Agenda Item No. 8
Worthing County Local Committee
Ref: W04 (16/17)
8 June 2016
Key Decision:
No
Part I or Part II:
GORING, Marine Drive Prohibition of Motor
Caravans
Report by Executive Director of Residents Services
Interim Director of Highways and Transport
Electoral
Division(s):
Goring
Executive Summary
In recent years Marine Drive and Marine Crescent have been used for long term
parking by increasing numbers of motor caravans. Based on information
provided by local residents and the fact that the area is promoted on several
“Wild Camping” websites, it is believed on balance of probability that these long
staying motor caravans are being used for camping on the highway. This long
term parking by motor caravans restricts the ability of other visitors to find
suitable parking when visiting the area for recreation.
To provide a sustainable solution to this issue it is proposed to introduce (where
there are no existing restrictions) a restriction prohibiting motor caravans from
waiting between 10pm and 9am as detailed in Section 3. A formal consultation has
taken place to which there were 32 objections and 68 communications of support.
Recommendation
That the CLC considers the communications of objection and support as well as
the Officers response and further to this the Director of Law, Assurance and
Strategy be authorised to make the Order for the restrictions in the Worthing
area as advertised.
1.
Background and Context
1.1
The seafront in Worthing and Ferring is very popular for local recreation and
tourism. There has been a long standing issue of motor caravans and
static caravans occasionally being parked for long periods of time along
Marine Drive at its western end at the Goring / Ferring border. Due to the
modest number of incidents and the low impact, WSCC has previously
focused resources on higher priority issues.
1.2
In recent years the number of long staying motor caravans on Marine
Drive and Marine Crescent has increased significantly. The
motorhomefun.co.uk and wildcamping.co.uk forums both contain threads
from contributors stating they have used the road for free camping. At the
busiest time over 30 motor caravans / static caravans / vehicles adapted to
live in have been witnessed at this location.
1.3
It appears that the majority of motor caravans parking long term at this
location stay for one or two nights before moving on. There are however
a smaller number of vehicles which appear to be parked for months at a
time, some of which appear to be being used for long term
accommodation.
1.4
Currently, once it has been confirmed a vehicle is being used for long term
accommodation, action will be taken to remove it by applying to the
appropriate Magistrates Court. This solution is successful against vehicles
which stay for very long periods of time but on grounds of costs and
officer time it is not an effective solution against the higher number of
vehicles which stay only for one or two nights at a time.
1.5
It is considered that campervans parking overnight or longer at this location
unacceptably restricts the valuable amenity of parking for other visitors to
this popular area, hence reducing local amenity. It is proposed to address
this situation by prohibiting motor caravans from parking on the affected
length of road overnight.
1.6
In recommending the solution above it is recognised that visitors to the area
in motor caravans play an important part in the local economy and are to be
welcomed. The proposed restriction will allow motor caravans to continue to
visit the area without restriction during the day, while preventing behaviour
by a minority of motor caravan owners that unacceptably restricts access to
the area for other visitors.
2.
Consultation (See Appendix A for consultation documents)
2.1
The proposal is supported by both the County Councillor for Goring and
the County Councillor for Ferring.
2.2
Sussex police have raised no objections to the proposal.
2.3
A three week statutory consultation period commended on 14 April 2016.
A notice was placed in a local newspaper, notices were erected on site,
details of the proposal were available at the County Hall, local libraries
and on the West Sussex County Council Website.
2.4
•
•
Consultation results (See Appendix B for summary and officer response)
32 objections were received to the proposals. The majority of the
objections were with regards to users of motor caravans should be able to
use this area without restriction or for a few days before moving on.
68 communications of support were received of which:
o 51 local residents submitted support for the scheme, raising issues
such as a lack of parking availability and concerns about disposal of
waste from long staying camper vans.
o
An additional 17 submissions supported the scheme but raised
concerns about vehicles being displaced onto the unrestricted north
side of the road and into adjoining side roads.
3.
Proposal (See Appendix A for plans)
3.1
The proposal is to introduce (where there are no existing restrictions) a
restriction prohibiting motor caravans from waiting between 10pm and 9am
on the south side of Marine Drive and Marine Crescent in Goring-By-Sea and
Ferring, from the junction of Marine Crescent with Sea Place in Goring-BySea, westwards to the junction of Marine Drive with Sea Lane in Ferring.
3.2
The new Order is therefore proposed to improve the amenities of the area
through which the affected lengths of roads run.
4.
Resource Implications and Value for Money
4.1
It is estimated the cost of implementing the TRO will be £3,000. This will
be funded by the Highways Maintenance Budget.
5.
Other options considered
1. Do nothing - not chosen as would not resolve the issue.
2. Media pressure / campaign - this was done via a press release.
3. Public Spaces Protection Order preventing overnight camping by the
District Council - The district council confirmed this restriction could not be
used on the Highway.
6.
Impact of the proposal
6.1
It is considered that the proposal will resolve the issue of motor caravans
residing on the highway.
6.2
Equality Duty. An Equality Impact Report (EIR) is attached below in
Appendix C
6.3
Crime and Disorder Act Implications – The County Council does not
consider there to be any foreseeable Crime and Disorder Act implications
associated with this proposal.
6.4
Human Rights – The County Council does not consider there to be any
foreseeable Human Rights Act implications associated with granting
implementing this proposal.
6.5
Social Value – It is considered that the proposal will improve local
amenity by increasing the amount of available parking in this popular
tourist location.
7.
Risk Management Implications
7.1
There is a risk that motorhomes may displace to the north side of Marine
Parade. As with any parking restrictions, vehicles are generally displaced,
often to where ever the restriction ends. This will most likely occur shortly
after the scheme is implemented, and is expected to cease after a short
period when the introduction of the restriction is reported on the wild
camping websites.
7.2
If implemented as proposed, WSCC officers will monitor displacement and
members of the public can request a further TRO, which will need to be
prioritised by the CLC through the current TRO Policy, to resolve this issue
should it arise. A TRO was not proposed for the north side of Marine Drive
as this would require a large number of sign posts, which would urbanise
this very attractive semi-rural location. Further to this WSCC will continue
to serve Notice (as detailed in 1.3) on any vehicles which appear to be
used for long term accommodation in at this location, which should
resolve this issue.
Bernadette Marjoram
Executive Director Residents
Services
Lucy Monie
Interim Director of Highways
and Transport
Contact: Mike Thomas (03302 226341)
Appendices
Appendix A – Consultation and Proposal Documents
Appendix B - Summary of Comments and Objections
Appendix C – Equality Impact Assessment
Background Reading
Power of local authority to direct unauthorised campers to leave land
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1994/33/section/77
DfT Guidance - Prohibition of waiting for motor caravans
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/
3218/area-wide-authorisations-special-directions.pdf
Appendix A - Consultation and Proposal Documents
https://www.westsussex.gov.uk/media/7345/wor8014.pdf
Appendix B
Summary of Comments and Objections
Prohibition of Motor Caravans on Goring / Ferring Seafront
Objections to the proposed restrictions:
Comments
Officers Response
1. Resident of Felixstowe Court,
London: Restriction should be for a
maximum stay, not an overnight
ban.
The DfT authorisation only allows for
a timed restriction. It would be
difficult to find a suitable alternative
restriction which would be
enforceable and allow people to park
but not camp on the highway.
2. Resident of Jack Lane, Leeds:
It is unlawful to camp on the
WSCC should be taking a European highway in the UK. WSCC will review
approach to leisure activities in
this should national legislation
camper vans and overnight camping. change.
It is an expanding activity and a
commercial opportunity being
missed on if camper vans are
banned
3. Resident of Raleigh Crescent,
It is unlawful to camp on the
Worthing: Campervans are
highway in the UK. WSCC will review
welcomed with open arms in towns this should national legislation
across Europe. Stayed the night at change.
Goring Gap once as a trial run and
were very respectful of the area,
causing no problems at all. The ban
seems unjustified in an area where
visitors who don’t have the good
fortune to live right next to the sea
could be welcomed. Locals allowing
their dogs to foul the greensward
and beach without clearing up are a
far more serious concern.
4. Resident of Aldsworth Avenue,
It is hoped the websites promoting
Goring by Sea: If present proposal is “wild camping” at this location will
passed there would be a risk
cease to do so. WSCC will continue
overnight campers may move to the to serve Notice on any overnight
north side of the road. If camper
camping that occurs where there are
vans visiting in the daytime then
no restrictions. A further TRO may
park opposite on the south side of
be considered if this issue arises.
the road traffic problems will be
caused. There is also an increased
risk to life caused by more reversing
and questionable maneuvers being
carried out by camper van drivers
trying to park on the opposite side of
the road from which they are
driving.
5. Resident of Johnstone, Glasgow: This restriction would be very
Has invested heavily in a motor
difficult and resource hungry to
caravan for retirement and object to enforce. Other locations in the area
councils arbitrarily restricting it from are available without restriction. The
parking like any other vehicle. The significant majority of those camping
motor caravan is self-contained and on the highway are doing so in
leaves no trace behind by day or
motor caravans.
night. The problems in the
Statement of Reasons would be
better addressed by simply
restricting parking time to a
maximum of 12 or 24 hours, leaving
the facility available to all but
preventing long term parkers. Most
motor caravan owners are
responsible, do not park long term
and contribute economically to the
areas they visit.
6. Resident of Petworth Avenue,
It is hoped the websites promoting
Goring: Restriction is needed on the “wild camping” at this location will
north side of the road as well, and
cease to do so. WSCC will continue
should be extended into the roads
to Notice any overnight camping
leading off the seafront. Otherwise that occurs where there are no
camper vans will move into side
restrictions. A further TRO may be
roads as they do presently in rough considered if this issue arises.
weather.
Time proposed restriction is not good
enough, should be 8pm to 10am to We do not wish to demonise against
give other visitors a chance to park motor caravan owners who wish to
in the mornings before the camper park for the day.
vans arrive.
An easier solution would be to
introduce parking charges for motor We cannot introduce parking
caravans only. This would be easier charges just for motor caravans on
the highway, hence all vehicles
to patrol and enforce as long as
parking fees were more than a local would most likely displace to the
campsite to encourage them to use local area causing even worse local
parking issues.
those instead.
7. Resident of Penfold Road,
Worthing: Can see no problem with
allowing camper vans to park at this
location.
The restriction is proposed to
prevent the long term loss of
parking amenity which has been
monopolised by a few large vehicles.
8. Resident of Brook Barn Way,
It is unlawful to camp on the
Worthing: Feels objections to
highway in the UK. WSCC will review
camper van parking are more to do this should national legislation
with local residents being concerned change.
about the “tone” of the area being
lowered than any genuine concerns
about local enjoyment of the area.
Welcomes the holiday atmosphere
the campers bring and walks the
area every day in summer with no
concerns. There is plenty of space
for everyone and concerns about
lack of parking are completely
unfounded. Has never visited the
area and been unable to park even
on the hottest summer weekend.
Campers would be a nuisance on the
built up part of the road but there is
no reason to prevent them parking
on the section west of Aldsworth
Avenue. Preventing night time
parking is clearly not going to
resolve any perceived problem in the
daytime, which is when most people
would be looking to park.
9. Resident of Palmer Road,
Angmering: Living in a vehicle
causes no harm to anyone and is a
sustainable lifestyle. They rarely
leave behind litter unlike day
visitors. Living simply is a growing
movement and should be
encouraged not prohibited.
It is unlawful to camp on the
highway in the UK. WSCC will review
this should national legislation
change.
10. Resident of Connaught Avenue,
Shoreham: People should have the
right to park somewhere overnight.
There are no houses near this area,
please do not restrict this area.
It is unlawful to camp on the
highway in the UK. WSCC will review
this should national legislation
change.
11. Resident of Offington Drive,
This restriction would be very
Worthing: A full ban on overnight
difficult and resource hungry to
parking for motor caravans is too
enforce. It is agreed that day visitors
heavy handed. Understands
support the local economy, however
situation and that it is unfair to have day visitors with freezers, cookers
spaces monopolized by motor
and dining facilities are less likely to
caravans or any other single group contribute to the local economy than
of users but problem in the area
those who do not have them. There
could be solved by limiting waiting to are dedicated local sites where
48 or 24 hours at a time. The area motor caravans are welcome. It is
is busiest in the daytime so parking unlawful to camp on the highway in
at night does not cause disruption
the UK.
unless they stay for significant
periods beyond that.
Allowing short overnight stays would
maintain Worthing’s reputation as a
friendly welcoming seaside town.
Visitors support café’s restaurants
and local shops.
12. Resident of Tempo, Co.
It is unlawful to camp on the
Fermanagh, Ireland: Lived in
highway in the UK. The proposed
Worthing for 35 years and when they restriction is not available under
visit the area they stay overnight in current legislation. WSCC will review
Goring. Can’t see why people can’t this should national legislation
spend 1 or 2 nights. Worthing is a change.
holiday destination and previously
people could park up in camper vans
along the seafront up to the lido. In
Europe it is easy to stay overnight
anywhere and in Fermanagh people
are allowed to moor up boats for 2
nights for free then have to move
on. If restriction is put in people
wanting to stay overnight and spend
money in Worthing will move to
another town.
13. Resident of Clarendon Road,
There is no restriction that allows
Hove: People should be able to camp this. This restriction would be very
for up to 2 days. The proposal will difficult and resource hungry to
impact people’s freedom of
enforce. It is unlawful to camp on
movement.
the highway in the UK.
14. Resident of Grassmere Avenue, There is no restriction that allows
Peacehaven: Knows many people
this. This restriction would be very
who park their vans at Goring for 1 difficult and resource hungry to
night and feel it would be a shame to enforce. Enforcement is undertaken
prevent this from happening. There by the District Council’s Civil
is no harm done and everyone
Enforcement Officers. It is unlawful
seems respectful. Restriction would to camp on the highway in the UK.
be a drain on diminishing police
resources and is unnecessary.
15. Resident of Marine Crescent,
It is unlawful to camp on the
Goring by Sea: Effects of the
highway in the UK.
proposal will be disproportionate to
the aims of the TRO.
Current car parks at Sea Lane and
opposite Beachside Close are rarely
full and there is ample on-street
parking on Marine Drive and Marine
Crescent. Campervan parking does
not restrict availability of parking for
visitors.
Area most affected is the length of
Marine Drive which has no property
frontage. Restricting parking there
will move the campervans nearer to
residential dwellings.
Proposed restriction will not prevent
campervans parking on the north
side of the road or in the side roads,
moving them closer to residential
properties than they are now.
Restriction will require traffic signs at
regular intervals along the seafront.
At present there are few signs and
the additional street furniture will
detract from the open scenery of the
area.
16. Resident of Marine Crescent:
This option was seriously
Supports the aim of the restriction considered. However, enforcement
generally but believes restriction
could only be guaranteed between if
should operate between 10pm and the restriction ended at 9am, and it
8am to enable families in motor
was believed that the restriction
caravans to have a full day at the
should be enforced if necessary.
beach.
17. Resident of Freshfield Street,
There is no restriction that allows
Brighton: Proposal unfairly targets a this. This restriction would be very
number of responsible camper van difficult and resource hungry to
owners who would like to enjoy this enforce. It is unlawful to camp on
spot for one or 2 nights only. A 2
the highway in the UK.
night max stay restriction would be a
fair compromise that would benefit
all parties.
18. Resident of West Street,
Shoreham: Submitted objection to
the proposal without further detail.
19. Resident of Eastbrook Way,
Portslade: People should be allowed
to stay overnight to appreciate this
beautiful spot.
It is unlawful to camp on the
highway in the UK.
It is unlawful to camp on the
highway in the UK.
20. Resident of Rosefield Crescent, It is unlawful to camp on the
Rochdale: Submitted objection to the highway in the UK.
proposal without further detail.
21. Resident of Elm Close, Hayling
It is unlawful to camp on the
Island: Submitted objection to the
highway in the UK.
proposal without further detail.
22. Resident of Lincoln Street
There is no restriction that allows
Brighton: Have never had any
this. This restriction would be very
problem parking on this length of
difficult and resource hungry to
road or found motor homes to be of enforce. It is unlawful to camp on
any concern. If there is a long term the highway in the UK.
parking problem a 48 hour
maximum stay restriction should be
introduced, allowing tourists to visit
and enjoy the area. I tis a shame to
restrict access to an area for a
particular group just because of their
choice of transport.
23. Motor Caravan Owner: Most
There is no restriction that allows
owners are aware of normal
this. This restriction would be very
manners regarding parking and very difficult and resource hungry to
few motor caravans are parked in
enforce. It is unlawful to camp on
front of residential properties. The the highway in the UK.
restriction will move vehicles to
residential roads causing another
problem.
Present situation has arisen because
Vans, horseboxes and caravans have
taken up residence on these roads.
A better solution would be to charge
£5 per night to stay there with a
maximum stay of 3 nights.
24. Resident of West Hill Place,
It is unlawful to camp on the
Brighton: Submitted objection to the highway in the UK.
proposal without further detail.
25. Resident of Sandown Road,
It is unlawful to camp on the
Brighton: Proposal; is not the right highway in the UK.
thing to do.
26. Resident of Bennett Road,
It is unlawful to camp on the
Brighton: Submitted objection to the highway in the UK.
proposal without further detail.
27. Resident of Station Road,
It is unlawful to camp on the
Henfield: This area is a beautiful
highway in the UK.
place to stay for a night or two. It is
a shame to stop nature lovers having
the right to spend an evening there.
28. Resident of Rowlands Road,
It is unlawful to camp on the
Worthing: There is no harm in the
highway in the UK.
current behavior, the local
community should tolerate this.
29. National Motorhome Association: The code will be for contravention of
Many of the vehicles targeted by the a waiting restriction. The DfT
restriction are associated with New description of a Motor Caravan does
Travelers and should be dealt with not refer to a table.
under illegal occupation legislation.
Less than 5% of vehicles in the area
are of ‘Category M’ [the DVLA
category for passenger vehicles]
Many of the Category M vehicles do
not have a table.
There is no PCN code that can be
issued against a specific type of
vehicle. A motorhome is not a
separate class of vehicle, it is a type
of vehicle [the restriction cannot
therefore be enforced].
It would be more positive to set up
parking for motorhomes, which
brings a massive tourism benefit.
30. Resident of Goring Road, Goring The restriction has been proposed to
by Sea: Does not believe the
prevent the unlawful overnight
proposal will have the impact
camping. There is no legislation
suggested. Campervans will still be available for the restriction
able to park on the sea front as long proposed.
as they move on by a given time.
There is no evidence a greater
number of parking spaces for cars
will available during the day.
It would be more effective to
introduce a maximum stay
restriction for up to 72 hours. This
would prevent long term storage of
camper vans on the highway.
Maximum stay restriction would be
easier and less expensive to enforce.
Proposed restriction is out of
proportion to the problems reported.
TRO is not about safety but is of a
discriminatory nature that is
shameful for West Sussex to adopt
as policy.
31. Resident of Marine Crescent,
It is proposed that the signs will be
Goring by Sea: Proposed restrictions placed on the existing wooden
are unnecessary. Additional signage bollards and hence minimise the
for the restriction would be more of intrusion. Overnight camping is a
an eyesore than parked vehicles with local authority issue and without the
people enjoying themselves.
proposed restriction difficult and
It is already illegal to camp
time consuming to enforce.
overnight on the road so it should be
possible to enforce this with an
occasional police patrol.
Proposal seems un-unnecessary
restriction on people’s freedom.
There is much to enjoy in the area
and wish others to enjoy it too,
including those who can’t afford to
live by the sea.
Council funds are short and should
not be wasted on an unnecessary
scheme which has been requested
by people who may not have looked
at their own thoughts to consider
whether they are being selfish.
Visitors bring economic prosperity to
the area.
32. Motor caravan owner: Stops for
up to 2 nights at Goring Gap when
visiting an elderly relative in
Worthing. Most motor home owners
respect the unwritten rule of
stopping for no longer than 72 hours
at a location. An inconsiderate
minority at Goring Gap are staying
for longer periods. Accepts this is a
problem that needs to be resolved
but proposed restriction is not a
good solution.
Motor homes will simply park up on
the seafront in the day time, then
move into the side roads at night to
avoid the restriction, upsetting
residents even more and making the
situation more difficult to police.
It would be far better to introduce a
fee for overnight parking. People
who do not abuse the system would
be happy to pay this, but those
staying long term or storing vehicles
will move on. The fee could be
applied to all vehicles, discouraging
late parties which also upset
residents.
There is no restriction that allows
this. It may be possible to charge to
park, however this would just
displace vehicles to the local
residential roads. This restriction
would be very difficult and resource
hungry to enforce. It is unlawful to
camp on the highway in the UK.
Appendix C – Equality Impact Report
Equality Impact Report
Title of proposal
Worthing – GORING, Marine Drive Prohibition of Motor
Caravans
Date of
implementation
N/A
EIR completed by:
Name: Mike Thomas
Tel:
033022 26341
1. Decide whether this report is needed and, if so, describe how you have
assessed the impact of the proposal.
The proposal has followed the due Traffic Regulation Order process and public
advertisement the proposal has been aired in the local community. 32 Objections
and 68 communications of support have been received which help inform the EIR.
2. Describe any negative impact for customers or residents.
The proposal is to introduce (where there are no existing restrictions) a restriction
prohibiting motor caravans from waiting between 10pm and 9am on the south side of
Marine Drive and Marine Crescent in Goring-By-Sea and Ferring, from the junction of
Marine Crescent with Sea Place in Goring-By-Sea, westwards to the junction of
Marine Drive with Sea Lane in Ferring.
This will have a negative impact on those unlawfully camping at the above location.
3. Describe any positive effects which may offset any negative impact.
It is considered that campervans parking overnight or longer at this location
unacceptably restricts the availability amenity of parking for other visitors to this
popular area. It is proposed to address this situation by prohibiting motor caravans
from parking on the affected length of road overnight. This proposal will increase the
opportunity to park for day visitors to the area by preventing parking spaces being
monopolised by campervans being used for unlawful camping or long term storage.
4. Describe whether and how the proposal helps to eliminate
discrimination, harassment and victimisation.
The proposal does not significantly help to eliminate discrimination, harassment
and victimisation.
5. Describe whether and how the proposal helps to advance equality of
opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and
those who do not.
The proposal does not directly help advance equality of opportunity between
people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.
6. Describe whether and how the proposal helps to foster good relations
between persons who share a protected characteristic and those who
do not.
The proposal does not directly help to foster good relations between persons who
share a protected characteristic and those who do not.
7. What changes were made to the proposal as a result? If none, explain
why.
No changes were made to the proposal as the ratio of support to objection was
approximately 2:1, further to this it is unlawful to camp on the highway.
8. Explain how the impact will be monitored to make sure it continues to
meet the equality duty owed to customers and say who will be
responsible for this.
The true effect of the proposal will only be known once it is implemented. It will be
monitored by feedback from customers and Worthing Borough Council Civil
Enforcement Officers and also the WSCCs Highways team.