Agenda and minutes

The audio recording of this meeting can be found at the following link:

http://www.harrow.gov.uk/www2/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=260&MId=64457&Ver=4

RESOLVED:  To note the attendance at this meeting of the following duly appointed Reserve Members:-

RESOLVED:  To note that the following interests were declared:

All Agenda Items

Councillor Sarah Butterworth declared a Non Pecuniary interest in that she was Ward Councillor for Harrow on the Hill.  She would remain in the room the room whilst the matters were considered and voted upon.

Councillor Christopher Baxter declared a non-pecuniary interest in that he was a Ward Councillor for Headstone North, the neighbouring Ward to Headstone South.

Councillor Simon Brown declared a Non Pecuniary interest in that he was Ward Councillor for Harrow on the Hill.  He would remain in the room the room whilst the matters were considered and voted upon.

Councillor James Lee declared a Non Pecuniary interest in that he was Ward Councillor for Edgware and lived in Canons Park.  He would remain in the room the room whilst the matters were considered and voted upon.

Councillor Jerry Miles declared a Non Pecuniary interest in that he was Ward Councillor for Roxeth.  He would remain in the room the room whilst the matters were considered and voted upon.

Agenda Item 10 - Parking Management Schemes programme 2019 / 20

CouncillorAmeet Jogia declared a Pecuniary interest in that he owned a property on White House Drive.  He would leave the room the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

RESOLVED:  That in accordance with Executive Procedure Rule 38.1, the following Councillor, who was not a Member of the Panel be allowed to speak on the agenda item indicated:

Councillor Philip O’Dell – Agenda item 11:  Any Other Urgent Business

That the minutes of the meeting held on 31 October 2018 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 31 October 2018 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

To receive any public questions received in accordance with Executive Procedure Rule 49 (Part 4D of the Constitution).

Questions will be asked in the order in which they were received.  There will be a time limit of 15 minutes for the asking and answering of public questions.

[The deadline for receipt of public questions if 3.00 pm, 21 February 2019.  Questions should be sent to publicquestions@harrow.gov.uk

No person may submit more than one question].

To note that two public questions had been received and responded to.

To receive petitions (if any) submitted by members of the public/Councillors under the provisions of Executive Procedure Rule 47 (Part 4D of the Constitution).

A Petition containing 83 signatures to be presented by Councillor Ameet Jogia on behalf of residents of Whitchurch Gardens objecting to the proposed double yellow lines in Whitchurch Gardens, Whitchurch Close, Woodstead Grove.

RESOLVED:  To note the receipt of the following petitions which were referred to the Corporate Director of Community for consideration:

1.            Petition from residents of Warwick Avenue, Harrow, requesting improvements to the road and paving, containing 88 signatures.

2.            Petition from residents of Wildcroft Gardens, Edgware, requesting the implementation of a controlled parking zone, containing 13 signatures.

3.            Petition from residents of Whitchurch Gardens, objecting to the double yellow lines on Whitchurch Gardens, Whitchurch Close, and Woodstead Gove, containing  90 signatures.

RESOLVED:  That procedure rule 48 relating to Deputations be suspended to allow the Panel to receive a late Deputation.

To receive deputations (if any) under the provisions of Executive Procedure Rule 48 (Part 4D of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  That, in accordance with Executive Procedure Rule 16 (Part 4B of the Constitution), the following deputations be received:

1.            A deputation requesting modifications to the proposed Controlled Parking Zone in Harrow on the Hill, in order to encourage retail and restaurant use and hence strengthen the economic vitality of the Hill;

2.            A deputation to inform the Panel of residents concerns and issues relating to the current Controlled Parking Zone in Harrow on the Hill.

Report of the Corporate Director, Community.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director, Community, which set out a range of proposed programme options for the Panel’s consideration to be funded by the £100k Local Transport Fund LIP allocation in 2019/20.

The Chair advised that his preference would be to allocate £75k towards funding three of the four 20 mph zones identified in option A - Vision Zero and allocate £25k towards a report to investigate the feasibility of a low traffic neighbourhood as identified in Option C, Appendix C Walking and Cycling.

An adviser to the Panel requested that the Option B - Bus Priority & option C – Walking & Cycling be prioritised for funding.

An adviser stated that funding the walking and cycling options would address a number of urgent issues, namely air pollution, noise pollution, climate change, childhood obesity, diabetes, etc. He alluded to the success of the Waltham Forest mini Hollands scheme and stated that the Mayor of London’s cycling fund had been significantly underspent. He requested officers to bid for further monies from this fund with a view to improving and enhancing the walking and cycling network in the borough.

Officers had been promoting modal shift in the borough and had noticed an increase in walking, cycling and the use of public transport in recent years. The Council’s new 5-year cycle strategy was in the process of being updated. Traffic officers would seek input from the Panel’s cycling adviser in formulating the strategy;

Members voted on the chair’s recommendation that £75k be allocated to a part of option A – Vision Zero and for £25k to be allocated towards a feasibility study into a low traffic neighbourhood as detailed in Option C - Walking and Cycling. This amendment was  approved by a majority of the Panel. It was further agreed that the chair would work with the officers in consultation with the Portfolio Holder to prioritise which of the three 20 mph zones detailed in option A would be taken forward.

Councillors Simon Brown, Sarah Butterworth and Jerry Miles voted for  this option.  Councillors Christopher Baxter, John Hinkley and Ameet Jogia voted against this option.  The Chair used his casting vote.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (to the Portfolio Holder for Environment)

That the following programme to be taken forward in 2019/20:

Option A – Vision Zero that £75k be allocated towards the delivery of three of the four 20 mph zones schemes identified in the report. Officers to work with the chair of TARSAP and the Portfolio Holder to prioritise the list of 20 mph zones as detailed in the report to utilise the revised budget.

Option C - Walking and Cycling – that £25k be allocated towards a feasibility study into a low traffic neighbourhood as detailed in Appendix C as detailed in the report.

Report of the Corporate Director, Community.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director, Community, which set out information about the identification, prioritisation, development and implementation of parking management schemes in Harrow.  It also set out information about requests for parking schemes received by the Council and recommended a programme of work for 2019 /20. 

Officers responded to Members questions as follows:

·                     the schemes included in the proposed programme for 2019/20 were assessed and were given a score rating, the top eight of these had been prioritised for possible funding in 2019/20 in accordance with TARSAP’s agreed process.  The proposed schemes had not been ranked in order of when the schemes would be taken forward during 2019/20 and that would be determined once TARSAP had considered the recommendation and approved a programme.  It was clarified that there was no waiting list of schemes and additional schemes would not be added to the work programme later in the financial year because all available funds would already have been allocated;

·                     the operational hours of a scheme were an important part of the design process. Due to the large number of existing CPZs with very short operational hours, typically 1-2 hours, problems have now been encountered with enforcement.  As a consequence for future schemes developed residents will be advised that a minimum period of a 4-hour parking restriction will be required in order to enable effective enforcement of CPZ schemes;

·                     currently, the Council was required to undertake statutory consultation when introducing or amending parking restrictions and as a consequence of typically strong public opinion the implementation of parking controls in the borough was mainly a customer-driven process.  It was important to acknowledge the fact that the introduction of parking controls in one area often led to displaced parking in neighbouring areas and that this was an unavoidable consequence of this type of work;

·                     response rates to consultations was typically low.  Harrow had undertaken a survey with other local authorities which had revealed that the response rate in inner London boroughs varied between 5%?25% and in outer London boroughs it tended to be approximately 10%.  In cases where the response rate was significantly low, the matter would be referred to Members;

·                     parking controls, once implemented, could not easily be reversed.  It would be more cost effective and politic to use available funds to implement schemes that were required rather than spend money on removing existing schemes.

·                     incentivising low emission vehicles through lower parking charges was suggested, it was advised that the Council was already trialling electric vehicle charging points in Greenhill, and motorists would be entitled to free parking while they charged up their vehicles.

A Member back benching suggested that it would be sensible to undertake works on Whitefriars, Graham Road and Handel at the same time.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (to the Portfolio Holder for Environment)

That:

(1)          the list of parking management schemes for 2019 /20 is as shown in Appendix B, subject to confirmation of the capital funding allocation for 2019/20 at Cabinet,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

Report of the Corporate Director, Community.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director, Community, which set out details of the petitions that had been received since the last meeting of the Panel and provided details of the Council’s investigations and findings where these had been undertaken.

It was explained that most of the petitions related to requests for parking controls which were addressed in the Parking Management Schemes programme 2019 / 20 report on the agenda.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Report of the Corporate Director, Community.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director, Community, which set out an update on progress with the 2018 /19 traffic and parking management programme of works.

An officer advised that the scheme for Alexandra Avenue had been amended.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

RESOLVED:  That In accordance with the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, the following item was included late on the agenda for the reason set out below:

The Chair advised that a petition from residents of Byron and Warham Roads in Wealdstone, containing 49 signatures, requesting an urgent review of the Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) in Wealdstone, had been submitted to the Traffic section.  The petitioners stated that it had become increasingly difficult for local residents to park near their homes in the evenings due to displaced parking.  The petition was supported by Wealdstone Councillors.

Councillor Philip O’Dell stated that, in his view, residents in neighbouring streets to the new zone J CPZ and Wealdstone Councillors should have been consulted as part of the overall consultation for the zone J CPZ.  He added that both he and local residents had hoped that the petition could have been investigated and the petitioners request included in the 2019/20 annual parking management programme.  However, this had not been possible. He requested that officers investigate the terms of the petition as a matter of urgency, with a view to referring the matter to the Portfolio Holder for Environment. He added that any necessary works required to resolve the situation could  be funded from CIL (Community Infrastructure Levy) monies.

An officer undertook to look into the terms of the petition and carry out an assessment. He added that officers would discuss their findings with the Chair of the Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel and the Portfolio Holder for Environment.  If the matter was deemed to be a priority, then it may be possible to fund it from CIL monies.