Agenda and minutes

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

https://www2.harrow.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=260&MId=64657&Ver=4.

RESOLVED:  To note that there were no Reserve Members in attendance.

RESOLVED:  To note that the following interests were declared:

All/Relevant Agenda Items

Councillor Christopher Baxter declared a non-pecuniary interest on agenda item 8 in that he was a Ward Councillor for Headstone North.  He would remain in the room whilst the item was considered and voted upon.

Councillor John Hinkley declared a non-pecuniary interest in that he was Ward Councillor for Hatch End.  He would remain in the room whilst the matters were considered and voted upon.

During consideration of agenda item 7 and upon his arrival to the meeting, Councillor Ameet Jogia declared an interest on agenda item 7, in that he had recently moved to Winscombe Way.  He would remain in the room whilst the item was 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 whilst the matters were considered and voted upon.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 23 October 2019 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 23 October 2019 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, Friday 31 January 2020.  Questions should be sent to publicquestions@harrow.gov.uk

No person may submit more than one question].

To note that one late public question had been received and accepted by the Panel.  The Chair responded to the question, including the supplemental question.

The audio recording of the public question and answer can be found at the following link:

https://www2.harrow.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=260&MId=64657&Ver=4

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).

RESOLVED:  To note the receipt of the following petition which was referred to the Corporate Director of Community:

Petition for Controlled Pedestrian Crossing in North Harrow

Councillor Sasikala Suresh presented a petition with the following terms of reference:  “I support the proposal for a controlled pedestrian crossing on the north side of Station Road, North Harrow.” 

She added that this petition contained additional signatures to that which had previously been submitted and was referenced at agenda item 7, Petition 8 referred, and that the full petition now contained a total of 177 signatures.

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 48, the following deputation be received:

Controlled Zone – Wildcroft Gardens and Wychwood Avenue led by Nehul Shah

“The reason for the Deputation was the constant frustration the residents were facing due to bottlenecks in the morning.  Commuters were causing tremendous congestion and we were unable to get out of our driveways without the risk of damaging other people’s cars or crashing into people and passing cars due to blindspots it was creating.”

It was noted that local residents had supported the implementation of the CPZ in the area.

It was also advised that the CPZ for the area would be considered under the Panel’s work programme.

Full details in relation to the deputation, including questions asked and answers given, were set out in the audio recording referenced in brief, at Minute 6.  The audio recording of this item/minute can be found by following the link below:

https://www2.harrow.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=260&MId=64657&Ver=4

Report of the Corporate Director of Community.

Prior to the consideration of the report, the Panel heard from the deputees present at the meeting (Minute 69 also refers). Nehul Shah spoke on behalf of other deputees, full details of which were available by following the link at Minute 69.

In brief, the deputees urged the Panel to create a controlled parking zone (CPZ) in their area.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director of Community, which provided details of the Parking Management Programme 2020/2021.

The Chair referred to the revised Appendix 3, set out in the supplemental agenda for which the grounds of urgency were accepted by the Panel.  An officer reported that the proposed programme had prioritised six schemes for 2020/21.

Panel Members asked questions and made the following comments:

-               The Ridgeway petition area had been selected within the parking programme for a parking scheme and the petitioner’s concerns would be addressed by taking forward a CPZ.

-               The Wychwood Avenue deputation was not selected within the parking programme, and would, therefore, need to be considered again in the future.  An officer indicated that the dangerous junction mentioned by the deputees in the area could be addressed within the local safety parking programme separately as a minor intervention, and it was agreed to look at this.

-               With the anticipated Regeneration Programme in the borough that would result in massive developments, it would be prudent to ensure that more funding was available to meet the increased demand for parking.  An officer responded that areas ear-marked for regeneration would be prioritised within the parking programme to address problems from the anticipated increase in parking demand.  Funding could also be secured from TfL (liveable neighbourhood), as well as using section 106 monies from the Kodak development.

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

That

(1)          the list of parking management schemes for 2020/21, as shown in Appendix B to the report, be subject to confirmation of the capital funding allocation for 2020/21 at Cabinet;

(2)          officers be authorised to carry out scheme design and consultation on the parking management schemes listed in Appendix B to the report and the plans detailed in Appendix E;

(3)          officers be authorised to implement the parking management schemes listed in Appendix B, subject to further reports being provided on the outcomes of public and statutory consultation, and receiving approval of the Portfolio Holder to proceed; and

(4)          any substantive new requests be received to undertake a controlled parking scheme or review those not included within the agreed programme, or priority list in Appendices B and C to the report, be referred to the Panel for consideration.

Reason (for Recommendation):  To approve the proposed Parking Management Schemes Programme for the 2020/21 financial year.

Report of the Corporate Director of Community.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director of Community, regarding the Transport for London (TfL) Local Transport Fund Schemes Programme 2020/2021.

The Panel considered a range of options to take forward a programme of local transport initiatives using the TfL Local Transport funding allocation in 2020/2021.

The Chair proposed that the following schemes be considered for funding:

1.            Vision Zero – 20 mph zone, Westfield Drive / Westfield Gardens, Kenton, estimated at £25,000;

2.            Bus Priority – Roxeth Hill / Lower Road / Shaftesbury Avenue, to carry out a review of signalised junction layout and timings to improve bus movement, estimated at £25,000; and

3.            Walking and cycling – additional funds to provide local cycle facilities to connect the TfL cycleway along Station Road to the Kenmore Avenue underpass, via Elmgrove Road, estimated at £50,000.

The proposal was seconded and agreed upon.

Furthermore, another Member proposed for funding Vision Zero – ad hoc localised safety measures, such as road warning signing and lining to address personal injury accident (PIA) sites, be considered for separate funding to be identified by officers, using money from TfL and/or the Council.  This was estimated at £5,000.  The proposal was seconded, and agreed upon.

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

That the schemes set out in the preamble to the minute to be taken forward in 2020/2021 as the preferred programme.

Reason:  To allow a programme of Local Transport Fund schemes to be taken forward in the 2020/2021 financial year.

Report of the Corporate Director of Community.

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

An officer introduced the report and explained the outcomes relating to each petition.

A Member of the Panel commented that:

-               Petition 1, “Malpas Drive – Request for speed reduction measures”, would not meet the criteria set out in the petition; and

-               Petition 2, “Salt Bar/Roxeth Hill – Request for green man phase”, would require more improvements, such as a third lane. 

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

Report of the Corporate Director of Community.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director of Community regarding the background to a town centre improvement scheme for Wealdstone.  This gave details of the rationale for the investment, the collaboration undertaken with Transport for London (TfL), the benefits for public transport and the local economy, as well as the proposed consultation, and the delivery programme.

An officer provided points of clarification.  The scheme was a small part of a wider vision for Wealdstone set out in the Council’s liveable neighbourhood bid submitted in November 2019.  The scheme would improve bus services to the whole town centre and also refurbish the High Street area of Wealdstone.  The consultation would be held until 21 February 2020, and the scheme was scheduled to be implemented in the 2020/21 financial year.

An Adviser was concerned that there was no cycling provision in the scheme.  Cycle routes needed to be part of the design.

The officer advised that the design had taken a “healthy streets view” of the scheme in conjunction with TfL which would integrate cycling infrastructure.  The current design would future proof the scheme for proposed future cycle routes in Wealdstone.

Another Panel member inquired what scope was available to consider public recommendations during the consultation.

The officer advised that the core business case accepted by TfL to improve journey times and make key changes to the network, such as traffic signals, could not be changed as this would affect the business case viability.  However, other aspects of design could be influenced, such as the choice of materials and use of public space outside the station, with possible variations made.

Another Panel member asked if TfL’s business case on journey time improvement conflicted with improving parking facilities to support local businesses and whether it would be reconsidered.

The officer explained that there was likely to be some loss of parking spaces in the High Street.  This would result in improved bus services and a better experience for pedestrians and that, where possible, parking had been re-provisioned elsewhere within the scheme.  In addition, the current proposals were supported by the Wealdstone Traders’ Association.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Report of the Corporate Director of Community.

The Panel received an update from the Corporate Director of Community on the progress on the works of the Traffic and Parking Management Programme 2020/2021.

A Panel member expressed disquiet regarding the proposed banned right turn from William Carey Way into College Road as set out on paragraph 2.56 of the report, as all traffic would turn left.  This would congest the lane going towards Harrow Bus Station, and, thus, adversely affect the bus network.

An officer advised that the requirement of the scheme was for the left turn only to be introduced.  However, it was not expected to severely impact on bus services as traffic exiting from the development would be very light.

Another Panel member was concerned that electric charging points would be retrofitted onto street lighting columns to serve residents that did not have off-street parking.  An officer explained that electric charging points were ideally located separately in designated areas, such as in the recently implemented Harrow Town Centre scheme.

The officer advised that work was due to start before the end of the year (2020), where some the concerns on electric charging points would be addressed.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.