Report of the Strategic Director (Neighbourhoods)

Vehicles parking on footways, cycleways and pavements can cause obstruction to people seeking to use those facilities for their intended use of walking and wheeling in the city. Unmanaged parking on pavements often results in parking practices which are inconsiderate to the needs of those road users and can result in people who need the most assistance in travelling around the city (e.g. young children, the elderly and people with limited mobility and disabilities) being significantly impacted in going about their daily lives.

The Committee received a report of the Strategic Director (Neighbourhoods) which provided an overview of issues relating to pavement parking.

Key points and themes within the report included:

·         Managing pavement parking, including physical prevention, accommodation and enforcement;

·         Consequential effects of preventing pavement parking; and

·         Pavement parking in Manchester.

Key points and queries that arose from the Committee’s discussions included:

• The problems that pavement parking caused in Members’ wards for pedestrians, particularly wheelchair users and those with pushchairs, and local residents and that the extent of the problem was not captured in the report;
• That wards neighbouring the city centre were particularly badly affected due to commuters parking on their streets;
• Concern about people driving on the pavement and that enforcement action should be taken;
• Damage to pavements from vehicles, particularly Heavy Goods Vehicles;
• To support action to address pavement parking, while recognising the challenges involved in this;
• Concern that there was insufficient guidance from the Government on addressing this;
• Questions about trials schemes and the need to communicate the changes to drivers;
• That some drivers were not deterred by fines because it was not a lot of money to them;
• To request a further report following a response from the Government or when data was available from the trial schemes; and
• Noting that in some areas banning pavement parking would make a road effectively a one-lane road, due to the width of the roads; and
• That the language in the report should demonstrate that other road users were being prioritised over car users.

In response to Members’ questions about the trial project to prevent pavement parking, the Executive Member for Environment and Transport reported that there was no blueprint for this as yet due to the complexities involved.  She reported that they were looking across the whole city for trial areas, that consideration needed to be given to where the cars would go if they were not parked on the pavement and that part of the work was about behaviour change and reducing the number of cars in the city.  She advised that it was important not to just displace the problem into different areas.  In response to a Member’s comments about Operation Park Safe in Sheffield, she reported that GMP were looking to other areas for good practice which could be adopted in Manchester.  She informed Members that she was also engaging with local MPs to make progress on this issue.

In response to a Member’s question, the Director of Highways reported that GMP was looking into using photographic evidence provided by members of the public to support enforcement but that clarification was needed on the definition of obstruction in relation to pavement parking offences.  He agreed with a point from the Chair about a minimum width of clear footpath being a useful measure, stating that this would be useful for defining obstruction and for prioritising areas for intervention.  In response to a further question, he confirmed that grass verges were included under the pavement parking powers in place in London.  He informed Members that, if similar powers were extended to Manchester, consultation and engagement with drivers and residents would take place before it was introduced.  In response to a question from the Chair, he stated that, if a vehicle caused damage, for example, to a bollard, the Council would try to recover the costs from the driver but that cumulative damage to pavements due to vehicles driving over them was difficult to attribute to an individual driver.  He advised that there would be a challenge in balancing the interests of pedestrians against the loss of on-street parking for residents.

The Chair requested that a representative from GMP be invited to attend next time this item was considered.

Decisions:

1.            To note:

• The legislative position with regard to managing and enforcing parking on the pavement, with particular reference to the current issues relating to the definition of “obstruction” in law;
• The challenges with respect to the consequences of displaced parking when implementing measures to prevent or enforce against pavement parking;
• The ongoing work to identify suitable locations for the introduction of a trial project in Manchester to prevent pavement parking, in order to evaluate the consequential impacts of displaced parking and;
• That the Executive Member for Transport and Environment will write to the Secretary of State for Transport to request clarity on the offence of “obstruction” in these circumstances, and to seek confirmation of a timeframe for the devolution of civil enforcement powers for obstruction offences/contraventions and the powers to introduce a ban on pavement parking to Local Authorities outside London

2.            To request a further report at an appropriate time, following a response from the Government or when data is available from the trials, and to invite a representative from GMP to attend this meeting.