Objecting to the parking proposals for North Berwick

In order to object or support the parking proposals put forward by Labour controlled East Lothian Council it is essential that you follow the rules. The rules this time are designed to make it harder for individuals to register their objection. If the rules are not followed it is clear that Labour controlled ELC will dismiss your objections.

All the information can be found here – https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/1a48fd752ddc4057ac4ffb1f1d3feb49

You have until Sunday 29th September 2024 to lodge your objection or support for the proposals. You can do this by either sending emails to parkingconsultations@eastlothian.gov.uk or writing to

North Berwick Parking Management TRO

Asset and Regulatory Manager

Penston House

Macmerry

ELC say that they would prefer seperate email or letters covering individual TRO’s, but will accept a single email covering all proposals. They will NOT accept emails or letters with the same wording multiple times ie the same email submitted 4 times for the 4 TRO’s. If you can I would write 4 seperate emails or letters just in case they dismiss individual ones.

It is really important that you follow the following steps.

For each of the following TRO’s you must write an email or letter with the following information clearly stated in the email
1. The Reference for the TRO your email of letter regards – see list below
2. Stating the grounds upon which you are objecting or support on
3. Your full name and address
The TRO’s are as follows or you can write just one email
1. Reference – “North Berwick off Street Parking Places Order No.1″
  1. For off street car parks – Kirk Ports car park – Law Road, Glebe car park – St Andrews Street, Imperial car park – Quality Street, The Lodge car park – East Road, Castle Hill car park – Tantallon Terrace.
2. Reference – “North Berwick Haugh Road and Sewage Works off street Parking Places No 2”
  1. For off street car parks – Haugh Road and Sewage Works order No.2.
3. Reference – “North Berwick Community Centre and Library Parking Places order No 3”
  1. For off street car parks – Community Centre and Library order No.3.
4. Reference – “North Berwick On Street Order No.4”
  1. For on street parking in all zones, North Berwick order No.4
Ask at the end of the letter or email for a personal response so you are sure they have received it

To help people object to the proposals below are some ideas to include in your responses by TRO. The first list is general objections and then some specific to each Reference TRO and then I give some specific ideas. Please also add your own as we are sure there are others we have not thought about. The more objections the better. Please DON’T COPY and PASTE must be in your own words.

Please distribute this to people you know, post on what app groups and get others to object. Even people outside NB need to object as if they don’t the parking will be coming to their town next so stop them now.

Below are some objections you can use in your email or letter to the council. Click on each tab to find a list releravent to each TRO and use the General Objections on each of your submissions. If you have other objections you wish to share with others then let me know and I will add them. Email – John@100pceffective.com Thanks

John Wellwood

General objections for each Reference

The process is not fair to people of North Berwick as 4 TRO’s is difficult to understand or object to and some objections will be dismissed.
No public meetings have been held to explain and answer questions
Key data / information is missing from the proposal – No data was collected to try to show a parking problem in NB and no new costs and revenue forecasts have been provided. As a result, we have no idea if this is a good or bad idea
No proof has been provided that there is a year-round parking problem in NB. The decision is based on 3 dates in Aug 3 years apart. One date was when fringe by the sea was on, so the data is not statistically robust
We have not had time to scrutinise the data because 35 days were promised but information was not added to the website for the first 5 days
This is a waste of money some £363,367.58 has been spent externally since 2021 on this project. No costs are kept for the officer’s time involved in this project and the surveys used to show a parking issue in 2019 have not been included in their numbers. We understand that a further £500k has been allocated to this project for the rest of East Lothian. This at a time when ELC is essentially bankrupt can only be seen as a waste of public money.
Lies or exaggerations have been included in the proposal to deliberately miss lead the public. For example, in the FAQ’s section – 3. How do you know parking turnover is low in North Berwick? It states – “A detailed traffic and parking survey was carried out in North Berwick to understand the level of parking space turnover.” This is clearly untrue as only 3 dates were studied in August 3 years apart.
Overly complex for a town the size of NB – The proposals are based on a model from a city such as Edinburgh and proposed for NB. They are not fit for purpose even if there was a problem it will confuse residents, staff and indeed the wardens who will enforce the parking both on and off site. No other town in Scotland with our topography and age profile has implemented parking where it has not had a negative effect on the town.
Why 3 zones? This just makes signage more expensive and confusing for all. Residents of the town who buy a permit can only do so for the zone they live in. It only then enables them to off street parking in their zone. A person in the central zone would be very restricted as to where they can park. The issue is that anyone from outside a zone will have to pay effectively a tax to live, work or visit the town.
Why 3 different durations and costs? Each zone will have its own unique durations and costings. This will make signage extremely confusing for all. Why the differences – Easterly maximum stay will be 5hrs but in the Westerly its 6hrs. The complexity will be felt mostly by those who have poor reading skills, or are careless or not from the UK.
Aesthetics and signage – the cost of signage will be extensive due to the number of zones and charge rates. Each different area will need different signs to explain charges etc. Not only will this cost more to produce but will mean more signs and meters added to the streets in the town. The aesthetic look of the town will be negatively affected.
Safety concerns – In TRO 4 it is stated that the CPZ’s will – Reduce inappropriate and indiscriminate parking so reducing inconvenience and congestion and improving road safety for all users. This is totally untrue and in fact creates more problems.
People walking to cars after work particularly those who work late at night will be put in potential jeopardy. With no banks in NB and police advising shop owners etc not to leave money on the premises people will have to walk to cars with potentially large sums of money putting them at risk. Also, workers will have to park outside the zones to avoid being taxed to go to work. For example, walking from the high street to the recreation car park in the dark late at night is a risk I am sure nobody would like their son or daughter to have to take when they could have parked very close to their work particularly in the winter when there is no parking problem what so ever. The situation will arise where there are virtually no cars parked on the high street, but a person has to walk to the recreation car park potentially with a lot of money. Real safety concern.
Recreation car park – this is designated as outside the zones meaning that all people nearby as well as motor homes will use this free car park. Visitors will work out this is the best place to park and this car park will be full. As everyone knows at the weekend this car park is already full of parents dropping off or watching children and adults undertaking rugby and football. It is already a dangerous situation with children not paying attention to cars as they run to training or a match. Adding even more cars having to cruise round and round looking for a space will vastly increase the likelihood of an accident.
Economic impact – Over 90% of the members of the North Berwick Business Association representing shops, pubs, restaurants and other businesses are against these proposals but why? They have seen the effect on other town centres throughout Scotland. Nobody wants to pay to go shopping – they will vote with their feet and go to out of town locations. There is no argument that can be made against this statement. It will impact businesses ability to attract and retain staff as well as trade particularly in the winter months. At least 2 shops have said that if the scheme goes ahead they will not renew their lease. One of the supposed aims of the scheme is to increase the vibrancy of the town centre this proposal will do the exact opposite.
North Berwick was recently voted the best place to live in the UK by the Sunday Times. Listed as one of the benefits was the fact that parking was free. That demonstrates what people see as important in a town centre.
Visitors will be frustrated when visiting the town either paying for parking or looking for free spaces, way more than in the couple of months in the summer when there may be some issues. It will not affect their current visit but might affect any subsequent visits.
The Business association have stated that the average length of stay on the high street is some 23 minutes. There are simpler and cheaper solutions to the supposed parking issue on the high street which have been suggested and rejected by ELC. Parking charges in the town will mean people will go to out of town shopping or go on line.
Short term lets will also be impacted– Permits can be purchased for visitors, but this is limited to 25 per year for weekly permits. Once they have been used the owners will have to ask people to pay or direct them to free zones. This will have an effect on the visitor’s view of the town and may affect their return.
Lots of businesses in NB are desperate for staff particularly in the summer months. Placing a daily cost on those working in the town or expecting them to walk outside the zones will do nothing to aid the workforce in NB. It also disadvantages whole groups of people who physically can’t walk the distances required up and down hills. The cost of a person parking in the central parking zone and working full time for 6 days would be £30. Many shop workers etc are on minimum wages this makes the choice simple long walks or don’t work in NB. With safety issues late at night and potentially carrying money this again will affecting the ability to attract staff. Without a joined up pubic transport structure it means that you must drive to work if you live outside the town.
As a typical user of North Berwick you will be taxed for coming into the town. Let’s say you visit a friend in the Eastern Zone for a few hours, play golf once a week in the westerly zone and go shopping for a few hours twice a week in the central zone. You could easily rack up a parking bill of some £15 per week or £780 per year. For those on fixed incomes or those with little money this is a vast sum. The ELC would like to think that these people will just walk but they will not, they will go elsewhere, arrange to meet friends elsewhere and slowly the centre will no longer be the beating heart of the town voted best place to live in the UK and the only people to blame will be ELC.
All towns are developing their plans for the future. NB has been developing this over the last few months with the North Berwick Place Plan with thousands of people participated and vast sums used to develop this strategic plan for the town this has been ignored by ELC. In this plan parking solutions have been proposed and people have voted to say if they agree or disagree with them. This consultation is about to conclude. It includes park and ride and other solutions why has this not been included in the ELC plans, why have they not engaged with NBCC on these issues?
A major issue with all 3 zones will be the ripple effect as people move from parking inside one of the 3 new zones to outside the zones. The main areas that will be affected will be St Baldred’s road, Law road and Dirtleton Avenue. Each will cause chaos in the town. However, all streets around the station will also be affected as will streets up to Lochbridge Road. This will lead to more and more congestion in the town.
The number of spaces will be reduce rather than increased making parking worse due to these proposals.
Enforcement – No way a warden can police the vast area. It is stated that some additional wardens will be hired. It is not clear how many, where they will be based or if they will only work in NB. The area that wardens will be asked to police is vast and even full-time wardens will struggle to circle the town consistently. This will impact the revenue that was in the first consolation – no numbers were provided for the second consultation.
It is unclear who will pay for permits for social care workers.
As no forecast for income was provided for this consultation I can only use the numbers given last time which make no sense. I object due to lack of clarity. However the forecast was for an income of £1.2 million for NB in the first year? That is means an average income of £3,287 per day. If the maximum charge for cars is £5.00 per day then that implies an average of 657 cars per day. If each car has an average of 2 passengers that would be 480,000 visitors a year and 480,000 is in fact the number of visitors to the county for 2020, during the pandemic so its a conservative figure. Some vehicles will be camper vans paying a higher rate (which is still much too low) and some of the spaces will be taken up by permanent residents and holiday lets. That affects the figures – but not in a good way – because for every permanent resident parking for the equivalent of 12 pence a day (£45 / 365) you then need more cars to make up the difference. Conclusion this proposal will not earn the returns ELC believe.

Objections for North Berwick off Street Parking Places Order No.1

One of the aims is to improve parking but there are no new spaces suggested. In fact there will be less as the spaces down the middle of Kirk Ports car park which everyone uses will be taken away meaning there will be less parking spaces.
There will be no Blue badge holders parking at Tantallon Terrace Castle Hill works car park
The proposals show that less electric changing spaces will be available in St Andrews street car park – negative effect on the environment

Objections for North Berwick Haugh Road and Sewage Works off street Parking Places No 2

There will be no Blue badge holders parking at Haugh road or Tantallon Terrace Sewage car parks
Haugh road and Tantallon Terrace (sewage works) car parks no markings – All other car parks are shown with bays clearly marked however Haugh road and Tantallon Terrace are not. This means that there is no intention to mark out bays making it difficult for wardens to know who parked where and issue tickets for bad parking. It also means that the capacity of these car parks is unknown which impacts turnover numbers.
Motorhomes – now officially allowed to park in the town. Motorhomes will officially be able to park at 2 of the town car parks (Haugh Road and Sewage Works) car parks over night at a cost of only £15. This will lead to even more motorhomes as some people will currently not park there as it’s not officially sanctioned. Now it will encourage more and more which of course will make the parking situation even worse. If motorhomes are parked for more than 1 day how would a warden know this? As meant to be no return within 24 hours with max say 24 hours?

Objections for North Berwick Community Centre and Library Parking Places order No 3

Community centre car park will now only be for authorised vehicles as maximum stay is 15 mins. When no activities in community centre nobody can park there. Presently ELC suggest this as a long stay car park which will be eliminated for vast amounts of the week.
Community centre, Library and Museum Car Park – Parking will be restricted to fee paying and authorised vehicles. The definition of an authorised vehicle is one which is registered with council parking services and you will be allocated a defined parking bay. How can this work? Unless staff are constantly coming in and out to allocate a spaces based on what has not been taken it means that spaces will be reserved for users so no parking for others – reducing capacity as they will be empty while people look for spaces elsewhere. Staff at these facilities will they be given extra time to undertake parking duties, what happens if a warden comes by while you are trying to get a ticket as the staff on duty are busy. Dose this mean that you must register even if you are dropping off causing chaos. This in fact reduces capacity of car parking spaces in NB.
Blue badge holders – will not be able to stay more than 2 hour stay at library, museum and community centre
There will be no Blue badge holders parking at Haugh road, Tantallon Terrace Sewage or Tantallon Terrace Castle Hill works car parks

Objections for North Berwick On Street Order No.4

The 45mins free parking on the high street – no details what so ever have been provided regarding the payment methods. However, it is understood that even those wishing to take advantage of the 45 mins free parking on the high street or Kirk Ports car park will have to register their car in some way – via an app, at a machine or obtain a ticket to place in their car. Obtaining a ticket will have an effect on the time to get the ticket but also mean some people will not both with the hassle to obtain a ticket.
No assessment has been carried out and shared as to the economic impact on the high street of parking charges for this consultation. No data provided as to how the free parking will work and how people will pay after the 45mins. Remember that time will be limited in the high street to 90 meaning you then have 45 mins free then have to pay £1 for the next 25 mins and then a further £1 for the next 15 mins. The reality is you will go elsewhere its less hassle.
It is unclear as no map has been provided in this consultation regarding loading and unloading on the high street. It is unclear what people will have to do if they have to pick up larger items. It is unclear if shops will be able to operate effectively as they do today. Every obsticale place in front of a shopper or a business makes it more likely they will not bother shopping or trading. In a town the size of NB the high street is vital. Parking has the ability to kill a town centre.
No map of the area at the east end of the High Street has been provided for scrutiny. It is impossible to see blue badge spaces, loading and unloading bays and as a result the documentation is incomplete making it impossible for people to assess the impact of the plans.
Safety concern – St Baldred’s road – The knock-on effect of the zones will be that St Baldred’s road will become jammed with cars on both sides. This occurred in the last few weeks where the whole area became grid locked. This will now happen on a weekly basis. It provides a major problem for the fire service who will not have access to this main thoroughfare. Question has the Fire Service and Police been asked to comment on these proposals from a safety perspective.
Safety concern – Dirleton Avenue – will also be jammed with cars as it lies just outside the westerly parking zone. This means that people will now park on this avenue. Typically, nobody parks on the avenue as they are aware of the chaos this causes the main route into the town. 1 car will cause cars to snarl up the whole area of the town. People from just inside the zone will now park there as will visitors and golfers. This has the chance to not only slow down the flow of traffic causing frustration but massively increase the chance of accidents.
Safety concern – Law Road – the effect of more cars parking on Law road as it is outside the payment zones also raises safety concerns as children go to school. Buses will find it harder and harder to get up and down the road and the drop off times will make traffic chaos. This has been demonstrated recently when road works took up one side of the road.
Safety concern – PointGarry road – As visitors start to use the now officially sanctioned parking on PointGarry Road there will be increased risk of golf ball strikes. Children will be getting in and out of cars with the danger unknown to them as they are not local and don’t understand the risks of parking on this street. Safety of those parking could mean nets have to be put up to stop balls hitting cars and people. This will look terrible and have an impact on the costs for the project as it is assumed that ELC will have to pay for these nets.
Safety concern – Tantallon Terrace East of Glen Golf club house – This is to become official parking spaces. The danger to those parking here from golf balls from the 18th fairway will be very high. As with West golf course visitors will not know what to do if they or their cars are struck. Visitors due to the parking being official will now park there consistently whereas presently this is only done on high demand days. Safety of those parking could mean nets have to be put up to stop balls hitting cars and people. This will look terrible and have an impact on the costs.
Commuter impact – Parking around the station – The train station car park is owned by Scotrail who have not been consulted about the parking plans and their impact on their customers. It is proposed that this car park will remain free. Any residents in this area will therefore park in this car park rather than be charged. Visitors will also work out this is a free car park. This will have a major impact on commuters or those using the train service to Edinburgh. People will miss trains as they will have to park outside the Westerly zone which has a 6 hour maximum stay. People will drive round and round looking for spaces so a negative effect on the environment. It will also impact massively on all the streets around the station just outside the parking zone.
Glen golf club car park – The car park is owned by the golf course. Currently some visitors to the beach and some residents use this car park with some but not massive disruption. Those golfers who can’t find a space park on the street or up the road toward the sewage works. The Easterly proposal would see the Glen car park swamped with locals not wishing to pay and visitors. This will force the Glen Golf club to put in parking barriers etc I am sure. It will then also have a knock on effect to members and those living around the course. Any member wishing to use the practise facilities at the course will of now need to pay another tax on local people.
North Berwick West Golf Course impact. The current car park running along the 18th fairway is typically used by golfers (PointGarry Road). This is a dangerous place to park due to golf balls. With the advent of parking by visitors this will lead to more confrontations and confusion as visitors will not know what to do if a car is struck. Members of the Golf club will have to pay the £6 to park each time they play. Some golfers play 2 times per week or more giving a tax of some £12 week or £624 per year. Of course members will not park in the zone but walk from just outside the zone giving the ripple effect across the town. Visiting golfers will be faced with paying parking and then worrying about having enough time to return to their cars. The result apart from frustration will be visiting golfers will not have a meal or beverage before or after their round which will impact the turnover of the golf clubs. It will also provide a poor impression on our golf courses which are held in high esteem the word over. As visitors start to use the now officially sanctioned parking on Pointgarry Road there will be increased noise which will once again impact our world-renowned golf courses and tourism as a result.
Car park in zones not included in plans. Marine Parade / start of Tantallon Terrace small parking just off beach not included in the plans why?
Marine Parking map 5 suggest that parking is restricted to vehicles less than 2.29m but that no charges will be made for parking there? Why is this street excluded from the parking charges?
Those who own motorhome and currently park outside of their houses will now not be allowed to do so. The result is they will park outside other people’s house outside the zone making things even worse.
Can’t wash your car on street even with a permit. Nobody parking on any street in the zones will be allowed to wash their car outside their house even with a permit. How will this be in forced?