Council services by letter

Agenda and minutes

||

Venue: Virtual Meeting - Online. View directions

Contact: Andrew Seaman, Senior Democratic & Electoral Services Officer  E-mail:  andrew.seaman@harrow.gov.uk

Link: View the meeting online

Media

Items
No. Item

118.

Attendance by Reserve Members

To note the attendance at this meeting of any duly appointed Reserve Members.

 

Reserve Members may attend meetings:-

 

(i)            to take the place of an ordinary Member for whom they are a reserve;

(ii)          where the ordinary Member will be absent for the whole of the meeting; and

(iii)         the meeting notes at the start of the meeting at the item ‘Reserves’ that the Reserve Member is or will be attending as a reserve;

(iv)         if a Reserve Member whose intention to attend has been noted arrives after the commencement of the meeting, then that Reserve Member can only act as a Member from the start of the next item of business on the agenda after his/her arrival.

Minutes:

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

119.

Declarations of Interest pdf icon PDF 75 KB

To receive declarations of disclosable pecuniary or non pecuniary interests, arising from business to be transacted at this meeting, from:

 

(a)          all Members of the Panel;

(b)          all other Members present.

Minutes:

RESOLVED:  To note that the declaration of interests, which had been published on the Council website, be taken as read and that in the course of the meeting.

 

(1)          The Declarations of Interests published in advance of the meeting on the Council’s website were taken as read. And the following further declarations were made at the meeting for agenda item 7 - The Streetspace LTN six-month review:

 

Councillor Hinkley (non-pecuniary Interest) relating to Hatch End Ward.

 

(2)          Members and Advisers who had declared interests remained in the virtual meeting whilst the matters were considered and voted upon.

120.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 125 KB

That the minutes of the meeting held on 2 March 2021 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

Minutes:

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 2 March 2021, be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

121.

Public Questions pdf icon PDF 285 KB

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, Monday 19 April 2021.  Questions should be sent to publicquestions@harrow.gov.uk

No person may submit more than one question].

Minutes:

RESOLVED:  Public questions taken were responded to.  The Chair advised that, due to the volume of questions accepted, any supplementary questions asked would receive a written answer.

122.

Petitions

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).

Minutes:

RESOLVED:  To note that the following petitions had been received:

 

(1)          A resident presented a petition on behalf of The Croft, Pinner residents, containing 22 signatures, requesting improved road safety around that area.

 

RESOLVED:  That the petition be received and referred to the Corporate Director of Community for consideration.

123.

Deputations

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

Minutes:

RESOLVED:  That, in accordance with Executive Procedure Rules 48 the following deputations be received in respect of agenda item 7 – The Streetspace LTN six-month review.

 

1.

Title of Deputation

The road block at West Harrow Station

Reason for Deputation

[18]

Objection – based on lack of passing trade to shops, on the Harrow side of the blockage.

 

Full details in relation to the deputations, including questions asked and answers given, are referenced, in brief, at Minute 124 of these minutes.

Recommended Items

124.

The Streetspace LTN six-month review pdf icon PDF 291 KB

Report of the Corporate Director, Community

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Prior to the consideration of the report of the Corporate Director of Community, the Panel received a Deputation (Minute 123 also refers).

 

Title of Deputation 1

The road block at West Harrow Station

Reason for Deputation

Objection – based on lack of passing trade to shops, on the Harrow side of the blockage.

 

In summary, the shop had experienced revenue losses due to the pandemic and due to being located in the Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) area.  Other shops had experienced the same effects made by the roadblocks which had, in addition made deliveries challenging.  The LTN should be removed for businesses in the area to recover.  The Deputee also noted that driving in the area proved challenging when it came to day-to-day tasks.

 

The Panel thanked the Deputee for their presentation and the Chair invited questions to which the Deputee responded that a consultation prior to the changes made should have taken place.

 

The Panel received the officer report which provided details of the six-month review of the four low traffic neighbourhood schemes introduced as part of the Harrow Streetspace Programme in October 2020 and considered the future of the schemes.

 

An officer presented the report and highlighted the following:

 

·                     The scheme had been introduced by Transport for London (TfL) and the Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs) were part of this scheme.  They had been introduced on a trial basis in late 2020 and a monthly review process had been agreed to observe the progress of the trials.

 

·                     Ongoing adjustments had been made throughout the trial, including improving access for emergency vehicles.

 

·                     There had been an increase in walking but an increased difficulty with vehicle congestion and delay on surrounding main roads.

 

·                     The schemes had caused an overall negative response from the public.

 

The Panel raised a number of questions to which the officer responded to as follows:

 

·                     Comments and ideas would be considered with reference to how the schemes could be adapted.

 

·                     The budget set out had not just been for the removal of planters but also for traffic sign and road markings to be removed or replaced.  The budget had been an estimate and therefore the actual budget could fall below this.  There should not be an issue with re-using the planters; there had been a need to ensure they would be re-used appropriately and that recommendations would be listened to.

 

·                     The cost of removal had not been included in TfL’s budget allocation and so the extra cost for the removal of the LTNs had been placed onto the individual boroughs.

 

The Panel agreed that a number of Councillors, who were not members of the Panel, could address the meeting.  The issues raised included:

 

·                     The recommendations were welcomed and supported with lessons to be learnt from this when it came to future schemes being implemented.

 

·                     That there had still been a need for traffic calming measures as there were some positive outcomes from this scheme.

 

·                     Public engagement had been crucial, and that the public should be listened to.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 124.

125.

The Streetspace Cycle Lane six-month review pdf icon PDF 355 KB

Report of the Corporate Director, Community

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Panel received a report which detailed the six-month review of the three cycle lanes introduced as a part of the Harrow Streetspace Programme in October 2020 and considered the future of the schemes.

 

An officer introduced the report and highlighted the following:

 

·                     This had been funded by Government and required specifically that road space reallocation be used to facilitate these routes.

 

·                     Monthly reviews, traffic studies and opinion surveys had been undertaken. Overall, there had been negative response to the trial.

 

·                     Dual-carriageways that had been at 40mph and were now set at 30mph would need to be reinstated to 40mph, consideration of introducing a 30mph limit in these roads in the future would need to go through a consultation with the Police.

 

The Panel raised a number of questions to which the officer responded to as follows:

 

·                     A survey had been adopted following general practice and the portal had been found to be an effective way for feedback to be gathered.  The company that oversaw the portal checked for abnormal activity to mitigate the results being affected, therefore there had been confidence in the portal’s effectiveness.

 

·                     There had still been an aspiration to continue the promotion of cycling but there was a need to review the current strategy.

 

·                     At the time the scheme had been accepted, normal funding for these types of projects had no longer been available.  The pandemic had created unusual circumstances and this scheme was the best at that given time.  The bids for these government schemes did not make allowances for any fees in terms of removals.

 

·                     A breakdown of the costs involved in the removal of the Streetspace Cycle Scheme had been largely made up of the removal and replacement of road markings as well as signage.

 

The Panel agreed that a number of Councillors, who were not members of the Panel could address the meeting and the issues raised included:

 

·                     Many residents had been opposed to the Uxbridge Road cycle route and would be pleased to see the officer recommendation as it had caused congestion in the surrounding area.  This had not been a case of being anti-cycling but in favour of well executed schemes.

 

In response to the comments made, members of the Panel made the following comments:

 

·                     That although there had been good intentions with this scheme, it had been important for the residents to be listened to and for cycling schemes to be better implemented.

 

·                     There had been a need for infrastructure to be in place for residents to be encouraged.  There had also been a need for bicycle parking facilities.

 

·                     The recommendations were supported but highlighted that although this particular scheme had not materialised, a cycling strategy would still remain in place.

 

·                     From a cycling perspective, it had been noted that the lanes were kept in place with the strategies developed and a survey carried out.

 

A Member proposed an additional recommendation to review the capital spend for these issues and, following a further amendment to this additional recommendation by  ...  view the full minutes text for item 125.

126.

The Streetspace School Streets six-month review pdf icon PDF 367 KB

Report of the Corporate Director, Community

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

This report detailed the six-month review of the four school streets schemes introduced as a part of the Harrow Streetspace Programme in October 2020 and considered the future of the schemes.

 

An officer introduced the report and highlighted the following:

 

·                     This was a Transport for London (TfL)L scheme and that schools had been chosen where there were known issues surrounding the pickup and drop off times.

 

·                     The consultation process had been followed, with this scheme recommended for a trial at TARSAP in August 2020, and which had been implemented in September 2020.

 

·                     There had been monthly reviews and monitoring throughout the trial.  There had been consultation with key stakeholder which included schools.

 

·                     It had been clear that the trial had created low traffic conditions for students and parents, which had created a healthier and safer in the conditions in the school streets.  The schools had also been supportive of the schemes.

 

The Panel raised a number of questions to which the officer responded to as follows:

 

·                     the second phase was currently going through public engagement and a special meeting for June was planned.  The funding provided by TfL from last year had been carried forward but could only be used within a certain time frame.  If the deadline were to be missed, that would mean that funding would be drawn from elsewhere.

 

·                     The Panel agreed that a number of Councillors, who were not members of the Panel, could address the meeting and the issues raised included there should be time for the data to be understood and to identify why there had been negative feedback to this scheme.

 

In response, members of the Panel made the following comments:

 

·                     There was a need for a better understanding as to why there had been a negative reaction to this scheme.

 

·                     There had been a need for parking to be monitored.

 

·                     There should be a pause between gathering data and the implementation of projects in order for data to be fully assessed.

 

·                     Parking had caused issues in surrounding areas.

 

A Member proposed to an additional recommendation which was duly agreed by the Panel.

 

Another Member moved an amendment to the additional recommendation which requested that the Panel recommend no further Street Schools schemes were implemented, until there was data from the current schemes.  This was duly seconded, put to the vote and was lost.

 

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (to Cabinet)

 

 That

 

(1)          the experimental trials of the school streets schemes be continued until month 12 of the 18 months;

 

(2)          a full report be submitted to the Panel on the progress of the experimental trials in order that the future of the schemes could be considered;

 

(3)          the Corporate Director – Community following consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Environment, collate an action plan on learning from the negative consultation feedback to date and take relevant steps to directly address the main issues and problems associated with the School Street programme introduction in the local surrounding areas.

 

Reason for Recommendations:  To continue to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 126.

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

 

https://www.harrow.gov.uk/virtualmeeting