Regulatory Committee 7

Page 1 – Proposed Waiting & Loading Restrictions – B3073 Parley Lane & Hurn Court Lane, Hurn, Christchurch

Agenda I tem:

Date of Meeting 17 September 2015

Local Member - Margaret Phipps – County Councillor for St. Catherines & Hurn Lead Officer - Andrew Martin – Head of Highways

Proposed Waiting & Loading Restrictions – B3073 Parley Lane Subject of Report & Hurn Court Lane, Hurn, Christchurch

Executive Summary A number of objections have been received following the advertising of proposed waiting and loading restrictions on Hurn Court Lane and B3073 Parley lane in the vicinity of Bournemouth Airport. This report considers those objections and whether the proposals should be implemented as advertised, amended or abandoned.

Impact Assessment: Equalities Impact Assessment: The proposed waiting restrictions will apply to all members of society equally with exemptions for disabled badge holders. The ‘no loading’ restrictions will apply to all, including disabled badge holders.

Use of Evidence: The following evidence has been used in the preparation of this proposed Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) and Committee Report:

• Liaison with local businesses; • Site investigations; • Primary consultees consultation and support gained: Local County Councillor, Parish Council and Dorset Police; • Consultation with District Council; • Public consultation; and • Dorset County Council (DCC) risk calculator.

Budget: £25,000 Maximum Budget Allocation. This is made up of: • £10,000 - Installation / construction inc. Traffic Mng; • £8,600 - Staff costs Inc. enforcement; and • £6,400 - 10% Contingency + 20% Optimism bias.

PDF processed with CutePDF evaluation edition www.CutePDF.com Page 2 – Proposed Waiting & Loading Restrictions – B3073 Parley Lane & Hurn Court Lane, Hurn, Christchurch

Risk Assessment: Having considered the risks associated with this decision, using the County Council’s approved risk management methodology, the level of risk has been identified as:

Current Risk: HIGH Residual Risk MEDIUM

The current high risks relate to the relocation of Parkfield School and the associated effect of parental parking on the B3073 corridor.

Improving access along the B3073 is a strategic priority for DCC and the Dorset Local Enterprise Partnership (DLEP). £44.7m is due to be invested on improving the highway network in the vicinity of the Airport. Continued traffic congestion after improvement is a reputational risk and would undermine this financial investment.

There is a residual medium risk following the recommendations in this report. These relate to the removal of the originally proposed ‘no loading’ restrictions on Hurn Court Lane.

The Hurn Court Lane ‘no loading’ restrictions were proposed at public consultation due to reported “near misses” between pedestrians and HGVs. The reduced ‘no loading’ restrictions recommended in this report mean there is still the potential for a pedestrian presence on Hurn Court Lane.

Other Implications: None

Recommendation (i) That the Cabinet be recommended to approve the making of the order as advertised, subject to the amendment to remove ‘no loading’ restrictions on Hurn Court Lane south of the sand and gravel extraction site access junction.

Reason for The recommended TRO, with amendment, is expected to resolve Recommendation the following issues:

• Anticipated Parley Lane traffic congestion associated with Parkfield School parental waiting and loading. • Airport passengers loading/unloading on the northern end of Hurn Court Lane which is used by HGVs. • Long stay airport passengers parking on Hurn Court Lane. • Public concerns expressed in objections regarding proposed restrictions for loading/unloading on Hurn Court Lane, south of sand and gravel extraction site.

The proposals support the policies within Dorset County Council’s Corporate Plan. Community safety will be improved by reducing potential exposure to danger on Dorset’s Roads. The proposals will also protect and ensure the efficient movement of people, goods and services on the B3073. Page 3 – Proposed Waiting & Loading Restrictions – B3073 Parley Lane & Hurn Court Lane, Hurn, Christchurch

Appendices Appendix A – Location Plan; Appendix B – Advertised TRO Proposals (Drawing No. 2271/1/12); Appendix C – Public Consultation Responses; and, Appendix D – Amended TRO Proposals (Drawing No. 2271/1/12 – Version 2).

Background Papers The following information is held on file and available on request: • CBC Traffic Regulation Task & Finish Group minutes; • Public consultation responses; • Primary consultee responses; and, • The project risk calculator.

Report Originator and Name: Joseph Rose Contact Tel: 01305 224232 Email: [email protected] Page 4 – Proposed Waiting & Loading Restrictions – B3073 Parley Lane & Hurn Court Lane, Hurn, Christchurch

1. Background

1.1. The proposed traffic regulations around the B3073 Parley Lane Airport Access Junction consist of both strategic priority and local issue elements, bought together in a single Traffic Regulation Order (TRO).

1.2. The strategic element of the proposed TRO relates to the relocation of Parkfield Free School to the former National Air Training School (NATS) site located on the entrance to the Bournemouth Airport.

1.3. Dorset County Council (DCC) and our funding partner Dorset Local Enterprise Partnership (DLEP) are investing some £44.7m on highway improvements to improve access to Aviation Park. Aviation Park is a key employment growth hub for Dorset and the Poole & Bournemouth conurbation. Traffic is already a problem in this area and investment in reducing congestion to improve access along the B3073 corridor is a key part of this growth strategy.

1.4. County Council officers are concerned that the relocation of the School will undermine the effectiveness of these highway improvements. There are on-going issues with inappropriate parental parking, waiting & loading at many schools in the county. The relocated Parkfield School is accessed from the Airport Access Road and requires parents/carers to travel through the signalised Airport Access Junction four times a day. The concern is that parents will seek to save time by pulling up on the B3073 and unload their children there, or even leave the car and walk into the School.

1.5. This will create congestion on Parley Lane due to peak time loading and unloading activity. Parental loading and unloading on Parley Lane is also a safety concern. The road is busy with commuters and industrial traffic and not suited to the presence of school children.

1.6. Originally, the school intended to relocate for a September start to 2015/16 school year. Since this TRO was proposed, the school has delayed relocation until the start of the 2016/17 school year.

1.7. The local issues addressed within the proposed TRO relate to Bournemouth Airport passengers parking, waiting and loading on Hurn Court Lane. Dorset County Council has received complaints from the sand and gravel extraction site about this issue due to near misses with their vehicles.

1.8. The visibility of the eastern side of Hurn Court lane is restricted when turning in from Parley Lane – east of the junction. There have been a number of near misses with HGVs related to inappropriate parking/waiting very close to the junction, and even pedestrians in middle of the road while walking to the Airport.

1.9. The issue with airport passengers comes about from the parking charges at the Airport. All cars are required to pay a minimum £2.50 charge for passenger drop off. Most passengers on Hurn Court Lane are being picked up or dropped off. However, some long term parking is reported south of the existing double yellow lines and on the verges of the lane.

1.10. A meeting was held with Bournemouth Airport after this concern was raised with the Highway Authority. The purpose of the meeting was to ascertain the likelihood of allowing a free period for pickup / drop-off, negating the loading/unloading issue on Hurn Court Lane. Unfortunately, the Airport would not move on this charge and the only option left was to propose that the TRO included a restriction on loading and unloading on Hurn Court Lane. Page 5 – Proposed Waiting & Loading Restrictions – B3073 Parley Lane & Hurn Court Lane, Hurn, Christchurch

2. Proposals

2.1. On the B3073 Parley Lane, there are double yellow lines (DYLs) that indicate ‘no waiting’ west of the airport access junction. DYLs are also already in place on Hurn Court Lane along with the short section of adopted highway on Airport Access Road.

2.2. There are no DYLs on Parley Lane east of the Airport Access Junction. On Hurn Court Lane the DYLs stop short of the narrowest section where parking is not feasible, leading to occasional long term parking which can restrict access.

2.3. The TRO taken to public consultation included the following waiting and loading restrictions:

2.3.1. ‘No waiting’ restrictions (DYLs) on Parley Lane east of the Airport Access Junction, up to and including short sections on Pussex Lane and Mill Lane.

2.3.2. ‘No waiting’ restrictions on the southern section of Hurn Court Lane from the existing DYLs to the point where the road narrows.

2.3.3. ‘No loading’ restrictions (double kerb ‘ticks’) on Parley Lane (B3073) approximately 300m either side of the Airport Access Junction.

2.3.4. ‘No loading’ restrictions on Hurn Court Lane from the Airport Access Junction to the southern point where the road narrows.

2.3.5. ‘No loading’ restrictions on the short section of adopted highway on the Airport Access Road.

2.4. The proposed restrictions would prevent anticipated parental waiting and loading on the B3073, protecting this corridor from unnecessary traffic congestion. The proposals would also prevent all long term parking on Hurn Court Lane and were intended to prevent airport passengers from loading/unloading on the road.

3. Law

3.1. Sections 1 and 2 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 allow the County Council to make an Order prohibiting or restricting the waiting of vehicles or the unloading of vehicles. The circumstances where an Order may be made include:

3.1.1. For avoiding danger to persons or other traffic using the road; and,

3.1.2. For facilitating the passage on the road of any class of traffic.

3.2. The Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 prescribe the procedure that must be followed when making a TRO. Following consultation and notification of a proposed TRO, the Council can make the TRO as advertised or may modify the order. If any modifications appear to the Council to make a substantial change to the order, the Council must take steps to inform persons likely to be affected by the modifications.

4. Consultation

4.1. The Hurn Court Lane element of this project was originally taken to the March 2015 Christchurch Borough Council (CBC) Traffic Regulation Task & Finish Group. Approval was given and the minutes are available on request.

Page 6 – Proposed Waiting & Loading Restrictions – B3073 Parley Lane & Hurn Court Lane, Hurn, Christchurch

4.2. The relocation of Parkfield School was announced prior to the proposed Hurn Court Lane TRO being advertised for public comment. It was decided that these issues would be combined in a single proposed TRO.

4.3. A further round of consultation was undertaken with the primary consultees. In this case Hurn Parish Council, Dorset Police and the County Councillor for the area. Christchurch Councillors have also been informed of this TRO proposal but are not primary consultees for the Parish of Hurn. All primary consultees supported the proposals as advertised.

4.4. The proposed TRO was taken to public consultation on the 9 th of July 2015 and continued for 21days. The summary of responses and comments received are given in tables 1 & 2 below. The full responses including comments are given in Appendix C.

Response Number %age Total Objections 37 75.5% Total Supportive 2 4.1% Total Only Comments 7 14.3% Not Stated 3 6.1% Total Responses 49 100%

Table 1: Summary of Consultation Responses.

%age of Comment Frequency Respondents General objection to the pick up/drop off charge. 22 44.9% Suggested DCC make the Airport drop the pick up/drop off charge. 11 22.4% It's not DCC's role to support the Airport's charge. 9 18.4% Suggested that Airport should stop the pick up/drop off charge. 8 16.3% Suggested DCC should provide safe areas for pick up/drop off. 7 14.3% Suggested Airport should allow free period for pick up/drop off. 6 12.2% Understand need to prevent long term parking. 5 10.2% Suggested there should be pavements to the Airport Terminal. 5 10.2% Public transport links to the Airport are inadequate. 3 6.1% Suggested more public transport routes required. 3 6.1% DCC should not stop pick up/drop off on Hurn Court Lane. 3 6.1% Pick up/drop off charge too high. 2 4.1% General objection to the proposed TRO. 2 4.1% Suggested proposals should be reconsidered due to public response. 2 4.1% Stated the proposals will not solve the issue. 2 4.1% Suggested improvement to Hurn Court Lane to improve visibility. 1 2.0% Suggested we wait until school goes in. 1 2.0% Parkfield School should provide safe pick up/drop off. 1 2.0% Questioned need for proposed TRO. 1 2.0% Questioned the cost of the proposals. 1 2.0% Total Respondents 49

Table 2: Summary of Comments Received.

4.5. There was a significant response to this proposed TRO. Partly due to a Dorset ECHO article about the proposed TRO that focused on airport passengers picking up / dropping off and the charges at the airport. The comments received indicate that Bournemouth Airport’s parking charges are a public concern.

Page 7 – Proposed Waiting & Loading Restrictions – B3073 Parley Lane & Hurn Court Lane, Hurn, Christchurch

4.6. There was a strong objection to the minimum £2.50 charge for picking up/ dropping off passengers. A number of people suggested that the Airport should provide a free pick up/drop off facility. Many also suggested that DCC should make the Airport drop the charge; or, that the Council should not be supporting the charge with this proposed TRO.

4.7. In practical terms, there was an appreciation that long term parking should be stopped. However, people questioned the effect of loading/unloading on Hurn Court Lane. There were suggestions of providing safe areas for picking up/dropping off along with footpaths into the terminal building.

4.8. Other comments related to the need for better public transport services into the airport and that Parkfield School should consider their transportation impacts. One respondent suggested waiting until the school relocation is confirmed.

5. Recommendations

5.1. The significant public response to the proposed TRO led to a reconsideration of the proposals. Officers sought ways of achieving the strategic and local objectives of this TRO while addressing public concerns regarding the proposed loading/unloading restrictions in the vicinity of the airport.

5.2. The northern section of Hurn Court Lane is not suitable for loading/unloading of airport passengers. This is due to the presence of HGVs associated with the sand and gravel extraction site. The potential for conflict between stopped vehicles and HGVs turning in from Parley Lane is high. Figure 1 on the following page provides a Google Streetview image of the northern section of Hurn Court Lane to illustrate this.

5.3. The southern section is better suited to loading/unloading. There are wider verges and less HGVs as sand and gravel vehicles exit to the B3073. Visibility is also better and there is a signalised crossing point across Parley Lane from Hurn Court Lane. Although, there are no pavements on the privately owned Airport Access Road and pedestrians have to cross the sand and gravel site access. For illustration, figure 2 on the following page provides a Google Streetview image of the southern section of Hurn Court Lane.

5.4. Having considered the significant number of objections received and the objectives of the proposals, it is recommended that the ‘no loading’ restrictions on Hurn Court Lane, south of the sand and gravel extraction site access, are removed from the proposed TRO.

5.5. The proposed modification is not considered to be a substantial change to the advertised TRO and the requirement for further consultation is not necessary. However, the objectors and the Dorset ECHO will be contacted to inform them of the modification.

5.6. The recommended TRO, with amendment, solves the following issues:

5.6.1. Anticipated Parley Lane traffic congestion associated with Parkfield School parental waiting and loading.

5.6.2. Airport passengers loading/unloading on the northern end of Hurn Court Lane which is used by HGVs.

5.6.3. Long stay airport passengers parking on Hurn Court Lane.

Page 8 – Proposed Waiting & Loading Restrictions – B3073 Parley Lane & Hurn Court Lane, Hurn, Christchurch

5.6.4. Public concerns expressed in objections regarding proposed restrictions for loading/unloading on Hurn Court Lane, south of sand and gravel extraction site.

Figure 1: Northern End of Hurn Court Lane – Looking south from Parley Lane to Sand and Gravel Access.

Figure 2: Southern Section of Hurn Court Lane – Looking south from Sand and Gravel Access to Narrowing.

Andrew Martin Director for Environment and Economy September 2015 Ref: CR AppA Date: 15/08/2015 Appendix A - Location Plan. Scale 1:30,000 Drawn By: JSR Cent X: 411453 Cent Y: 97769

Airport Service Road

Parley Lane

Mill Lane Existing No Waiting At Any Time Existing Non-highway No Waiting At Any Time Proposed No Waiting At Any Time Proposed No Loading/Unloading

The County of Dorset Mike Harries Director Various Roads, Hurn County Hall (Prohibition & Restriction of Waiting) Order 201’ Dorchester DT1 1XJ Date Reproduced from the 2002 Ordnance Survey 1:1250/1:2500 Environment and the Economy Scale Drawn by scale Land Line maps with the permission of The Controller of Drawing No. Directorate Not to Scale 24/6/2015 SEP Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, Crown Copyright. 2271/1/12 Dorset C.C., County Hall, Dorchester, Licence No. LA076570 28/08/2015 Appendix C - B3073 TRO Consultation Responses Joseph Rose

Name Postcode Position Response This order is being made solely to support the drop-off charges levied by the airport. It is not the role of a public authority to support a private concerns charges. I, therefore, r harris bh232pz I object to the proposal object to these orders as they are not in the public interest and not within the power of the council.

Instead of this why not stop the ridiculous £2.50 charge for dropping someone off at the airport. There should be 10 min free drop off allowance but charges could still apply for picking passengers up. How are double yellow lines going to stop people Marcus Mitton BH149HF I object to the proposal stopping and dropping off passengers as it's not going to be policed 24/7. They will still do it. No other airports charge as much for dropping off passengers and charging Taxi's is even worse. Scrap the drop off charge and you won't have a problem.

The route cause of the problem is not being addressed here. There are multiple elements to the issue. Firstly the users objections to be levied a charge to enter the airport, and secondly the lack of investment in public transport. A single shuttle bus, at over £5 a ticket from Bournemouth town centre is totally inadequate for users matthew tuck bh2 6nz I object to the proposal based in the catchment area. It is quite frankly unacceptable that the trunk route - Bournemouth/Ringwood/Salisbury buses do not call at the airport. Likewise across routes from Christchurch have no calling at the airport. If authorities got this sorted out, then it removes the issue of people getting 'a lift'. Therefore as the fundamental public transport links are inadequate I strongly oppose this traffic regulation order.

I understand the need to stop people parking while they go away on holiday. Quite logical. I support that. However, this should not stop people just dropping off others and driving away. The current bus / public transport services are inadequate. I use the airport a lot and would like the option to get there whenever I have a flight by public Barbara Leonard BH149ET I object to the proposal transport. Unfortunately the service does not exist early in the day nor after early evening. What is going to happen once the school is also on the site? Just imposing a blanket ban does not make sense.

It's an absolute disgrace that the airport has no drop off facility. Why not? All other airports seem to have one. The charge is also extortionate. Why can't the council do something to help promote the airport instead of discouraging use. It would appear that this decision will also affect local business' as well! Christine cross Bh118sb I object to the proposal I walked to the airport once from parley cross. It's fine until you get to the road which then says no pedestrians!! How are you supposed to get there? Absolutely ridiculous!!!

This whole situation has only arisen since the introduction of the charges for dropping off passengers for flights. If there was a nominal payment for say the first 10 -15 mins Mr Steedman BH220PJ I object to the proposal then all this would be unnecessary. Drivers do not want to pay £2.80 just to unload suitcases from their car.

I would like to object to this proposal, and would recommend that the local authority engages with Bournemouth Airport to withdraw their charges for entering its land, and provide a FREE OF CHARGE drop off zone for persons dropping off people at the Airport. Problems have arisen on the "various roads" only since the Airport introduced the charges for people entering the area to drop people off. Rather than Richard Murgatroyd BH206LD I object to the proposal spend a considerable amount of money to impose such restrictions (costs for materials, vehicle costs and labour costs) by marking up the "various roads" the money should be spent consulting with the airport to remove the drop off charges. This would then encourage more people to use the airport, and reduce the problems currently being experienced on the "various roads"

I find it objectionable that public money is being spent in order for the airport to Stephen Smith BH212TA I object to the proposal increase profits. I'm sure neither Heathrow or Gatwick would charge to drop off their customers.

I believe you are approaching the problem in the wrong way. It is unnecessary and unpopular to charge £2.50 at Bournemouth Airport for a 10/20 min drop off. You should be providing that drop off period for no charge and have a designated area within the existing car park for that purpose. If you did that you would not only John Ainsworth BH148AN I object to the proposal improve the customer satisfaction of dropping off at the airport but you will find it unnecessary to go to all the expense and inconvenience of traffic orders on the surrounding roads. You will also stop people having to use those roads to drop people off to avoid the dropping off charge.

I agree with stopping people parking cars while they go on holiday but if they dropped John Furlong BH4 9JH I object to the proposal the scandalous £2.50 to drop off, I would say 75% of the problems would be alleviated.

The council should be looking at ways for free and safe drop off areas for the airport. julian bailey so416dg I object to the proposal Rather then making the situation worse. Support the community not the wealthy airport business.

T:\Projects\Active Projects\HI (Highway Improvements)\HI1092\Documents Working\TRO\Responses\2015 08 15 - B3073 TRO Consultation Responses.xlsx 28/08/2015 Appendix C - B3073 TRO Consultation Responses Joseph Rose

Name Postcode Position Response

As a very regular user of the airport I get dropped off outside the airport to save the gross charge of £2.50 per drop off (£5 round trip).I have to question this waste of our money to implement a scheme for a problem the airport authority has caused.The council would be better of creating a drop of zone and helping cash starved motorists Chris Wood Bh242at I object to the proposal just to show the airport not to be so greedy.There is no charge at Gatwick,Heathrow or Southampton,which shows that there system works,even at Manchester home to the airport owners they have no charge,so why Bournemouth ? And why are the council letting this happen.I am against people leaving there cars for long periods of time in undesirable locations.

It would be far better to allow loading & unloading in Hurn court lane rather than to mr d brittain bh228ph I object to the proposal have people trying to either hop out at the traffic lights or elswhere along the fast moving parley lane.

Why should Council Tax Payers have to fund and maintain new restrictions, presumably extensive road markings, perhaps other works, and then the policing/enforcement ongoing, for a problem created by utterly unreasonable actions of the Airport Management?

Is there another airport anywhere in the country which does not have a free Drop Jeff Porter BH165JQ I object to the proposal Off/ Pick Up point? Certainly not locally or at Gatwick or Heathrow.

Its an airport problem created by the Airport and they should be told to sort it out themselves by re-instating a set down/ pick up area. Their excuse about a downturn in air traffic is completely lame, if not, why the urgency of another runway at Heathrow or Gatwick, air traffic is increasing rapidly, Bournemouth Airport are their own enemies , THEY should sort this out, not Us!

The waiting/ drop off charges are disgusting. Out of principal I would rather walk a Michelle Rossiter BH228JL I object to the proposal distance than pay!

I would suppot the free movement of traffic on these roads only if the Airport were required to remove their ridiculous drop-off fees. This would remove the problem of why people are stopping along this busy road, so rather than treat the symptoms, please concentrate on stopping the greedy Manchester Airport group from creating this problem with their charges.

It is also anti-sustainable travel to support the removal of pavements onto their site andy hadley bh153bb I object to the proposal for those lucky enough to live close by,.

Because the airport and transport authority fail to provide meaningful public transport options to encourage people to travel to the area by public transport, people resort to the car, and because airports charge ridiculously high car-park charges, people naturally do what they can to avoid them. Sort the Airport out, and stop propping up their moneymaking scheme.

I think this proposal is ludicrous, it is a clear attempt to force people to use the car park at the airport at what is frankly an unreasonable rate. It is not as you would have us believe, for the safety or benefit of people in the area it is clearly for the sole benefit of the airport and the money they shall receive out of it. If it were for the benefit for the public, you would be providing a footpath and a reasonable way to walk to the airport in a way which is safe but instead you dishonour us by trying to persuade us that you have our interests at heart. How dare you. There are two reasonable solutions to the problem. 1-provide a drop off area 500m down the road with restrictions of parking duration and a footpath for the safety of those involved. Jeremy ferguson Bh7 6qu I object to the proposal Or 2-enforce sanctions to the airport in order to allow short periods of stay without unreasonable charges.

You only need to look at the comments on the Bournemouth echo online article in order to see that this is the majority view and that all problems of safety would be resolved if either of those 2 solutions were put into place.

Please reconsider your proposal for the simple reason that it does not have the public interest at heart nor does it have the majority of the public behind it and as a democracy you have a duty to act in a way that attempts to do so.

This is another effort to rip off the local people who fly from Bournemouth airport. Lee arnell Bh6 3hu I object to the proposal Dropping someone off or picking someone up and being charged is a disgrace.

restricting the waiting for passengers will further make me look for trips going fromSouthampton and other airports. I would rather the price is included in the ticket, where we do not see it rather than pay to go up a short strip of road to drop Jackie elderfield sp6 3bj I object to the proposal someone off! It has reduced my use of the airport. I do agree that cars should not be parked permanently whilst people go on holiday however. I strongly object to the proposal of restricting waiting!

Free drop off at airports n reduced parking charges so this wouldn't be required. Will Emma Clarke BH165SB I object to the proposal reduce travel from airport

Name Postcode Position Response

The charging of £2.50 to simply drop off a passenger is outrageous and is typical of the greed displayed by Councils these days. Bournemouth Airport used to be user friendly and the preferred airport for local people but this charge, and the hostile atmosphere surrounding the airport has caused many people that I know to catch a train to Colin Harper BH213AJ I object to the proposal Southampton and go from there.

Take a brave decision and insist that the Airport stops this stupid charge which would make all of your proposed regulations and their enforcement unnecessary.

I live near Branksome station and we very often get people parking up whilst they take the train -very often for weeks at a time and we live with it. Also people are Paul Shearing BH149AD I object to the proposal exercising their democratic right to protest at the outrageous charges imposed by the airport and the council should not act as if in league with the airport it is not what we pay our council tax for.

The TRO is having to be proposed entirely due to consequences of the commercial Jemma Denson BH1 1QX I object to the proposal decision of the airport to charge for drop off. Perhaps a better solution would be to encourage MAG to drop their ridiculous fees and this problem will cease to exist.

This proposal absolutely reeks of the council caving into the Airport's requests/demands. I note that the reasons for the TRO are very, very vague "ifs" "just in case", "one day something might happen" etc, etc. None of them are valid reasons.

People only very briefly stop on the roads included in the proposal to avoid the extortionate 'drop off' fees being demanded by the Airport. I feel outraged firstly that the Airport is allowed to any sort of fee to 'drop off' near the airport and secondly that Christchurch Council and assisting the Airport operators in ensuring that no-one can escape these unethical fees. Members of the Christchurch Council involved with this and the Airport Operators should be totally ashamed of themselves for this neil akerman bh9 3nt I object to the proposal proposed extortion racket.

I would be so very interested to be provided with statistics of the number (if any) of accidents caused in the past 12 months caused by people dropping off others in any of the locations in this proposal. This to see if accidents are being cited as part of the proposals.

In fact, I hereby submit this request for information as I am entitled to do under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). I look forward to receiving these details by email to the above email address within the statutory 20 days.

The proposal to further limit the parking issues around Christchurch Airport will only push the people parking slightly further out, it won't solve the problem.

The problem is that parking is ridiculously expensive. Why charge to drop off passengers? You could easily install ANPR onto the drop off zone, any longer than 20 minutes get a parking ticket automatically sent to them.

The reason people are parking in the lanes is the airport parking is so high. Why not solve the problem with a shuttle bus service from the industrial estate? Darren Girling BH3 7LF I object to the proposal You are not doing correct due diligence and root cause analysis. The actual problem is the parking charges and especially the drop off fee. How can you actually justify a drop off fee initially anyway? It's purely extortion and now you're looking at a way to funnel people into the charges because you're annoyed they're finding ways round it.

This will only push people into parking and dropping off at St Catherine's hill car park or outside the small row of shops at the start of Matcham's lane. If you thought about it in the correct way, you could use disused surrounding land as a drop off point, make people happier and encourage them to use the airport responsibly instead of making the town rub their heads in dismay at yet another public sector mismanaged project.

I find it totally unacceptable that a free 15-20 minute drop off/pick-up time is not allowed. Bigger airports like Heathrow & Gatwick allow this to happen. Mr& Mrs Hanley BH235AD I object to the proposal Why can't Bouurnemouth allow it - what makes it different?

Spending public money on solving parking problems around Bournemouth Airport is wrong because the situation is entirely of the Airport's own making. They should be Anne Deacon BH244BA I object to the proposal told to provide a free 10 minute drop off zone for their customers. Southampton Airport can do it, why can't Bournemouth?

Name Postcode Position Response the problem caused is due to the £2.50 charge made by the airport to walk on its property in order to become a customer of the airport. this is pure greed !we are told the airport is doing very well and the managements top priority is customer enjoyment !

people are enraged at this rip off,and attempt to avoid it. it is not the actual amount , it is the principal involved.

should a shopping customer have to pay to just to walk over the shop threshold ? should a publican charge a customer for being picked up by a taxi after a nights william Summersgill BH238AA I object to the proposal drinking ?

controversial at inception this scheme is now to be encouraged by the council to suit the airport management .

why should local taxpayers pay the bill for the admin and road signage costs for these restrictions and who will enforce them? scrap the charges and the problem is solved , simples !!

the airport should supply a safe and convenient drop off area as part of the customer care and enjoyment so important to the management priority.

The reason people are parking or dropping off on these roads are because of the dropping-off fees charged by the airport of £2-50 which is outrageous. Even Heathrow Trevor Emans SO452HA I object to the proposal does not charge a dropping off fee! Remove this fee and you will remove the problem of temporary parking. Personally it puts me off of using Bournemouth airport at all.

The proposal doesn't seem to tackle the initial problem that is ultimately caused by a local business - Bournemouth Airport. This solution is only addressing the symptom.

As far as I have witnessed, most individuals that are presenting the described problem are doing so as a result of the inappropriate short-term parking charge at Bournemouth Airport, and the lack of suitable transportation alternatives for reaching the airport - i.e. buses, trains.

A long-stay parking levy appears to be warranted for this type of business, but short- Ryan Miller BH6 4DW I object to the proposal term (5 or 10 minutes for drop off) seems to be unreasonable, especially given the zoning location of the airport and it's ample land availability. Look to other airports to see that this levy is not common.

The majority of the electorate would no doubt agree with my statement, and would therefore be looking to their elected council to be acting on their behalf, rather than inconveniencing them further through applying further traffic restrictions and billing them (through local authority rates) for doing so. My view is that local businesses in the vicinity will also suffer due to the restrictions; deliveries and customers to these businesses will be inconvenienced just so as to support Bournemouth Airport's levy.

I object to the cost of instituting and enforcing these regulations. This is solely for the benefit of MAG and the management that has a 'vendetta' against anyone trying to avoid the toll charge for approaching the airport terminal. There is already Paul Burt BH8 9EA I object to the proposal disproportionate and distracting signage regarding parking and toll fees. This is a growing and an ill conceived enforcement policy purely for their commercial gain and I object to publically supporting this in anyway.

The problem is caused solely by the owners of Bournemouth Airport not permitting a free drop area. To make it compulsory for everyone to use their car parking and therefore pay an extortionate charge, when only dropping someone off or picking them up of £2.50 if even only for a few minutes is daylight robbery and the council is Cherrill Howlett BH106JH I object to the proposal now going to assist them in this very unfair charge. The council should be dealing with the airport and insist they provide this facility not attacking , yet again, car owners. I have no objection where people seem to abandon their cars and go on holiday but surely something better could be achieved for us locals who are literally there for minutes.

Name Postcode Position Response

I object to the proposed measures. They are apparently designed to address problems in Hurn Court Lane. However, a known ‘unintended’ consequence is that it will in effect prevent flight passengers being dropped off/picked-up outside the toll road area. It thus smacks of DCC pandering to the commercial interests of the airport owner in this respect. Any new measures should address only the Hurn Court Lane issue, directly. Potential solutions include:

• Widen the B3073/Hurn Ct Lane junction, to give more visibility to turning vehicles, and pedestrians

• Provide lay-by or similar temporary parking space beside the B3073 – with short waiting time restrictions if necessary

• Review the situation if/when the school becomes a reality (is there really going to be a school on the airport?)

The above measures should: Michael Woodward BH217JL I object to the proposal • Involve fewer new restrictions on road users

• Involve fewer new road signs, painted roads, on-going maintenance/cost, on-going enforcement

• Cost less than the proposed draft restrictions

In light of the above, and the general increase in development and traffic in the airport vicinity – over the past 50 years and in the foreseeable future - DCC should focus on:

• Providing additional road capacity in the area

• Using its powers (again/as appropriate) to get the pernicious drop-off charge rescinded

• Using its powers (again/as appropriate) to get the school plans abandoned.

I object to the draft proposals.

I strongly object to this proposed order as the reasons given for the proposal are weak and do not stand up to scrutiny. The junction is controlled by traffic lights so there is no danger in dropping off passengers in addition there is no current congestion caused by any passengers being dropped off. With regard to preserving Cynthia J Sell BH234NL I object to the proposal and improving amenities this is not specified and thus is not a valid reason for the imposition of waiting restrictions. In addition with regard to the school it is the responsibilty of the school to implement and advise parents of safe dropoff/pick up procedures

passengers, car drivers and the general public with this dumb idea of stopping anyone from dropping off those who wish to use the airport.

Instead of punishing the public, why doesn't Dorset Council object to MAG (airport owners) charging the car driver?

What did Dorset Council do when MAG employed 'Bouncers' (security guards) to stop the public from walking down the airport approach road? Nothing! It was the public who used the Road Traffic Act to force MAG to allow the public to walk down the road.

Dorset Council is weak in giving MAG all that they want and more. Ian Payne bh6 3pp I object to the proposal

There isn't any public transport to the airport. Taxi's (Rats of the road) charge far more than a journey of the same mileage when going to the airport and still add on the £2.50 charge to the passenger.

Your decision will lead those who do not agree to break the law. I am unsure if you could actually take someone to court if they dropped someone off. This would be up for debate in a court of law.

Dorset Council should hang their heads in shame at the weakness it is showing. Picking on the small as it is afraid of the bully (MAG)

I amazed the the Council wish to put these restrictions in to place and encourage people to use Southampton airport instead! Having recently flown from Bournemouth Airport recently I can only say how stupid this drop off system is. I was trying to park at 5:50 am only to find the car park was full of people trying to drop off and equally when I arrive home there was a problem with the car park. Not only were people trying to pay just to pick up but the car park was full of people moving their cars around. Considering the number of people who had walked up the road June Shearing BH14 9AD I object to the proposal this would just make matters worse, tempers would be raised as people potential miss their flights. Surely the option would be to take a piece of land and let people drop off - not charge them a ridiculous amount for doing so. With several people in a car when we went on holiday we looked at taking public transport. In many airports the cost is per car but not here to get back to Branksome it was going to cost around £8 each. There was a drop off area before and this worked very well and it seems that more and more people will be considering Southampton Airport which is a shame for Bournemouth.

Name Postcode Position Response if the airport stopped ripping off its customers people wouldnt have to drop off outside of the airport southampton airport dont charge so why should the greedy gary hopkins bh22 0df I object to the proposal owners of bournemouth do it, there is also no way you will stop people walking down to the terminal why dont you do something active and put a path in asap before someone gets run over.

Having had the full details explained to me my the DCC road team I am happy to Thomas Herbert Bh236aa I support the proposal withdraw my objection previously registered

My complaint is regarding the cost of parking in the airport. No one should object to paying when picking up as no one knows how long they will be. But I strongly disagree with the cost when dropping off. There should be a separate area for Brenda Fitzgerald SO418GT I support the proposal departing passengers than can be in and out within minutes. Why do you think you are forcing people to park in the roads - they are protesting at the exorbitant parking fee. There must be a solution to go along with the parking restrictions you propose.

If you really want to make a difference to inappropriate parking in the vicinity of the Colin Fenton BH228QA I want to give some general comments airport, then persuade the airport operators to reduce their drop-off charge to a more reasonable amount. £1 would be good - it's still free at Southampton.

Need to provide a quick pick up/drop off area as they do at other regional airports i.e Southampton & if an 'international' airport then like Gatwick & Heathrow with a max 10 minute window. Then a short stay & long stay. No wonder people use other roads. Tessa Valpy BH212AF I want to give some general comments Also need a public transport link again ( a regular airport bus) like other airports do to Bournemouth Centre & Poole station.

It is fair to prevent airport passengers leaving vehicles on roads while they have gone on holiday, but completely unfair to in effect stop people being dropped off. A drop- off usually takes less than a minute, but it is and will be even more necessary to pay M Bray BH9 1DQ I want to give some general comments and find a car park space to do this - an inconvenient ridiculous waste of time and money, and a disincentive to use the Airport. The Airport should reintroduce a drop- off point as part of the approach to good passenger management.

This situation is completely the result of the airport owners operating practices and therefore either:

Mark Whitmarsh BH153RU I want to give some general comments a) Reinstate free drop off and collection or b) Charge to the costs associated with implementing the proposed changes to the airport owner

Bournemouth Airport should make provision for dropping off and picking up passengers free of charge. As do all train stations, Gatwick and Heathrow airports Olivia Duckett BH244HP I want to give some general comments and Southampton airport. The traffic problems are caused by the charge of £2.50 that the airport makes for simply dropping off or picking up a passenger. This is the issue that the Council should address, if they have any powers.

I would just like to say that Bournmouth Airport are shooting them selves in the foot,by not having a drop off point.I my self would use Southampton or even Richard Judd bh233bb I want to give some general comments Exeter,this is not about money my wife and i used B/mouth A/port for many years in the past where our sons or daughter could drop us off & pick us up.What is the cost to the tax payer ie new signage etc etc,or are B/mouth A/port paying for this?

Have the authorities ever thought of the reason why drivers drop off passengers on roads around the airport?? If the car park there was free (or a minimal charge like .50p) for the first 15mn, then you would not have to legislate. Paying £5 in all to drop Dominique Ryley SO413PX I want to give some general comments off and pick up passengers is a complete rip-off. You might not have anything to do with the pricing, but you could use your influence to suggest the airport authorities that their charging is counter productive

I am appalled to learn that Dorset County Council is planning to increase the waiting restrictions around the area of Bournemouth Airport. Years ago, the Airport made provision for people using the Airport to be dropped-off with no charge. But now they J. Stephenson SO419GS have deliberately done away with footpaths and lay-byes and imposed a charge of £2.50 for vehicles entering the Airport. Rather than conniving with the Airport authorities in this iniquitous manner, I feel the Dorset County Council should provide footpaths, etc. to enable Airport users to gain free access on foot into the Airport.

ref parking problems around Bournemouth airport ,this situation ,in my opinion ,has been created by the GREED of the airport managers ,removing the drop off areas and bob burley charging all traffic entering "£ 2.50 even to just a drop .Peter Bath would never allowed this to happen . bob burley

Name Postcode Position Response

To whom it may concern, I would like to comment on the article in the Lymington Times last weekend regarding traffic regulations being proposed for Parley Lane and areas around Bournemouth Airport. As a customer of the airport I regularly use this service and this year will have been dropped off and picked up 6 times. This has cost me £5.00 each time as there is no drop off or pick up point outside the airport. When I use Heathrow and Gatwick, which I do frequently, I have no problem in being dropped off and picked up straight away outside the airport at no cosy to anyone. This would have saved me £30 if Bournemouth airport would only provide this facility! The reason you as a council are having so much trouble and issues with the roads around Mrs C N Huxham SO455FX the airport is that they don't offer a drop off and pick up free service! I believe that if you as a county council and Christchurch Borough Council worked together you would be able to speak on behalf of those people living, working and using services in your area and ensure that Bournemouth Airport provided this easy solution to such a crazy situation. I myself have written to the Director of Bournemouth Airport several times and each time I have been as good as told go away we are going to make £5 out of every car that comes to drop off at our airport. By taking this issue up for the people you would be able to save a lot of money on not having to do all the things you are planning for the roads and area around Bournemouth Airport.

Response Number %age Total Objections 37 75.5% Total Supportive 2 4.1% Total Only Comments 7 14.3% Not Stated 3 6.1% Total Responses 49 100%

T:\Projects\Active Projects\HI (Highway Improvements)\HI1092\Documents Working\TRO\Responses\2015 08 15 - B3073 TRO Consultation Responses.xlsx