Bramley Moore Dock Football Match Parking Zone

We asked

We carried out engagement to hear from the public, businesses and residents and commuters to obtain their views on proposals that will affect an area within a 30-minute walk of the proposed new Everton stadium at Bramley Moore Dock and the operation of extending the current Football Match Parking Zone.

The proposals included:

• New resident parking areas
• New taxi ranks
• New match day bus stands
• New parking restrictions
• New hours of operation for existing parking zones for Great Homer Street area
• New hours of operation for existing parking zones for the Ten Streets and Love Lane areas
• New industrial parking zone south of Boundary Street
• New industrial parking zone north of Boundary Street

The proposals are aimed at reducing congestion, improving air quality, safety, and journey times through the modernisation of parking across the City Centre. This will support Liverpool in being a clean, modern and dynamic City, one which helps its local businesses and residents thrive.  

You said

Approximately 8,000 consultation letters were distributed in the proposed area, from the week commencing the 28/11/2022. Copies of the proposals were made available online as detailed within the consultation letters with comments or feedback to be addressed to liverpooltraffic@amey.co.uk. Three separate consultation events were also held at the below locations with each event averaging around 30 visitors with some providing feedback on questionnaires provided.

• Tuesday 6th December 2022, 10am to 6pm- Ten Street Social, 8 Regent Road, Liverpool, L3 7BX
• Tuesday 13th December 2022, 10am to 6pm – Kirkdale Neighbourhood Community Centre, 238A Stanley Road, Liverpool L5 7QP
• Thursday 15th December 2022, 10am to 6pm – Vauxhall Neighbourhood Council, Blenheim Street, Liverpool, L5 8UX.

The closing date for all responses was 19th December 2022.

191 responses to the Bramley Moore Dock Football Match Parking Zone questionnaire were returned, these were mostly online questionnaires with three being physical questionnaires filled out at the events. This is a response rate of 2.39% (8000 letters issued).

The questionnaire contained eleven questions, which allowed participants to provide their feedback on specific elements of the proposals.

The first question asked respondents to indicate their street name.

In total 96 separate street names were provided, with these street names being a near enough even split between those within the consultation area, and those outside. This represented views from those within the area and those travelling to the area for various purposes. In total, 47 number of these streets were within the area with 49 being from outside the area.

Overall, in response to the question (Q2) “Are you in favour of the proposed Residents Permit Parking Areas?”, 58.12% of respondents were in favour whilst 38.74% were opposed to the proposals.

In response to the question (Q3) “Are you in favour of the proposed match day Taxi ranks on Dublin Street& Sandhills Lane?”, 80.63% of respondents were in favour of the proposal, whilst 16.75% were opposed.

Responding to the question (Q4) “Are you in favour of the proposed match day bus stands on Regent Road, Sandhills Lane, Bankfield Street & Bankhall Lane?”, 82.72% were supportive of the measures, whilst 14.66% were opposed.

In relation to the question (Q5) “Are you in favour of the proposed parking restrictions in the Paul Street Area, operating from 11am to noon & 7pm to 9pm Monday to Friday & 10am to Midnight Saturday & Sunday?”, 52.88% were in favour whilst 41.88% were opposed.

Responding to the question (Q6) “Are you in favour of the existing parking restrictions in the area south of Boundary Street being amended to operate from 10am to midnight all year round?”, 48.17% were in favour whilst 47.64% were against.

In response to the question (Q7) “Are you in favour of the existing single yellow lines in the area north of Boundary Street being amended to operate from 10am to midnight 1st August to 30th June?”, 53.93% were supportive of the proposals whilst 42.41% were opposed.

In relation to the question (Q8) “Are you in favour of the proposed new hours of operation for parking restrictions for the Great Homer Street area (8am to midnight all year round)?”, 51.31% were in favour whilst 44.5% were opposed.

Responding to the question (Q9) “Are you in favour of the proposed new hours for the Ten Streets & Love Lane areas (10am to midnight all year round, with 1 hour limited waiting for non-permit holders)?”, 50.79% were in favour of the proposals whilst 45.03% of respondents were opposed.

In response to the question (Q10) “Are you in favour of the proposed new Industrial Permit Parking Areas south of Boundary Street (operating from 10am to midnight all year round, with 1 hour limited waiting for non-permit holders)? “, 53.4% were in favour whilst 42.93% were against the proposals.

Finally, in response to the question (Q11) “Are you in favour of the proposed new Industrial Permit Parking Areas north of Boundary Street (operating from 10am to midnight 1st August to 30th June, with 1 hour limited waiting for non-permit holders)?”, 51.83% of respondents were in favour whilst 45.03% were opposed.

It has been noted that members of one establishment based on Grundy Street responded to the questionnaire on 32 occasions, these responses tended to provide negative responses for proposals not only in the area around Grundy Street but in other locations also. This had an impact on the percentages of those opposed, and as such had a significant impact upon the statistical results of the questions listed above. Each question which lay outside this location was assessed both with and without these responses and were reviewed within each statistical breakdown to show the impact.

In addition to responding the questions asked, respondents were invited to make comments on the proposals. Positive and negative comments were received, with the overall majority of these being negative.

The majority of respondents were in favour of the residential permit parking zones. Given the expected increase in traffic that may visit the area, analysing the data showed that residents were in agreeance with the proposals and the measures taken to ensure their street is protected from match/event day parking.

There were a noticeable number of respondents who did not agree with the proposals at around 39%. Analysing the responses which selected no to this particular question, many of these responses seemed to tie in with industrial permit parking. After reading the comments that had been left, this may be an issue that respondents have conflated the proposals and not distinguished between residential permit parking and business permit parking, leading to an increase in the number of respondents who selected no. This is a visible and noticeable factor between questions 5 to 11. From reading the associated comments, members of the Aintree Pistol club based on Grundy Street who responded to the questionnaire 32 times, tended to vote negatively on measures that were outside their area.

The introduction of taxi ranks and bus stands at the locations detailed in the questionnaire, were widely supported with minimal opposition to the proposals. The taxi ranks would provide an easy and accessible mode of transport for attendees to travel to and from the stadium without the need for taxi drivers to drive around the area to look for fares adding to congestion in the area.

Assessing the other proposals, with and without the responses from outside the area. The support for the measures increases without, however respondents do have concerns from feedback comments relating to operating hours, enforcement days, and policing on event days.

We did

The feedback comments highlighted the issues which the industrial/business permits could possibly create for those within the area, the points of price, and the number of permits per property have caused some concern for those the scheme impacts. It should be communicated to those impacted that individual assessments of permit numbers could be carried out to assess the road space available and the requirement for number of permits. This will ensure that the scheme does not become oversaturated with permits and those who are paying for them are able to use them.

The matter of cost, which is also a big issue for those businesses, needs to also be assessed to see if this can be addressed.

Following on from the review set out above, it is the intention to formally advertise the scheme over a 28-day statutory notification period so that the scheme can be implemented prior to the stadium being completed and to become operational.