Canterbury City Council discuss changes to parking bays and yellow lines in their Annual On Street Parking Review. Anyone can recommend a change to on street parking online and historically these ideas were discussed once a year in a meeting open to the public (the Whitstable Forum). Local councillors then, having heard from all the affected parties, made recommendations to the Joint Transport Board which decides on these matters. The attendance at these public meetings was always good.
When the current administration decided to cancel the Whitstable Forum last year, local councillors were asked to submit their own  opinions on the recommendations. We have listened hard to representations from across the ward and are choosing to make our recommendations public to improve transparency. You deserve to know what we think and why we have come to the conclusions we have.
You will find detail of all the proposals listed here.
Our recommendations are:
Â
Â
Â
|
6805 |
Proposed disabled bay – 1a Harbour Street |
Support |
Disabled parking is limited in the high street. There is no dedicated disabled bay at this end of Harbour Street. |
|
6810 |
Proposed disabled bay – 29-30 Harbour Street, Whitstable |
Oppose |
The 1 hours free parking in this location is essential to independent local businesses. Loading on this street is already problematic and the current parking bay prevents unnecessary blocking of the bus stop opposite. Disabled parking is available in Albert Street car parking opposite. |
|
6840 |
Proposed disabled bay – 51-59  High Street |
Oppose |
The need for additional disabled bays raised in 2019 has recently been mitigated by the reopening of 4 bays in Gladstone Road. Local shopkeepers have highlighted reducing the length of this bay would prevent loading to their businesses, particularly when the loading bay outside Iceland is often entirely filled by large wheel based vehicles for some length of time. |
|
6850 |
Proposed conversion of loading bay to disabled bay – 79-83 High Street |
Oppose |
As with 6840 |
|
6910 |
Conversion of lading bay to taxi rank, Oxford Street |
Modify |
Removing the loading bay from this location would cause significant congestion when setting up for the regular weekend markets at the Umbrella Centre and the pop up space at the Whitstable Museum. Whilst we understand why licensed premises in Oxford Street want improved taxi provision, and think this location is preferable to people using the bus stop outside St Alphege School, we not think there will be much call for it during the day. We would recommend it remain a loading bay but become a taxi rank after 6pm. |
|
6935 |
Proposed disabled parking bay, Nelson Road |
Support |
There is little disabled parking infrastructure near Oxford Street. The removal of existing no waiting outside 1a provides additional residential parking lost in the installation of the electric charging bay further down the street. |
|
6950 |
Removal of yellow lines, Norfolk Street, Suffolk Street and Glebe Way |
Support |
The residential density in this area is particularly high and a massive problem. Reducing the yellow lines in this area creates an additional give parking space without limiting acces to the streets essential for refuse collection. |
|
26705 |
Proposed Double Yellow Lines, Albert Street, Whitstable |
Modify |
Residential parking in this area is particularly difficult with many residents refusing to move their cars in the summer season. Whilst we appreciate the need for improved refuse access to Warwick Road, we believe the vans can load from Victoria Road or via Regents Street it necessary. We would recommend yellow lines are added in front of the Nursery only, improving access at the corner of Stream Walk and Albert Street and allowing for the nursery to best utilise its off road spaces. We would not support the remaining yellow lines. |
|
26710 |
Proposed Double Yellow Lines, Acton Road and Albert Street |
Support |
New restrictions will make it safer for people exiting Stream Walk and improve access for refuse vehicles. |
|
264840 |
Proposed repositioning of a disabled bay, Belton Close |
Support |
Parking in Belton Close is difficult but relocation of the disabled bay to be nearer the house of those people using it is advantageous |
|
26855 |
Proposed double yellow lines, Old Bridge Road |
Oppose |
Whilst we thoroughly support the ambitions of the scheme to improve cycling in our town, there is no confirmation that removing this stretch of parking would see a cycle lane immediately installed or where this would go to. We would support this application when funding has been allocated and permission granted for final stretch of the Crab and Winkle from Teynham Road. |
|
26870 |
Proposed Double Yellow Lines, Belmont Road |
Oppose |
Whilst there is limited sight lines for vehicles exiting Old Millfield Works, removing any waiting along this stretch of Belmont Road would likely just create more difficulty for local residents. The restrictions would affect residents using the Cricket Club and Football Club and encourage people to park off road in Windsor House where we have already had complaints. |
|
26875 |
Proposed Double Yellow Lines, Glebe Way |
Oppose |
Whilst we understand that new lines here would benefit residents of Foreland Cottages, they have good off-road parking. Installing new lines here would substantially reduce capacity in an area where it is needed most. |
