Consultation On Priory Chase Parking Restrictions

Proposals from County Highways – click on the plan twice to enlarge it!

County Highways have contacted us today. They are sending out consultation letters to residents re parking restrictions in Priory Chase, Rayleigh:

South Area Office
1 Endeavour Drive
Festival Leisure Park
Basildon
Essex SS14 3WF
_
Owner/Occupier
Priory Chase
Rayleigh Date: 05 September 2012
_
Our Ref: DM/289/1/SGA
Your Ref:
_
Dear Owner/Occupier
_
PROPOSED RESTRICTIONS – NO WAITING AT ANY TIME & NO STOPPING. INFORMAL CONSULTATION
_
I wish to advise you of our intention to proceed with the introduction of the above orders on Priory Chase. These are shown on the enclosed plan.
_
The waiting restrictions would prevent long term parking within Priory Chase to reduce congestion and improve turning movements into and out of the Asda car park and loading area. It is also intended to introduce School Keep Clear markings and waiting restrictions outside St.Nicolas Church of England Primary School to improve safety by preventing inappropriate parking on the roundabout and footways.
_
As this is the informal consultation stage we are asking you to raise any concerns with us so that we may consider these comments before the formal orders are publicised in the local press. Please note that although Priory Chase is currently private any formal Traffic Regulation Order introduced would become enforceable regardless of the status of the road.
_
I would ask that you send any comments that you may have to my email at susan.anker@essex.gov.uk or alternatively you may write to me at the above address. All comments should reach me within 21 days from the date of this letter.
_
Should you wish to discuss this matter further please do not hesitate to contact me at this office.
_
Yours faithfully

_
Susan Anker
Engineer
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT

We are grateful to County Highways for sending us a copy of the letter. If you want to look at the plan in detail, click twice on the picture ….

87 Comments

  1. Local Resident

    Any update?????

    Reply
  2. admin (Post author)

    Nothing recent, will ask again…

    Reply
  3. Cjav

    It is becoming increasingly obvious that ECC Highways have precious little intention of adopting this estate. The last I heard was that funding was the issue, we are now into the second financial year since that declaration was made!

    Is there seriously nothing that can be done to get this sorted once and for all?

    In June 2013, an RDC representative in a meeting with residents to address the anti-social activities on the estate clearly stated that they would address the ongoing issues of gym users exiting the gym using the roundabout incorrectly. To be honest I am not surprised that RDC have done nothing about this!

    Reply
  4. Tom

    Cjav, agreed, seems that RDC are being completely negligent in dealing with this matter. I cannot fathom 1) the idiocy of people unable to go AROUND the roundabout when exiting the gym. 2) why people think it is acceptable to park on the corner of the roundabout. 3) why some feel it is ok to abandon their car by the chip shop to go pick up their dinner.

    Someone needs to take action into their own hands if RDC won’t pull their finger out. Pathetic that they will not act to correct such a ridiculous and dangerous parking situation.

    Reply
  5. admin (Post author)

    Tom, do you think a sign on the leisure centre land (not the public highway) reminding the drivers they are coming onto a roundabout would help?

    Reply
  6. Jim Cripps

    I feel for you people , a modern estate that has suffered flooding due to poor design and traffic issues – sound familiar ? ( all predicted for the coming Core Plan impact).

    Seems to me every Town & Village now has to form an Action Group to get noticed,
    maybe that now needs to be individual estates with Community Groups and direct action ( attend Town & RD Council meetings in large numbers ) and demonstrate.
    Different estate groups could support each other to swell the ranks on demo days.

    You could start by writing to the Health&Safety Executive Office ( Chelmsford ) , they
    will refer you to ECC Highways but will also approach the Council ( H&S will not
    completely ignore a written safety concern – they will cover their own rear ). That might just get a reaction from RDC/ ECC.

    Reply
  7. Greenbelt

    Admin, It’s not only the public misusing the roundabout, a couple of weeks ago I witnessed the RDC contractors rubbish collection vehicle, heading northward from the direction of St. Nicholas School, pass the roundabout on it’s eastern side at a fairly high speed for such a location. Presumably the driver did not want to slow down and keep left around the roundabout. Totally irresponsible in my opinion.

    Reply
  8. Local Resident

    Admin. Can we not just get RDC to get on with the original plan of putting restrictions in place. This thread started on the 5th of Sept 2012. This is now beyond a joke. Taylor Wimpey have been on the estate and done remedial drain works, they have also in the last month replaced 2 dead trees that they planted in 2006! Surely we can’t be that far off adoption by now. Do you have the details of who at RDC is responsible for all this so the many of us who have followed this issue can approach them direct and apply some pressure?
    With regards to a sign at the leisure centre, this was done before and had no effect.

    Reply
  9. admin (Post author)

    Local Resident, parking restrictions are a county council matter rather than RDC, and indeed this is beyond a joke. As soon as I have more info I will publish it here (unless told to me confidentially)

    Reply
  10. Cjav

    Admin, further to your post #55 and my post #53, RDC have already said that they would put a notice up reminding their patrons on how to use a roundabout – just another RDC empty promise. Just like RDCs inability to curb the increase of drug sales and drug taking that are yet again occurring on their premises (at the Rayleigh Leisure Centre) all of which is taking place underneath repositioned CCTV cameras!!!

    Reply
  11. The Mighty Oz

    Surely drug misuse is a police matter ?

    Reply
  12. Jim Cripps

    DRUG sales/ taking – a police matter surely, or don’t they even respond to that nowadays? , never mind Action Groups / Community Teams maybe it is time for
    a Vigilante Mob!!!!!. What is this country coming to…….

    Reply
  13. The Mighty Oz

    Mmmmm, time to take a step back here, if we are talking about a few useless yoofs then (1) cjav, is this true, do you have evidence ? and (2) if you do have you called Rayleigh Police and / or our local beat officer to make them aware ? If you have have they taken any action ?
    Not sure we are at the vigilante patrols just yet……

    Reply
  14. Jim Cripps

    I was only joking Oz – one man with a bazooka would be enough…..”..lol. “

    Reply
  15. Cjav

    The information regarding drug dealing/taking was passed onto me when my neighbours children arrived home early from the skate park and they told their mother why they were home early.
    This has been an ongoing matter for several years now. The Police are very well aware, as are RDC, who repositioned the CCTV cameras last year to deter such behaviour on their property.

    Reply
  16. Tom

    Now Middle of May. Are RDC totally incompetent?

    Reply
  17. Cjav

    Tom, like you I’m totally fed up with the non existent progress with this, I have today sent a Freedom of Information request to ECC asking for a timetable on the adoption and information on the current standing of the adoption. Will let you know when I hear more.

    Reply
  18. Tom

    Sounds good Cjav, thanks.

    Reply
  19. admin (Post author)

    Yes, good idea Cjav!

    Reply
  20. local resident

    Admin,

    Surely as our elected representative (congrats, still wish you were an independent though, I voted for the man rather than the party) for our ward you could obtain an update without the need for a FOI request?? This issue affects over 80 households and as you are aware the unadoption has caused many issues many of which are mentioned within this thread.

    Reply
  21. Chris Black

    Local resident- all I can say is that I haven’t had a reply to my last request for an update and a FOI request from a resident is very helpful.
    Thanks for your support in the election, and I understand what you are saying. But we have a good team in our area, with a good local reputation and incidentally I’m sure that I would be a less effective councillor if I was an independent.

    Reply
  22. cjav

    I have today received a response to my FOI request – as the response is published on the ECC website, I see no problem with posting the response here…..

    As Taylor Wimpey have never entered into a S38 agreement for this estate the adoption process will by notice on site under section S228 of the Highways Act 1980. To enable this to happen the developer has to bring the private estate up to an adoptable standard, therefore the timetable for the adoption is dependant on when they complete any remedials identified.

    Bi-monthly meetings are held with Taylor Wimpey to discuss their sites in Essex the last being on the 5th June 2014, the outstanding items discussed for this site are as follows:

    Drainage – contractors have completed the remedial works on the drainage and Taylor Wimpey are waiting for Anglia Water to inspect and sign off.

    Lighting – The majority of the lighting faults have been completed with some minor faults outstanding.

    Roundabouts – further works are required to install all signage required and improve the design of the mini roundabout due to recurring damage.

    Parking restrictions – The final plan has been sent to the Parking Partnership and Network Management for their agreement, the documentation to allow us to go to a formal consultation on the restrictions has been drawn up ready. If we get prompt replies we can request the start of the consultation next week. Taylor Wimpey will be undertaking the works once the consultation has been completed. Traffic Regulation Orders normally take up to 8 weeks to complete, however if objections to the scheme are received this could take a minimum of 14 weeks. The finalisation of the traffic regulation order does not impact on the adoption of the estate roads.

    Reply
  23. Jim Cripps

    Yes Minister…….

    Reply
  24. admin (Post author)

    Many Thanks Cjav

    Reply
  25. Cjav

    Sorry Jim?

    Reply
  26. Jim Cripps

    It was a parady on the old TV series ‘ Yes Minister’ , that summed up the sort of statements that are issued by authorities – completely ignoring the timescales
    that are being completely overlooked.
    Still talking weeks and months – without taking the negligent contractor to task ( Grrrrrr), you have my sympathy.

    Reply
  27. Cjav

    Oh I see! If only it were weeks and months – I think we’re talking years before Wimpey actually do what they are supposed to do to get this development adopted, especially if past experience is anything to go by!

    Reply
  28. JIM Cripps

    A simple up front” retainer” deposit by contractor to council at the planning stage – only refundable on adoption might be a way ahead in future!!!!!! – but we would’nt want to upset Developers now would we.

    Reply
  29. Tom

    Utter morons parking outside the chip shop yet again the other day. Are people SO stupid as to not realise the disruption this causes / so lazy that they cannot park in asda car park and walk 10 seconds to collect their dinner!

    Reply
  30. The Mighty Oz

    I see our local Useless Yoofs are keeping themselves busy breaking the new low “fence” alongside ASDA and Priory Close. I am amazed that nobody sees or hears them doing it, is the criminal damage occurring when the lights go out ?

    Reply
  31. Cjav

    The lights do not go out in Priory Chase. Why the assumption that it is ‘yoofs’? as the posts are not damaged or out of place, I believe it is a result of the rails being slightly too short and have fallen. Very quick to judge without any evidence!

    Reply
  32. The Mighty Oz

    Really ? Fallen on at least three occasions all by themselves…..despite being replaced each time. But your right, might not be Yoofs, could be pensioners, middle aged women, all sorts really. You know, the same types that spray graffiti and break saplings in the park, yes, I’m sure it’s the work of responsible adults. Let’s get up a posse and hunt them down.

    Reply
  33. Cjav

    Somewhat patronising aren’t we?

    Reply
  34. Greenbelt

    I believe this was a malicious act carried out during the evening of Friday 27th June or into Saturday morning. I say this as when I walked to Asda on the Saturday morning noticed a shopping trolley on the pavement near Rawreth Lane. I reported it to Asda and the employee thanked me saying that another trolley had also been reported off site. He also commented that the fence referred to above had been broken during the night. Further evidence of vandlism was that some of the Estae Agents boards that now lay permanently on the grass in front of the flats, had been dragged and broken up along the Rawreth Lane pavement as far as Laburnum Way. I also witnessed this. There had been a teenager party going on in Laburnum Way that evening and after midnight a few youngsters were congregating in the pitch dark at the entrance to Laburnum Way. At least three of them were shining torchlights around but nothing other than that apart from raised voices, was going on.. I watched them for some time and then they dispersed. At the time I did not know of the Priory Chase events hence I had no evidence of problems. Had I known this I would have called the police.
    A number of problems including back garden hopping after midnight at this location have been reported to the police including clear trainer shoe footprints in our back gardens but I don’t know of any arrests or convictions. I strongly believe that turning off the lights has increased the incidents of crime in whatever form and the lights, particularly at this stretch of Rawreth Lane, should be returnrd to ‘all night opperation’.
    To conclude, when the ‘extra tall’ lamp posts were initially installed at this location, residents were told that they were necessary for safety reasons as a third lane to faciltate vehicle turning into Laburnum Way required a higher level of lighting. Apparantly the shorter ‘standard version’ would not give sufficient illumination to make it a safe junction. How about that for a County ‘U’ TURN. No pun intended.
    I have heard reports that all areas in the County should have had compulsary safety assessment reports completed before any decision could legally be made to switch off lights. Apparantly this was ignored.

    Reply
  35. The Mighty Oz

    Patronising no, realistic yes. Let’s have less of the lefty do gooder attitude and a bit more of a tough approach to this sort of behaviour. Unless, of course myself, and Greenbelt, are completely wrong……..

    Reply
  36. Tom

    Totally agree with Oz. Flipping so something about antisocial behaviour!

    So, STILL no progress on fixing the parking situation? Not sure what point there is having a council when they don’t so ANYTHING.

    Reply
  37. Tom

    What happened with the notice of intent that was published months ago? Still no action taken I see. Still idiots parking on the roundabout and now we have unsupervised children using Temple Way as a playground rather than observing good sense and avoiding playing in the middle of a road.

    Additionally I propose we get many drivers back to school as many times I see people struggling to indicate to turn into asda and others who don’t know they have to drive AROUND the roundabout when leaving the gym.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


eight − = 5

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

You can add images to your comment by clicking here.