North Yorkshire County Council

Business and Environmental Services

Executive Members

22 October 2021

Washbeck Close, Scarborough – proposed Traffic Regulation Order

Report of the Assistant Director – Highways and Transportation

1.0 Purpose of Report

1.1 To enable the Corporate Director - Business and Environmental Services (BES) and County Councillor Don Mackenzie, Executive Member for Access to consider objections and comments received following public consultation and statutory advertisement carried out for proposed waiting restrictions.

2.0 Background

2.1 Washbeck Close, Scarborough is a residential cul-de-sac accessed from a mini roundabout on Valley Road at its junction with St James Road and Londesborough Road. Washbeck Close serves 18 terraced and semi-detached properties and five apartment blocks. The 18 properties have some off street parking provision and the apartments have off street parking provided in two car parks.

Figure 1 – plan showing Washbeck Close leading off from the junction with Valley Road and St James Road. The junction is a mini roundabout.

2.2 There have been long running issues around parking on Washbeck Close on the approach to the roundabout on Valley Road. There are usually approximately 10 vehicles parked end to end along the western side of Washbeck Close from the junction of Washbeck Close with Valley Road. This means Washbeck Close is narrowed for a length of approximately 50m, leaving a carriageway surface only wide enough for one way traffic. This length of road has a steep uphill gradient leading away from the mini roundabout and is also situated on a bend in the road. As vehicles park as close to the roundabout as possible, this causes problems for vehicles wanting to access or leave Washbeck Close to reach residences. Residents say that drivers have to reverse uphill or back onto the roundabout depending which vehicle starts passing the parked cars first. The horizontal alignment of Washbeck Close means that the visibility of two vehicles approaching each other from opposite directions can be hindered by parked cars. The radii at the junction with the roundabout are currently protected by double yellow lines, but these do not extend along Washbeck Close for any distance.

2.3 Pedestrians waiting to cross the mouth of the junction can have difficulty seeing vehicles coming down the hill due to parked vehicles, vertical and horizontal alignment. However, in the last five years there have been no recorded injury collision incidents.

2.4 After receiving representations from the local residents requesting improvements to this junction and after having discussions with the local area highways office, the local member requested that additional no waiting restrictions be proposed and funded from her Locality Budget.

3.0 Proposals

3.1 The proposal is to extend the existing ‘no waiting at any time’ restriction by 12 metres, on both sides of the road, to create better visibility for pedestrians crossing at the junction, and to create a reserve for vehicles to wait if the passage ahead/uphill is obstructed by a vehicle proceeding down the hill.

4.0 Consultation

4.1 The proposals have been the subject of consultation and public advertisement in accordance with the Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996. Appendix A contains the consultation letter and a drawing showing the extent of the proposals. The Traffic Regulation Order was advertised on 28 January 2021 and any person could make objections and representations until 22 February 2021, Appendix B contains the advertised schedule.

5.0 Consultation response

5.1 There were a total of 18 consultation letters delivered to residents with 14 responses received from residents. Of those responding, 12 were in support of the proposals, one expressed objection and one was neutral.

5.2 Cllr Liz Colling, the local County Councillor for the Falsgrave and Stepney Division, expressed that she welcomed the positive comments received from residents about the proposals, and believes that the proposed restrictions would improve visibility at the junction.

5.3 A consultation letter was sent to the Yorkshire Coast Disability Forum, as a statutory consultee and no response was received.

5.4 A summary of the consultation comments received, together with officer comments, is attached as Appendix C.

6.0 Equalities

6.1 Consideration has been given to the potential for any equality impacts arising from the recommendation. It is the view of officers that the recommendation does not have an adverse impact on any of the protected characteristics identified in the Equalities Act 2010 and a copy of the Equalities Impact Assessment screening form is attached as Appendix D.

6.2 A consultation letter was sent to the Yorkshire Coast Disability Forum, as a statutory consultee and no response was received.

7.0 Climate Change

7.1 Consideration has been given to the potential for any climate impacts arising from the recommendation. It is the view of officers that the recommendation has a neutral impact on the environment of North Yorkshire and on our aspiration to achieve net carbon neutrality by 2030 and a copy of the Climate change impact assessment screening form is attached as Appendix E.

8.0 Finance

8.1 The cost of advertising the Traffic Regulation Order, installing the appropriate lining and signage is estimated at approximately £5,000 which will be funded from Cllr Colling’s Locality Budget.

9.0 Legal

9.1 North Yorkshire County Council proposes to make an Order under Sections 1 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, specifically with reference to the provisions of sections 2(1) to (3), 4(2), 32(1), 35(1) and 45 to 49 and Part IV of Schedule 9 to the 1984 Act and under the Traffic Management Act 2004, the effect of which will be to introduce waiting restrictions on the various named roads in Scarborough.

9.2 Section 122(1) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 provides that it shall be the duty of every local authority upon whom functions are conferred by or under the 1984 Act so to exercise those functions as to secure the expeditious, convenient and safe movement of vehicular and other traffic (including pedestrians) and the provision of suitable and adequate parking facilities on and off the highway.

9.3 The County Council considers that it is expedient to make this TRO on grounds of Sections 1(1) (a) and (f) of the 1984 Act – for avoiding danger to persons or other traffic using the road or any other road or for preventing the likelihood of any such danger arising, or for preserving or improving the amenities of the area through which the road runs; having taken into account its duty under Section 122(1) of the 1984 Act.

9.4 Where an Order has been made (sealed), if any person wishes to question the validity of the Order or any of its provisions on the grounds that it or they are not within the powers conferred by the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, or that any requirement of the 1984 Act or of any instrument made under the 1984 Act has not been complied with, they may apply to the High Court within 6 weeks from the date on which the Order is made.

9.5 A new process for the consideration of objections to traffic regulation orders was approved by the Executive on 29 April 2014 and County Council on 21 May 2014. The consideration of objections to Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) is now a matter for the Executive and the role of the Area Constituency Committee is changed to a consultative role on wide area impact TROs. The consideration of objections has been delegated by the Executive to the Corporate Director of Business and Environmental Services (BES) in consultation with BES Executive Members. The new decision making process relates to the provision and regulation of parking places both off and on the highway where an objection is received from any person or body entitled under the relevant statute. A wide area impact TRO is classed as a proposal satisfying all of the three criteria set out below:

· The proposal affects more than one street or road and,

· The proposal affects more than one community and,

· The proposal is located within the ward of more than one County Councillor.

9.6 These proposals do not meet the criteria required to be classed to have an area wide impact.

10.0 Recommendations

10.1 On the basis of the consultation responses, it is recommended that in consultation with County Councillor Don Mackenzie, Executive Member for Access:

i. The proposals are implemented as advertised.

ii. The objectors are notified of the decision within 14 days of the Order being made.

BARRIE MASON

Assistant Director - Highways and Transportation

Author of Report: Matthew Baldwin, Project Engineer, Area 3 - Whitby

Background Documents: None

Street	Side	From	To	Restriction	Hours	Zone
Washbeck Close	both	A point 8 metres south of its junction with Valley Road	A point 20 metres south of its junction with Valley Road	No waiting	At any time

Initial equality impact assessment screening form This form records an equality screening process to determine the relevance of equality to a proposal, and a decision whether or not a full EIA would be appropriate or proportionate.

Directorate	Business and Environmental Services
Service area	Highways and Transportation
Proposal being screened	the introduction of Road Traffic Regulation Order
Officer(s) carrying out screening	Matthew Baldwin
What are you proposing to do?	The proposal is to extend the existing ‘no waiting at any time’ restriction on Washbeck Close, Scarborough by 12 metres, on both sides of the road.
Why are you proposing this? What are the desired outcomes?	To create better visibility for pedestrians crossing at the junction, and to create a reserve for vehicles to wait if the passage ahead/uphill is obstructed by a vehicle proceeding down the hill.
Does the proposal involve a significant commitment or removal of resources? Please give details.	No
Impact on people with any of the following protected characteristics as defined by the Equality Act 2010, or NYCC’s additional agreed characteristics As part of this assessment, please consider the following questions: · To what extent is this service used by particular groups of people with protected characteristics? · Does the proposal relate to functions that previous consultation has identified as important? · Do different groups have different needs or experiences in the area the proposal relates to? If for any characteristic it is considered that there is likely to be an adverse impact or you have ticked ‘Do not know / no info available’, then a full EIA should be carried out where this is proportionate. You are advised to speak to your Equality rep for advice if you are in any doubt.
Protected characteristic		Potential for adverse impact				Do not know / No info available
		Yes	No
Age			x
Disability			x
Sex			x
Race			x
Sexual orientation			x
Gender reassignment			x
Religion or belief			x
Pregnancy or maternity			x
Marriage or civil partnership			x
NYCC additional characteristics
People in rural areas			x
People on a low income			x
Carer (unpaid family or friend)			x
Does the proposal relate to an area where there are known inequalities/probable impacts (e.g. disabled people’s access to public transport)? Please give details.		No
Will the proposal have a significant effect on how other organisations operate? (e.g. partners, funding criteria, etc.). Do any of these organisations support people with protected characteristics? Please explain why you have reached this conclusion.		No
Decision (Please tick one option)		EIA not relevant or proportionate:		Yes	Continue to full EIA?;		No
Reason for decision		It is considered that there are no significant negative impacts on people with protected characteristics. None of the consultation responses highlighted issues for those with protected characteristics. A consultation was sent to the Yorkshire Coast Disability Forum, as a statutory consultee and no response was received.
Signed (Assistant Director or Equivalent)		Barrie Mason
Date		12/10/2021

Climate change impact assessment

The purpose of this assessment is to help us understand the likely impacts of our decisions on the environment of North Yorkshire and on our aspiration to achieve net carbon neutrality by 2030, or as close to that date as possible. The intention is to mitigate negative effects and identify projects which will have positive effects.

This document should be completed in consultation with the supporting guidance. The final document will be published as part of the decision-making process and should be written in Plain English.

If you have any additional queries which are not covered by the guidance please email climatechange@northyorks.gov.uk

Please note: You may not need to undertake this assessment if your proposal will be subject to any of the following:
Planning Permission

Environmental Impact Assessment

Strategic Environmental Assessment

However, you will still need to summarise your findings in the summary section of the form below.

Please contact climatechange@northyorks.gov.uk for advice.

Title of proposal	Amendment to Borough of Scarborough (Prohibition of Waiting and Loading and Provision of Parking) Consolidation Order 2011, Washbeck Close, Scarborough
Brief description of the proposal	Extend the current no waiting restrictions to improve visibility at the junction for all road users.
Directorate	BES
Service area	Highways & Transportation
Lead officer	Matthew Baldwin
Names and roles of other people involved in carrying out the impact assessment	Matthew Baldwin – Project Engineer
Date impact assessment started	16^th August 2021

Options appraisal

Were any other options considered in trying to achieve the aim of this project? If so, please give brief details and explain why alternative options were not progressed.

What impact will this proposal have on council budgets? Will it be cost-neutral, have increased cost or reduce costs?

Please explain briefly why this will be the result, detailing estimated savings or costs where this is possible.

The cost of advertising the Traffic Regulation Order, installing the appropriate lining and signage is estimated at approximately £5,000 which will be funded from Cllr Colling’s Environmental Locality Budget.

How will this proposal impact on the environment? N.B. There may be short term negative impact and longer-term positive impact. Please include all potential impacts over the lifetime of a project and provide an explanation.		Positive impact (Place a X in the box below where relevant)	No impact (Place a X in the box below where relevant)	Negative impact (Place a X in the box below where relevant)	Explain why will it have this effect and over what timescale? Where possible/relevant please include: · Changes over and above business as usual · Evidence or measurement of the effect · Figures for CO₂e · Links to relevant documents	Explain how you plan to mitigate any negative impacts.	Explain how you plan to improve any positive outcomes as far as possible.
Minimise greenhouse gas emissions e.g. reducing emissions from travel, increasing energy efficiencies etc.	Emissions from travel			X	Removing the parking spaces may lead to addition distances travelled by vehicles to find a parking space.
	Emissions from construction			X	Road markings will need to be laid and maintained.
	Emissions from running of buildings
	Other
Minimise waste: Reduce, reuse, recycle and compost e.g. reducing the use of single-use plastic			X
Reduce water consumption			X
Minimise pollution (including air, land, water, light and noise)			X
Ensure resilience to the effects of climate change e.g. reducing flood risk, mitigating effects of drier, hotter summers			X
Enhance conservation and wildlife			X
Safeguard the distinctive characteristics, features and special qualities of North Yorkshire’s landscape			X
Other (please state below)

Are there any recognised good practice environmental standards in relation to this proposal? If so, please detail how this proposal meets those standards.

Summary Summarise the findings of your impact assessment, including impacts, the recommendation in relation to addressing impacts, including any legal advice, and next steps. This summary should be used as part of the report to the decision-maker.

Neutral Impact – the negative impacts are not significant, particularly when balanced against the need to make improvements to visibility at this junction.

Sign off section

This climate change impact assessment was completed by:

Name	Matthew Baldwin
Job title	Project Engineer
Service area	Highways & Transportation
Directorate	BES
Signature
Completion date	16^th August 2021

Authorised by relevant Assistant Director (signature): Barrie Mason

Date: 12/10/2021

	Themes raised	Number of responses mentioning	Officer comment
1	Concerns about vehicles meeting each other at either end of the parked vehicles and the safety issues relating to reversing onto Valley Rd or reversing uphill towards the residential car parks.	1	Noted. The double yellow lines are proposed as a remedy to this concern.
2	Concerns about the parked vehicles causing obstruction for vehicles exiting Valley Road or travelling towards Valley Road.	1	Noted. The double yellow lines are proposed as a remedy to this concern whilst seeking to maximise the remaining length of street available for parking.
3	Comments were received requesting the proposed restriction should go further up the road (6) or should not extent as far as proposed (2)	8	Officers consider that extending the proposed restrictions any further is unnecessary. The proposal is considered to be the minimum required to have the desired effect of improving visibility and space for vehicles to manoeuvre, whilst maximising the remaining length of the street available for parking.
4	Concerns about the reduction in the available on street parking spaces.	2	It is necessary to propose these measures in response to the safety concerns.