Feb 232016
 

A number of Society members have recently expressed concerns about the use of the Car Park in Murray Road. It appears that it has become increasingly difficult to park when visiting daytime functions at the Ottershaw village hall or visiting the local shops.

During week days the Car Park is quite often full with long-term parkers from approx 8.30am onwards. No survey has been done, but users clearly include workers at nearby businesses and shops and also people who are now “commuting” to St Peter’s Hospital to avoid charges there.

As it has had a severe effect on the Hall operations, the Ottershaw Village Hall Committee has written to Runnymede BC (RBC) suggesting the introduction a limited free period (possibly 3 hrs) followed by charging as a way of freeing space for shorter-term users.

 

When the possibility of charging was last raised a few years ago the Society, as did a number of other organisations, objected strongly. RBC in response this time have said that there will have to be some extensive consultation locally over this including those who objected previously.

So what do you think?

 

Considerations:

There are 43 spaces with an additional 3 spaces for disabled people.

  • Should there be parking charges applied to the Car park?
  • Should there be variable charges applied i.e. So much time free?
  • Should we continue the status quo, no fee?
  • Are there any other solutions?

 

Other things in the equation:

Will charging in the Murray Road Car Park move the problem elsewhere? To the village roads or to the other car parks in the village (one at Timber Hill and the two at the Memorial Fields)

 

Might charging be extended to these other car parks as well.

 

Your thoughts and comments are encouraged.

Please reply to committee@ottershawsociety.org

Thank You

 Posted by at 8:58 am

  18 Responses to “Murray Road Car Park – We need your views!”

  1. Long term parking charges could work. Over 3 hours sounds reasonable.

    Or make it fully chargeable…but if you use the local community facilities such as shops or the hall and spend over a certain amount, you could get a free parking exit ticket. That way ensuring a benefit for local businesses.

  2. It does depend on the users. If it is a lot of St Peters commuters then unless you charge the same high fees they are still going to park there to save money. All you will do is raise money for the council.

    The car park should be for the benefit and use of the community so if people park there who work in say Brox Road for example then I don’t see a problem with that, that is what the car park is for.

    If you then charge you will end up with these people parking for free along Brox Road, and that is busy enough all the way down to Travis Perkins as it is.

    A free period of 3 hours may deter St Peters employees if that is a max stay and doesn’t allow a days usage but hospital visitors would still use it.

    I think a ticket machine offering free tickets for 2-3hours (to prove when you arrived) and some parking permits of a low nominal annual charge which can be applied for if you have a business address in half a mile to allow all-day parking would be the best combination. However I fear a ticket machine issuing free tickets/permits to park isn’t going to be supported cost wise by the parking permit charges. I also wonder if there are any parking wardens in the area to monitor or enforce any scheme.

    At the end of the day if the car park is getting full, we simply need more provision. I don’t believe its green belt that side of the road so could the car park be extended?

  3. For Information:-
    It is Green Belt all along the north (Chertsey) side of Murray Road from the Otter roundabout to the beginning of Addlestone.

  4. Three hours free then charge more than hospital. The problem would be policing it unless barriers and pay machines were installed. Very expensive!

  5. If I worked at Trident or the hospital and I lost parking at Murray Road I would park park in Chaworth Road or Christchurch car park.

  6. Before even considering such drastic action we should not just rely on hearsay but have a proper understanding of the car park utilisation rates and how many spaces are taken by regular long stay parkers.

    Voting for car park charges will not increase the attractiveness of Ottershaw Village Hall or the local shops. Even a having a fee free period will be the thin end of the wedge as it will set the precedent that parking fees are acceptable and quite possibly the fee free element will be slowly eroded until all motorists will be required to pay. Fees may also be introduced at other car parks such as the Memorial Fields and Timber Hill before we know it.

    Introducing charges may simply force long stay parkers on to local roads, potentially creating a more dangerous environment for pedestrians and vulnerable road users such as cyclists but leaving us with a beautifully presented half empty car park.

    I live on Guildford Road so visitor parking at my house is limited to a few cars and guests often use the free Murray Road car park. Currently the maximum permitted stay at Murray Road is 17 hours so it is also perfect for overnight visitors. If fees are introduced then in the future my friends and family will have to pay or park in neighboring side roads – Welcome to Ottershaw….

  7. Well said Rik – this has opened up a ‘can of worms’ which will probably result in a great deal of inconvenience for many Ottershaw residents not to mention local working people who might see yet another dent in their incomes. When the residents of Chaworth Road complained about people parking outside their houses the local authority put in double yellow line parking restrictions !

    • I agree with this comment I personally believe the car park should remain free to all. Introducing charges will just create further problems and I for one am rather proud that we have retained free parking in our little village. As Rik says charges will just encourage more dangerous road parking.

  8. At the Chobham village car park you take a ticket from the machine and are allowed 2 free hours parking. You pay for any further time. Perhaps enquiries could be made through the council as to how the scheme was set up, what consultations took place and how it is generally working.

  9. I seems that any option is potentially fraught with unknown consequences as others have noted, and on that point alone I would suggest the status quo, leave this car park alone as is, to avoid unforeseen consequences of car park charging in the Ottershaw area , namely at Timber Hill (Church car park) and the Memorial Fields (recreation grounds) car park Reg Taylot

  10. As a resident of Chaworth Road I think that if the Murray Rd car park is no longer free there, will be many cars that will simply park in this road. This road is already the parking area used by the residents of Guidlford Road and the tradespeople visiting their houses. We also get cars parked here from people visiting the garages and at the times, even Christ Church. Some of this traffic would have to park somewhere else.I think that imposing charges for parking at Murray Road would be a disservice for the residents of the Village

  11. I think the proposal of a free period, probably a bit longer, perhaps 5 hours, which if exceeded would be followed by parking charges for the whole period at a level to deter St Peters Hospital staff exploiting the current free car parking to the extent it is now used, would be best. I feel sorry for the situation of the Hospital workers but currently all car parking at the Murray Road car park is full for most of the day weekdays to the detriment of villagers.
    As previous contributors have stated, various combinations of schemes and different initial periods of free parking time appear to be used successfully elsewhere.

  12. Further to my input at 11. above and for clarification with respect to invited opinion, as at – ” So what do you think ? ” ,

    I think there should be ” variable charges applied i.e. So much time free ? ”

    However the determination and control of the period of time free and variable charges would be in the hands of our local borough council and they will no doubt be empowered to vary terms and conditions beyond that which may have been initially agreed, so it needs a lot of consideration and deep thought, so that they don’t exploit everyone.

  13. I believe that the current Murray Road free car park should be left as it is. Any charges for parking will encourage more long term parking of vehicles in Brox Road.
    Brox Road at the Village Hall end is congested enough.
    Perhaps Runnymede B. C. can be encouraged to enlarge the present parking area by extending it into the rubbish area that surrounds it.

    • RE message no 11 from Brian Young,
      According to Hannah Lane message no 3, the land into which you suggest a car park extension might be made, is green belt, and may therefore it may be difficult to achieve in the short term at least. Reg Taylor

  14. Clearly a solution does need to be found to the need for short-term parking. My main concern, however, is what is going to happen to the (?30 plus) cars that are currently parking all day in the car park if restrictions mean they are no longer able to park there?

Leave a Reply to LB Cancel reply

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