Oct 052014

The KCG committee recently (24th Sept) met with Jon Toy, Bristol City Council’s RPZ liaision officer, to discuss the proposed changes to the Kingsdown zone. Below are summary notes of the meeting.

The KCG will send a response to BCC as a body, but individual members are strongly encouraged to respond also regarding the potential loss of very large numbers of parking spaces for residents in the area and other issues. 
Email tro.comments@bristol.gov.uk noting reference CAE/NMT/P/907.  It is necessary to give your name and address in the email (which may be available within Council documentation for public scrutiny) and to state (if an objection) why one objects. The deadline is 10th October.

Present : Jon Toy (JT) – BCC RPZ Liaison Officer, David Mellor (DM), Richard Harrad (RH), David Winter (DW), Jeremy Newick (JN), Nick Kidwell (NK), Nigel Tasker (NT), Lorna Robinson (LR), Joel Baillie-Lane (JBL) – notes.

JBL thanked JT for taking the time to attend this informal briefing which was organised to appraise attendees of the generalities of the proposed changes to the RPZ.

DM started the discussion by stating that after a recent meeting to discuss the RPZ it was generally agreed that the RPZ was a great improvement on the situation prior to its introduction in 2010, but that pressure on the zone had increased and it was in a ‘fragile’ state at present – hence the concern at some of the proposals, especially the changes to the system relating to business permits, and to the proposed increase of the RPZ catchment area to include some of Stokes Croft.

All present also expressed surprise that BCC were implying ‘consultation’ had taken place, as none of us was aware of anything until about 10 days ago. It was also pointed out that some of the new pressure on the scheme was from the increase in the number of residences in the area from recent developments.

JT replied with some general points on this RPZ and others similar that had been approved and were being implemented.

– Any genuine household in the zone can apply for up to 2 (sometimes 3) permits, but halls of residence and some other developments where car restrictions were specifically mentioned in planning consents can be refused permits

– all RPZs are reviewed after 6 months, and then roughly annually thereafter, so RPZs can be tweaked as required – nothing that is implemented here is irreversible.

– BCC wanted all RPZs to have common ‘systems’ in terms of pricing structure and timings (of zone restrictions), but where necessary variations will be made. As an example the Clifton Central Zone has a 9am to 9pm timespan due to the necessities of the area.

– Generally pricing would be as follows : £48 first permit (currently £30), £96 second permit (£80) and £192 third permit (£200). There are amendments on 4 levels for most to least efficient emissions from cars

– Permits are only granted to applicants who can prove residence in the zone, and whose V5 form shows they are the registered owner of the car. This should prevent some students using ‘parents car’.

– With regard to business permits, at present a legitimate business can apply for 2 permits for ‘staff’, and up to 5 for ‘customers’. This will change to a maximum of 7, but in any combination. Business permits are £250 each, with reductions for faith groups, charities and some small businesses.

– Regarding newly implemented schemes (Clifton Wood, Cotham North) the early feedback is generally positive, but there has been comment that there is not enough ‘Pay and Display’ (P&D)

– Income from the schemes is ring-fenced. The income goes to pay the loan (over an approx 10 year period) for implementation, and then afterwards income can only be spent within the system, so it is self funding.

– JT explained that it was standard policy to have a zone division down the middle of a road – hence the introduction of some Stokes Croft addresses into the zone

Comments in response to JT points were as follows :

– DW and JBL both commented upon the ‘squeezing’ of the existing zone by the introduction of both Stokes Croft and some areas around Whiteladies road into the RPZ. Concern was voiced as to how many businesses in these areas would apply for permits, and how many permits they might be allowed ….. especially the BBC !

– NT asked how the system monitored business permit applications. Legitimate applications for tradesmen and regular customers popping in and out all day are fine, but how does one monitor this to ensure they are genuine and not just being used by normal commuters who are happy to drive into the area and then walk a further mile or so to their place of work. Commuters should use public transport

– RH was concerned about the proposals for The back of Kingsdown Parade. This had very specifically been worked to its existing situation with consultation between BCC and residents 4 years ago. It was now shown as having about 15 less spaces available and those cars would have to park on Kingsdown Parade ….. knock on effect etc ! JT responded that he would check on this specific point as it might (?) be an error. RH pointed out that refuse lorries and emergency vehicles happily use the present arrangement, so there seems to be no need to tinker with it and it would save a lot of time and worry if it could just stay as it is

( Note : since these notes were made BCC have responded that some comments had been made to them by some resident(s) of BOKP that some cars parking there at present did hinder access )

– NK asked whether Kingsdown RPZ could change its hours of operation as Clifton was 9 til 9. JT stated that was something that could be looked into, and it was generally felt that increasing the evening time restriction to 7pm in Kingsdown would be helpful, and would not stop UHB night shift staff using the area

– DM pointed out that from a simple walk earlier he had counted 28 businesses in the side of Stokes Croft being introduced into the zone, and this could mean nearly 200 additional business permits just from this area, plus any residences above the businesses. This could push the zone past it’s ‘fragile’ state into a ‘broken’ state !

– All asked for some data feedback on existing / proposed numbers of permits issued, ration of resident to businesses, how many spaces are there in huge existing and proposed Kingsdown RPZ ….. etc. JT stated he should be able to disseminate data from their systems.

– JBL asked about parking on corners as per Clifton, stating the streets here are very narrow and turning on corners is not easy. JT stated that the corners in Clifton and elsewhere were being taken out of the bays to ease traffic movement and make pedestrian access easier.

– It was generally agreed that representations to BCC about the scheme were better coming from individuals rather than (representative) groups such as Kingsdown Conservation Group.

The meeting closed with JT stating that BCC will respond to ‘show-stopper’ issues or errors (such as BOKP query) and not minor niggles, but that the whole process is monitored and alterations can be implemented as required. However there is no plan for a full scale ‘re-consultation’

The meeting closed with thanks to JT for giving us the briefing – his time was appreciated


In discussions afterwards on the next step forward it was clear the following points were specific concerns that were still outstanding

1 The introduction into the zone of Stokes Croft businesses and possible residences – this would have a serious effect upon the balance of the RPZ

2 The introduction into the zone of areas close to Whiteladies Road and what impact this would have

3 The (hopeful) error in making changes to The Back of Kingsdown Parade – why change what already works perfectly well ?

4 We should ‘flag up’ the possibility of making timing changes – perhaps at a later date

5 The changes generally to Business Permit allocations – how will this affect the number of permits allowed

6 We should ‘flag up’ the lack of confidence in the ‘rigour of the interpretation of operational vehicles necessary for businesses to function’ – ie not commuters !

7 We should ask about only a limited number of streets immediately behind the Stokes Croft area being available for business permits relating to that area

8 We should flag up the fact that no consultation as such has taken place between BCC and KCG or other Kingsdown residents and earlier discussions would have been helpful to give time to sort things out properly – even if that took a bit of work for all parties.

 Posted by on October 5, 2014
Oct 252010

The Government has recently urged Councils to cut down on unnecessary (and expensive) street signs and posts, but it often takes a long time for this sort of pronouncement to have any real effect on the ground. So KCG have been approaching local residents to help cut the number of posts that the Residents’ Parking scheme will bring, and City Council Conservation Officer Hannah Porter has been working to influence her colleagues. The net result is: 10 more signs going on existing lamp columns than originally proposed; 12 signs identified as being unnecessary; and 39 signs placed on existing boundary walls and railings instead of on new posts.

Many thanks to everyone who has helped with this important and useful piece of work.

 Posted by on October 25, 2010
Mar 212009

The City Council’s traffic engineers have sent us a summary of the points made in the consultation on their plans for Marlborough Hill, and have given a detailed response to each of the points. You can download their document here: marlborough-hill-consultation-results. The main points are listed below, with the Council’s response summarised in italics:

The pavement-widening is on the wrong side, both for pedestrians and for deterring illegal downhill vehicle traffic. This was to bring the west-side pavement up to a better width. Sharing the widening between the two sides would have been much more expensive and would have made the turn from Marlborough Hill Place difficult.  In practice it won’t make any difference to traffic which side is widened – people who want to break the law and drive down will do so.

Other suggestions for slowing traffic – alligator teeth, a downhill cycle lane, weight limit, speed limit, ‘shared space’ paving, change of priorities against uphill traffic, wider western footway extended all down the hill, speed bumps – were all either not allowed by regulations, too expensive, or ineffective.

Some signs will be illuminated because regulations require that. The suggestion of a “two-way traffic” sign in Eugene Street was accepted.

What happens next? David Sarson, the responsible Traffic Engineer, says: “I intend to leave a couple of weeks now, in case anyone wishes to respond to my response, following which I will progress the detail design and assemble the contract prior to commencing site works. The works will probable necessitate a road closure which will take approximately six to eight weeks to procure so I will get that started asap (it can always be postponed); we are therefore realistically looking at an earliest works start date of early to mid May.”

So, if you have views, please just add a comment below and copy it to David Sarson: david.sarson@bristol.gov.uk

 Posted by on March 21, 2009
Jul 262008


The City has circulated 50,000 copies of the RTZ consultation paper and questionnaire.  If you haven’t received your copy, download it from http://tinyurl.com/6h5ydx or get a copy from the Planning Department at Brunel House.

KCG’s Committee discussed the RPZ at their committee meeting on the 22nd July and believe that they must say what they think about the proposals.

Years ago the City proposed to extend the Central Controlled Parking to include Kingsdown.  Kingsdown’s residents then held divided opinions.  The City said that the majority of residents voted to accept the scheme, which did not proceed.  We don’t need to tell you how since then, residents’ parking problems have grown worse; year on year.  Now, there are many more houses in multiple-occupation, more students’ cars and saturation commuter parking.

Cars park on pavements and damage them.  Cars park on corners and make them impassable.  Parked cars block streets.  Some weeks the refuse is not collected because parked cars make a street impassable.  Last year, a Fire Service tender couldn’t drive down Somerset Street to fight a house fire.

If the RPZ proceeds, KCG will do all that it can to ensure that the implementation is done sensitively without damage to the setting of the conservation area by a plethora of signs and yellow lines.


 Posted by on July 26, 2008
Apr 292008

KCG members may recall that we have not taken a formal view for or against the RPZ, because there was no clear consensus among our membership when the Council last published detailed proposals three years ago.

However, it is now very much a hot topic again, and we are grateful to Roger Mortimer of the Redland and Cotham Amenities Society, who has kindly given us permission to make available his recent short paper. In it he sets out some of the key questions that need to be answered before residents can take an informed view about whether the proposed RPZ will be of benefit. Download the paper as a Word document here.

 Posted by on April 29, 2008
Mar 142008

Thanks to Kingsdown resident Ian Abrahams for passing on the following information received from sally.lloyd@bristol.gov.uk:

On 15th November 2007 Bristol City Council’s Cabinet agreed a report on the introduction of Residents Parking Zones around the City Centre to minimise the impact of commuter parking in residential areas.

You can download the full report (PDF 32pp 4.3MB) from the council website.

Over the next few weeks we will be setting up a web page under the heading of Bristol Residents Parking Project. The web page will explain the intended basic operational principles and will have a section of frequently asked questions, to help explain to people how such a scheme will impact on them. There will be an opportunity for individuals to comment and an e-mail address to send any additional queries to. We will publicise the setting up of the site and currently expect the web page to be operational towards the end of March 2008. You may however wish to keep an eye on progress by checking on the Bristol City Council Website.

The Citizens Panel were asked for their views on the operational principles of Residents Parking in February 2008, and their responses will be analysed and reported on in March. The next stage will be to embark on a large-scale consultation exercise covering the Inner and Outer Rings that are highlighted in the Cabinet Report.

All residents, businesses and local organisations in the Inner and Outer Rings will be contacted, and asked whether they would like to have their street considered for Residents Parking. The results of this exercise will be used to establish where the initial “Early Adopter” Residents’ Parking Zones will be promoted.

Subject to general support within these initial zones, it is anticipated that detailed design and full implementation will start in the latter part of 2008 in the hope of having the first few schemes completed and operational by late Spring 2009. When these schemes are complete, the experience gained will be used to inform and facilitate the promotion of additional schemes, subject of course to the support of residents.

If and when the Inner Ring becomes fully established we will turn our attention to the Outer Ring. Subject to the continuing support of residents we currently hope to have both the Inner and Outer Rings fully established by the end of 2012.

We trust that this information is of assistance to you, and look forward to any additional comments that you would like to make.

Terry Bullock
Traffic Manager

 Posted by on March 14, 2008
Nov 192006

It’s not often we can say that, but credit where it’s due – new and much clearer roadsigns have appeared on Marlborough Hill. Cul-de-sac signs at the top, and No Entry/Left-turn only half-way down, and better marking on the road surface itself, should put an end to lawbreaking rat-runners driving down the hill on the offchance and then not quite noticing the old No Entry signs.

Thanks to the traffic engineers for responding to the concerns expressed by residents.

 Posted by on November 19, 2006
Oct 062006

Dr Mark Wright, one of our ward Councillors, tells us that Council officers are currently reviewing residents’ parking schemes in other towns and cities so that they can make recommendations on what form a Bristol scheme needs to take.

They will also be looking at how to prioritise areas of the city for the implementation of residents’ parking, and there will then be city-wide consultation followed by implementation.

So, the issue hasn’t been forgotten, but doesn’t sound as if it’ll be sorted any time soon.