An extension of parking restrictions on Mayfield Grove is being recommended by York Council officials. at a meeting taking place on 12th May.
The meeting is open to the public and an agenda can be found by clicking here
The restrictions are aimed at controlling parking generated by the nearby fishing lake. They would affect part of Mayfield Grove and Aintree Court.
Committee report page 2
Committee report page 2
The meeting will also consider changes to traffic orders in other parts of the City These include (click to access):
- Annex A Clifton, item 4. PDF 193 KB
- Annex B Dringhouses and Woodthorpe Ward, item 4. PDF 158 KB
- Annex C Fishergate Ward, item 4. PDF 554 KB
- Annex D Fulford and Heslington Ward, item 4. PDF 139 KB
- Annex E Guildhall Ward, item 4. PDF 144 KB
- Annex F Haxby Ward, item 4. PDF 112 KB
- Annex G Heworth Ward, item 4. PDF 188 KB
- Annex H Holgate Ward, item 4. PDF 157 KB
- Annex I Micklegate Ward, item 4. PDF 202 KB
- Annex J Rawcliffe and Clifton Without Ward, item 4. PDF 110 KB
The Council has published a report reviewing parking arrangements at several locations in the Dringhouses and Woodthorpe Ward.
click to enlarge
The decisions, for four roads in the area which had been reported for action, were:
- E1 – Ullswater/Acorn Way – Agreed no action to be taken.
- E2 – Aintree Court/Mayfield Grove – Agreed to advertise no waiting at any time restrictions on Mayfield Grove for 10m either wide of the Aintree Court junction, plus 25m into Aintree Court.
- E3 – Bramble Dene – Agreed no action to be taken.
- E4 – Wains Road/Chaloner’s Road – Agreed to advertise no waiting at any time restrictions for 10m both sides of the junction.
Click the link below for details:
Proposals have been published by the council which would introduce waiting restrictions at a number of locations on the ‘Revival’ development off Tadcaster Road.
The proposals (details of which can be viewed below) are designed to improve safety at places that are adversely affected by indiscriminate / obstructive parking.
Proposed lines to be installed:
First phase of yellow lines:
98 residents fined for using old badges in evening
Only a small proportion of the 30,000 old style Minster badge holders have opted to pay £20 to get a new badge
The latest figures released by the York Council suggest that 7076 of the badges have been sold
The badges entitle holders to free parking at Council car parks in the evening.
98 residents have incurred Penalty Charge Notices for relying on the old style badge during September.
It seems though that some are opting to pay the £2 a night evening charge. Evening car park income has increased since last year
- 2013 £34,042.05
- 2014 £40,754.50
No assessment has yet been made on the effects of the increased charges on the evening economy.
NB. The Minster badge also entitles users to pay lower day time car parking charges.
Less than 10% of current users have been prepared to pay £20 for Labours new style parking discount badge
The new badge is mandatory from Monday when the old blue free stickers – issued by the former LibDem run Council – will no longer be recognised by parking wardens.
Many traders fear that the message has not got through to shoppers and that some may be alienated if they receive a parking fine.
Another Lendal Bridge fiasco may be in the making. The quality of the warning signage about the change in the car parks on Monday is likely to come under intense scrutiny by residents.
Of over 30,000 current Minster Badge holders in York, only 3382 have so far bought a new Minster Badge. The badge was an initiative by Labour to try to bridge a £200,000 shortfall on parking income.
But it looks like it will make things worse, rather than better. Take up has been well below expectations and if motorists choose out of City centre retail parks in which to do their shopping, then the car parking account will be hit even harder..
Without the new badge, York residents will have to pay the same parking rates as visitors – meaning a hefty increase
Under the LibDems, in 2011 residents paid £1.10 per hour to park at most City centre car parks (those designated as “standard stay”). Residents will now see that increase by a staggering 82% to £2.00.
Even worse may be the effect on the City centre evening economy where the “free after 6:00pm” parking concession will also be lost.
Earlier in the year, a large petition was collected by residents who wanted to see things left as they were.
With the next Council elections only 8 months away, it is likely that the Liberal Democrats will become the first party to pledge to reintroduce the free Minster badge for residents.
In addition any regular visitor to the City should be able to buy one of the new style badges – in recognition of the money that they inject into the City centre economy and the jobs that it supports.
Labour back down and agree to fit card reader payment option by “early autumn”
The Council will fit a credit/Charge car payment option at the new Marygate pay on exit machines.
Although they blame a “national issue with chip and pin devices” the reality is that the Council forgot to include the option in the original design specification.
The new system should not have been brought into service until a choice of payment options was available.
Card payments can be made at other City centre car parks like Piccadilly.
NB. Only about 1000 of the new £20 Minster badges have been sold so far.
Each of York’s 80,000 households is entitled to a badge which replaces the current free badge which was issued when the LibDems were in control of the Council.
There are around 30,000 active Minster Badges currently in use in the City.
From September, anyone without a badge will have to pay the full rate to park during the day and will also lose the right to free evening parking.
The new equipment for Marygate has apparently has cost £100,000.
The reliability record of this type of system is also patchy
There are some big questions to be answered about value for money with residents discount Minster Badges now costing £20. .
NB. Will charges apply in the evening? How will badge holders exit without paying?
Minster FM is claiming that the parking enforcement camera van has now expanded its coverage area to include shopping streets.
Amongst them is Front Street in Acomb together with Acomb Road itself.
Traders in the sub-urban area have been having a difficult time over recent years and any suggestion that customers could pick up a £70 fine for parking would be an unwelcome development.
Free parking is one of the few advantages that small traders in Acomb have over the retail giants.
The camera car was introduced to stop poor (sometimes dangerous) parking outside primary schools in the City. Although not popular with everyone, we recognise that the initiative was a genuine attempt by the Council to address a real problem.
Local schools being monitored include Westfield and Woodthorpe
Extending the use of spy cameras to routinely issue tickets in less critical streets would be a step too far.
We are fortunate that York’s parking wardens (civil enforcement officers) do exercise discretion before issuing fixed penalty tickets. That approach needs to continue.
It appears that the Labour Council have learned little form the Lendal bridge fiasco. There, the crude use of cameras to enforce restrictions that were misunderstood by many, damaged the City’s reputation.
Labour’s inclusion, in their budget for the current year, of an additional £150,000 from spy camera generated fines confirms that they intend to continue the war against their own citizens.
NB. Respondents to our survey in west York have come out by 2:1 against the extended use of spy cameras in the City.
The decision to allow free car parking at some City centre car parks has been called in for reconsideration. The meeting takes place later today (Monday) commencing at 5:00pm at West Offices.
The main area of concern relates to the proposal to have free parking between 8:00am and 9:00am – times when the highways network can be congested, and most City Centre shops are closed.
Those studying the reports, by officers of the Council, have been surprised that no modelling work appears to have been undertaken to assess the impact that the additional traffic would have on journey times.
Similarly the papers fail to provide any detailed assessment of the assumptions made regarding the reduction in income that the changes may have on the Council’s budget overall, although much of this will be offset, for a short time, by use of Section 106 contributions from the developers of Monks Cross.
All in all, there are a lot of questions still to be answered on a policy change which is supposed to be implemented on 26th May.