The design of the paving does not prevent the retention of vehicles with Market stalls. The order contains only one provision to limit market vehicles, that is, they may not enter the street between 10 am and 3 pm. The areas allocated for loading and unloading in relation to the market have not been defined, neither has the retention arrangements for market vehicles. These issues have been considered market management and it is therefore not appropriate to include them in the traffic regulation order.