Issue - meetings

a)            Notice invoking the Call-in;

b)            Minutes of the Portfolio Holder Decision Meeting held on 19 August 2020;

c)            Report submitted to the Portfolio Holder Decision Meeting held on 19 August 2020.

The report considered by the Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel is attached.

Members present were permitted to speak about the recommendations from Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel (TARSAP).  The Portfolio Holder – Environment made representations about the importance of maintaining schemes to support the health of residents. 

The Deputy Leader was of the view that three of the recommendations required amendment and shared a version of his proposed amendments with those present in the meeting.  The Deputy Leader proposed amendments to:

·                     recommendation 2 in response to the Portfolio Holder’s views on the importance of maintaining a larger pedestrian space in specific areas to allow social distancing; 

·                     recommendation 3 to remove LTN-02 from the approved schemes and to require further consultation on this scheme, delegating authority to the Corporate Director, following consultation with the Portfolio Holder, to determine whether the scheme should continue; 

·                     recommendation 6 in relation to George V cycle scheme to not take forward the proposed scheme and require further consultation on any future scheme. 

In addition, the Deputy Leader proposed an additional recommendation 10 requiring a review of the procedure for schemes to be presented to TARSAP. 

Members present at the meeting were permitted to make representations about the proposed amendments.

Having regard of procedure rule 3 of the Appendix to the Executive Procedure Rules to the Harrow Council Constitution, in that an urgent key decision was being taken by the Deputy Leader in the absence of the Leader, following consultation with the relevant Portfolio Holder, it was

RESOLVED:  That

(1)          the impact of the health crisis on travel and public transport due to social distancing requirements and the measures proposed by the Government and the Mayor of London to address the crisis be noted;

(2)          the pedestrian space schemes implemented, as shown in the revised Appendix A, table 1, be noted, and be prioritised for a review as set out in recommendation 8, such review to be conducted by 15 September 2020 following further footfall survey results;

(3)          the low traffic neighbourhood schemes shown in the revised Appendix A, table 2, for implementation on an experimental basis by the end of September 2020:

(a)          be approved, with the exception of the following:

LTN-02 – Pinner View area, Headstone South

LTN-05 – Green Lane area, Stanmore

LTN-07 – Byron Road area, Wealdstone

LTN-08 – Dennis Lane area, Stanmore

LTN-09 – Princes Drive area, Stanmore

(b)          that the Low Traffic Neighbourhood Scheme – LTN-02, Pinner View area, Headstone South be subject to consultation with ward councillors, TARSAP members and local residents and the Corporate Director of Community, following consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Environment, be delegated authority to determine whether the scheme should be implemented;

(4)          the school streets schemes, as shown in the revised Appendix A, table 3, for  implementation on an experimental basis by the end of September 2020, be approved;

(5)          the cycling schemes – SC-01, SC-03 and SC-09 – implemented as shown in the revised Appendix A, table 4, be noted;

(6)          for the George V Avenue (Hatch End) cycle scheme, SC-10:

(a)          the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48

Report of the Corporate Director of Community.

Prior to the consideration of the report of the Corporate Director of Community, the Panel heard from the five deputees present at the meeting (Minute 78 also refers), full details of which were available by following the link at Minute 78 and listening to the audio recording.

In summary, the deputees urged the Panel to reject the schemes that they were speaking on and that they were vehemently opposed to proposals because of the adverse impact they would have on their communities.  Their submissions are also set out at Appendix 1 to these minutes.

The deputees responded to questions from Members of the Panel and stated that:

-               the proposed schemes for Dennis Lane and Green Lane areas were counter productive and would not increase the use of public transport or walking;

-               the pedestrian barriers in the Honeypot Lane area had not encouraged people to walk to their local shops and there was evidence that the foot fall had dropped considerably which was crippling businesses in the area.  The situation had been exacerbated by the lack of parking, including the provision of parking for people with disabilities;

-               the proposals for the Pinner View area (Scheme LTN-02 at revised Appendix A to the report referred) would lead to traffic congestion in the surrounding roads.  A Member cited the proposals previously rejected by the Panel for the Goodwill to All junction and asked officers how the two proposals were related.  An officer responded that there were plans to consult on the Goodwill to All junction which had had to be delayed due to Covid-19.  Another Panel Member stated that in light of the officer response it was best that both the schemes were held in abeyance and was of the view that the response given appeared to give an impression of silo working mentality;

-               the School Streets Grimsdyke Primary School Scheme SS-01 was poor and would increase traffic flows and congestion and did not interact with other schemes in the area.  The consultation was poor and a 20mph zone was required in Hillview if the scheme were to proceed.  An officer replied that funding was only available for SS-01 but that he would ascertain if a 20mph could be incorporated but he was not certain that the parking issue (Grimsdyke Road) could be resolved.  

The Chair thanked the deputees for their presentations.

Prior to the consideration of the report of the Corporate Director of Community, the Panel also heard from a number of back-benching Members who, in brief, were opposed to the implementation of a number of schemes, as follows:

-               Green Lane/Dennis Lane – the proposals were unrealistic and partial closures would impact on the surrounding area and would result in traffic gridlocks.  Both Green Lane and Dennis Lane had steep gradients and would not encourage cycling.  The problems would be exacerbated when children returned to schools in September 2020.   The existing width restriction at Dennis Lane would need to be removed and were the proposed scheme  ...  view the full minutes text for item 80