Agenda item

SHERINGHAM PRIMARY SCHOOL PARKING TASK & FINISH GROUP - INTERIM REPORT

Summary:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Options considered:

The Sheringham Primary School Parking Task & Finish Group was established to address traffic and parking issues in the residential vicinity of Sheringham Primary School. This Report aims to address the immediate concerns, but accepts that the work of the Task & Finish Group must continue in order to deliver a wider solution to similar issues across the district.

 

A number of possible options have been considered by the Task and Finish Group. At present some of these options are still under review or awaiting further information.

 

Conclusions:

 

The Sheringham Primary School Parking Task & Finish Group is yet to agree its final recommendations to address traffic and parking issues in the vicinity of Sheringham Primary School. It would therefore be beneficial if the Task & Finish Group continued to meet post-election in order to conclude its work.

 

Recommendations:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reasons for

Recommendations:

 

 

  1. To recommend that the 2019/20 Overview & Scrutiny Committee allow the Task & Finish Group to continue to meet as a sub-Committee for 3 months following the election, in order to finalise its work and issue final recommendations.

 

  1. That the Overview & Scrutiny Committee note the work of the Task & Finish Group to date.

 

To offer a realistic solution to address traffic and parking issues in the vicinity of Sheringham Primary School.

 

LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS AS REQUIRED BY LAW

(Papers relied on to write the report, which do not contain exempt information and which are not published elsewhere)

               

Cabinet Member(s):

 

Ward(s) affected:

Upper Sherigham/Sheringham South

Contact Officer, telephone number and email:

Matt Stembrowicz Matthew.Stembrowicz@north-norfolk.gov.uk 01263 516047

 

Minutes:

Cllr T Adams introduced the Report and informed Members that the Task and Finish Group had been formed as a result of a CCfA prior to the election. The Group were yet to make any recommendations, but had considered several options which were included in the Report. It was noted that that many of the issues identified were functions of Norfolk County Council.

 

Questions and Discussion

 

The Democratic Services and Governance Officer (Scrutiny) provided further information on the work of the Task and Finish Group, and explained the limitations of NNDC’s ability to implement any recommendations, as it did not administer the necessary services.

 

Cllr N Pearce stated that he accepted that both highways and schools were not the jurisdiction of the District Council, but stated that the issues continued to persist, and therefore asked if the schools could be contacted to implement any recommendations. Cllr N Housden stated that he saw no benefit in continuing the Task and Finish Group, but asked if it would be possible to implement a ‘bike walk scoot’ style scheme via NCC. Cllr P Heinrich stated that there was no benefit in continuing the Task and Finish Group, and suggested that it would be difficult to encourage children to cycle on their own. He added that he had helped to promote a walking bus approach in Portsmouth.

 

Cllr W Fredericks stated that working parents would have significant time pressures, and therefore walking children to school may be difficult. She then asked whether work to introduce such a scheme could be outsourced to Broadland District Council. The Democratic Services and Governance Officer (Scrutiny) explained that BDC had in fact outsourced some of the implementation of the bike walk scoot scheme to NCC.

 

Cllr G Mancini-Boyle suggested that car sharing was another opportunity that could be considered.

 

Cllr L Shires stated that she had been a school governor for six years, and had dealt with similar issues in the past, at which point a park and stride scheme had been implemented, though success was limited by a lack of viable pathways. Cllr T Adams suggested that pathways shouldn’t be such an issue at Sheringham Primary School, as it was located in a housing estate.

 

Cllr W Fredericks asked if any grants were available to help fund similar schemes, to which the Head of Economic and Community Development suggested that it was possible that the Big Society Fund might be possible, otherwise the community transport fund could be considered. Cllr T Adams asked whether the BSF was open to educational institutions, to which the Head of Economic and Community Development replied that this was not strictly the case, but it was possible that funding could be provided to a community organisation, though it would need to be properly constituted.

 

In reference to alternate parking arrangements for parents at the nearby community centre, the Democratic Services and Governance Officer (Scrutiny) stated that Sheringham TC had originally rejected the Group’s proposal to allow parking on the community centre car park. He then suggested that the Town Council could be asked to reconsider the request if it was presented alongside a full scheme to encourage walking.

 

In reference to Traffic Regulation Orders outlined in the Interim Report as a potential option, Cllr T Adams suggested that these would be difficult to implement, and noted that he had previously been involved in a scheme in which a high number of tickets issued had been to local residents.

 

In response to a question from Cllr L Shires, it was confirmed that Sheringham Primary School was not an academy, and should therefore be encouraged to discuss the issues with NCC as the relevant authority. Cllr L Shires suggested that recommendations to implement a scheme could be made directly to NCC. The Democratic Services and Governance Officer (Scrutiny) confirmed that BDC had paid for elements of their bike walk scoot scheme to be implemented by the NCC Road Safety Team. Cllr N Housden asked what percentage of the issues faced at Sheringham Primary School and the surrounding area were the responsibility of NNDC, to which the Democratic Services and Governance Officer (Scrutiny) replied that both educational services and highways were the responsibility of NCC. Cllr P Heinrich said he was shocked that the school had not done more to attempt to address the issue, and stated that NCC must be asked to engage with the school to improve circumstances.

 

Cllr W Fredericks proposed either that £5000 of funding be recommended to implement a bike walk scoot style scheme in North Norfolk, or otherwise encourage schools to apply to the community transport fund to implement such a scheme. The Head of Economic and Community Development stated that whilst the cost of implementing such a scheme in North Norfolk was unknown, it would not be wise to make any funding recommendations without clarification. Cllr L Shires proposed a recommendation to ask NCC to implement a bike walk scoot style scheme without a funding recommendation, until financial requirements were known. The Proposal was seconded by Cllr P Heinrich.

 

RESOLVED

 

That the Scrutiny Officer write to the Norfolk County Council Road Safety Team to request that a walk/bike to school scheme be implemented at Sheringham Primary School and across North Norfolk where necessary.

Supporting documents: