To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 10 December 2009.

The minutes of the meeting held on 10 December 2009 were confirmed as a correct record.

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Mrs. P. Quadling and Mr. M. Broughton.

To note whether the Chairman proposes to accept any item as urgent business.

None.

Members are asked at this stage to declare any interests that they may have in the following items on the Agenda. 

The Members’ Code of Conduct requires that declarations include the nature of the interest, and whether it is a personal or prejudicial interest.

No declarations were made.

An extract from the UEA report discussed at the meeting on 10 December 2009 is attached for consideration by Members, along with a copy of a letter received from the Taking Attleborough Forward Group.

The Council’s Asset Manager and Principal Planning Policy Officer have been invited to attend to participate in discussion on this item.

Mrs. Vera Dale, Mayor of Attleborough, representing Attleborough Town Council, was in attendance for this item.

The Principal Planning Policy Officer gave an overview of the longer term development plans and strategies for Attleborough, which effectively would double the size of the town over the next 16-17 years.

Attleborough was identified in the LDF Core Strategy for growth for 4,000 new homes, the broad location for this development being to the south of the town along the area of the London Road/B1077.  A new link road to serve the development would be required to alleviate congestion in the town centre.  A long lead-in would also be required for the new development to deal with infrastructure needs relating to water, energy and transport provisions.  As a result, development would not be expected to be able to begin until 2014 or 2015 at the earliest.

Part of the rationale for locating new development to the south of the town was the area’s proximity to the town centre, with provision to be made for improved links through Leys Lane and Station Road, the area being within walking distance to the town centre and close to the railway station for commuters.

The strategy for Attleborough included provision for jobs to serve the new homes, with 2000 new jobs being planned for the town, which it was hoped would reduce the overall need for people to travel.

Transport was a key issue for the town.  At the recent Public Examination of the LDF Core Strategy, the Inspector had made it clear that further work on strategic transport planning was required, which would include the issue of car parking.

For the moment, therefore, the focus in Attleborough was on interim measures needed over the next four to five years before the new development plans began to take effect.

The Head of Asset Management explained that, as part of the overall car park review, his team was in the process of collecting the necessary information required on the five towns.  The condition of the car parks in Attleborough and, in particular, the issue of maintenance and repair, was part of the larger picture on the car park needs of the district as a whole.

The Group then went on to look at the suggested options for Attleborough drawn from the UEA study presented at the last meeting as follows:

a)     Redesign of current car parks

The UEA study suggested a redesigned layout of the Queen Street car park could increase parking spaces by 20% and would provide a cost effective solution, as well as being relatively easy to implement.  A disadvantage would be the loss of some existing trees on the site.  In this connection, it was noted that the trees were not protected by Tree Preservation Orders but they were in a Conservation Area and therefore formal Consent to Fell would be required if this option were to be pursued.

Mrs. Dale felt that a 20% increase in the spaces on this car park would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Report of the Director, Organisational Development. 

The Principal Member Services Officer presented the report which gave members some background and context to the general use of parking permit schemes to enable a better understanding of this aspect of the review.

The report outlined the distinction between permits and season tickets and their jurisdiction.  In Norfolk, jurisdiction for issuing permits lies solely with the County Council and the County works closely with any district that wished to introduce such permit schemes.  It was noted that the only second tier council in Norfolk which operates an existing permit parking scheme is Great Yarmouth Borough Council.

The report gave details of the Great Yarmouth permit scheme and one other operated by East Hertfordshire District Council.

The report considered the issues that would need to be taken into account if the Council was to contemplate such a scheme for Attleborough.

As previously revealed by the review, Attleborough has very limited on street parking in the town centre.  There were also some 180 residential properties located on streets in the central area, a significant proportion of which were flats with no or limited dedicated parking provision.   Adjacent residential areas at Edenside Drive and New North Road were both narrow and highly congested streets.

There would be costs incurred in introducing any such scheme in respect of administration, signage, advertising, associated legal costs etc. and enforcement would be a further critical factor for any scheme.

Mrs. Dale confirmed that existing on street parking was problematical for the town as there was little enforcement carried out by the Police.  The decriminalisation of on street parking would remove the responsibility from the Police altogether.

While the Town Council had not yet given any detailed consideration to this issue, Mrs. Dale agreed that enforcement was a key issue.  Edenside Drive was the only residential area that experienced problems from on street parking.

One member stated that, in her experience, permit systems were not enforceable and she would not recommend them for that reason.

The Principal Planning Policy Officer advised that the AAAP was unlikely to include the issue of on street parking at the present time but could do so if it was raised as an issue at a future date.

The Head of Asset Management concurred that overall enforcement was a critical issue.  The review thus far indicated a need to manage the existing provisions as efficiently as possible over the new few years pending the future planned expansion, which might then offer some more readily available solutions.  He felt the main recommendations from the UEA study – redesign of current car parks, designation of short and long stay car parks and car park expansion – would be a key to solutions in other areas.

So far as enforcement was concerned, the issue of shared funding could be explored, although it was questionable as to how effective enforcement would be.

Mrs. Dale suggested that, if the Queens Street car park could be redesigned to create an additional 20% of spaces, a possible option  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

To agree a date and time for the next meeting.

The date of the next meeting was fixed for Monday, 22 February 2010 at 10.00 a.m. at a venue to be confirmed.