To receive a verbal report from Lorna Day, Kent Parking and Enforcement Manager, KCC Highways.
Minutes:
Lorna Day, Kent Parking and Enforcement Manager, Kent Highways and Transportation, attended the meeting in order to clarify the criteria used to determine disabled parking bay applications.
Ms Day advised that, following amendments to the Disability Discrimination Act in 2009, KCC had issued guidance to local authorities on disabled parking bay applications based on legal advice that it had received. This guidance stated that applicants were required to be a Blue Badge holder, in receipt of the Higher Rate Mobility component of Disability Living Allowance (or the Higher Rate of Attendance Allowance if over 65 years old) and were permitted to be the driver or passenger. However, practice varied across the Kent authorities. Whilst some authorities accepted applications from non-drivers provided the address of the applicant and driver were the same and the car was registered to that address, some only accepted applications where there were mitigating circumstances, for example where a child or adult could not be left unattended while the driver parked the car. The key point to consider when determining non-driver applications - where there were no mitigating circumstances - was whether traffic congestion would be caused by a driver double-parking a vehicle in order to allow a disabled passenger to disembark. Applications should be refused if traffic congestion would not be caused. Ms Day added that, since 2009, authorities had been unable to refuse applicants on medical grounds.
It was confirmed that Dover District Council’s disabled parking bay application form had recently been amended to make it clear that applicants did not have to be the driver. Once received, non-driver applications were assessed by the Corporate Estate and Coastal Engineer (CECE) to check whether the applicant met the criteria and, assuming there were no mitigating circumstances, to consider whether their road would become congested by double parking. If, following a site visit, it was determined that traffic flow would not be impeded by double parking, the application would be refused. Applicants had the right of appeal and appeals went to KCC for determination.
Ms Day clarified that the 5% limit on parking bays was a guideline issued by the Department for Transport, with a 3% limit applying to car parks. Local car parks were not taken into account when assessing the 5% limit. In addition, it was confirmed that parking bays were not provided for the sole use of the applicant but rather for any Blue Badge holder.
Councillor P M Brivio expressed concern that some people were having to wait several months to have their disability allowance applications processed and were therefore being refused a parking bay because they did not meet the criteria. Councillor P M Wallace raised concerns over the fact that, unlike Dover, Canterbury City and Shepway District Councils accepted applications from non-drivers. A clearer system was needed at Dover as the current one was confusing to applicants and Members alike, partly because of the mitigating circumstances rule.
Ms Day advised that applicants could be asked to obtain a letter of confirmation from the Department for Work and Pensions so that their parking bay application could be processed, notwithstanding that they were not yet in receipt of the allowance. In response to Councillor T A Bond who raised concerns about traffic congestion, Ms Day and the CECE emphasised that applications were assessed individually and were seldom black and white. For example, an applicant using a wheelchair was likely to be assessed differently to one who was an asthmatic because of the length of time it would take them to disembark from a car.
Councillor N J Collor referred to the length of time taken to process parking bay applications and explained that this was due to there being subject to consultation and other procedures. Given that the Dover Joint Transportation Board met only five times a year, he queried whether appeals could be considered between meetings. Ms Day confirmed that she would accept appeals for independent review if they had missed a Board meeting, and also from applicants who did not meet the criteria.
RESOLVED: That the verbal report be noted.