Decision details

To consider the comments received following the formal advertisement of proposed changes to parking restrictions on Manvers Street, Fore Street and Wicker Hill, Trowbridge as part of the Trowbridge Future High Streets public realm improvement works and to recommend an appropriate way forward.

I approve that:

(i)             The current proposals be abandoned and revised proposals be advertised.

(ii)            The objectors be advised accordingly. This decision was published on 8 January 2024 and will come into force on 16 January 2024.

It is proposed to abandon the advertised revised traffic regulation orders as they currently stand and readvertise revised alterations which have been developed through consideration of comments received from this consultation, feedback from elected representatives and design development. The revised proposals will remain similar in nature to those advertised but will include additional short-term parking and loading bay provision.

To:

i)               Implement the proposals as advertised.

ii)              Implement the proposals as advertised with amendments.

iii)            Abandon the proposals as they currently stand and readvertise revised proposals to accord with design changes.

In addition to regular dialogue with the Wiltshire Council Member and Trowbridge Town Council through the design process associated with the wider project, consultation relating to the proposed restrictions has been undertaken with:

•                The elected Wiltshire Council Members through the statutory TRO consultation process

•                The elected Trowbridge Town Council Members for all Wards through the statutory TRO consultation process

•                Emergency services through the statutory TRO consultation process

•                Members of the public through the statutory TRO consultation process

The proposed changes were subject to formal consultation ending on 7 August 2023. The advertisement plan can be seen in Appendix 1. During the consultation period a total of twelve items of correspondence were received in response to the Council’s proposals. Of the items received, three expressed support for the Council’s proposals, five made general comments on the proposals and four objected to the Council’s proposals. A list of respondents can be found in Appendix 2.