Agenda and minutes

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

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

To receive declarations of disclosable pecuniary or non pecuniary interests, arising from business to be transacted at this meeting, from all Members present.

RESOLVED:  To note that no declaration of interests were made at the meeting.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 11 July 2023 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

Ms Veronica Chamberlain, Adviser, proposed the following amendments to the minutes:

Item 43

Members’ questions, 9th bullet point:

… something in the Canva of the road …’ should read ‘… something in the camber of the road …’

"She also hoped Southfield Park would be included in the report about installation of 20mp/h signs for 2023/24."  This should read '20 mph zones'

Item 44

Deputation: 2nd bullet point 1st sentence should read: ‘The Deputee responded that the implementation strategy could have been better thought out.  Perhaps lessons …’

4th bullet point add at end:

The Adviser asked whether the Council’s schemes would all be compliant with Local Transport Note 1/20.  An officer confirmed that this was the case.

10th bullet point to be rewritten as follows:

‘She asked why, that as there was a secondary school on this road, safe cycling provision had not been made in order to enable students to cycle safely to school as per Local Transport Note 1/20, which said that to receive government funding for local highways investment where the main element was not cycling or walking, there would be a presumption that schemes must deliver or improve certain infrastructure to the standard in the Note.  An officer queried whether Clamp Hill was the right location; that it may be better to use the Bridges Road entrance if the aim was to encourage schoolchildren to cycle to that particular school given the gradient of the descent …’

Last bullet point:  Should read as follows:

‘An Adviser suggested to officers that, when a crossing was considered, both pedestrian and cycling crossing facilities should be built, as the cycle crossing of Pinner Road just over the railway line had proved quite useful.  Examples of much-needed crossings would be Harrow View between Cunningham Park and Marlborough Hill, Old Church Lane, Stanmore in the vicinity of Stanmore College and Harrow View – a speed table at the junction with Hindes Road. Officers agreed to investigate the possibility.’

Item 45

George V Avenue

Bottom of page 14  “At this stage, it had not been confirmed that speed was a factor however, automatic." - this is an incomplete sentence and should be completed.

Page 15:  Members asked the following questions:

Second bullet point second sentence should read:  ‘Despite previous assurances from officers, Harrow Cyclists had not received any designs to comment on, so she asked if officers could confirm that the design would be compliant with LTN 1/20 and that no shared space will be allowed at this junction.

... She also explained that the scheme was being taken forward as part of wider projects involving bigger junctions in the area and although there was a cycle route through there, any cycle design would not include that junction intentionally because it was being taken forward as part of a wider project.’

Third bullet point should read:

‘An Adviser commented that George V Avenue was crossed by a very important access point to the green space of Pinner Park Farm for both  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

To receive any public questions received.

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, 26 October 2023.  Questions should be sent to publicquestions@harrow.gov.uk

No person may submit more than one question].

RESOLVED:  To note that three public questions had been received and responded to.

To receive petitions (if any) submitted by members of the public/Councillors.

Councillor Dan Anderson presented a petition containing signatures on behalf of the residents of Woodway Crescent.

The terms of reference of the petition were as follows:

“We the residents of the uncontrolled section of Woodway Crescent are experiencing parking problems due to displaced parking from nearby properties situated within the existing zone (5) operational 11am to 12 noon Monday to Friday.  Cars are left in the crescent for several weeks at a time, some appear to be owned by car traders, some are used for long term storage.

This is making it very difficult for us living in the uncontrolled zone to park, we are not able to park anywhere in the surrounding streets on in the controlled part of the crescent, as we cannot apply for zone (S) parking permits.

We request the Council to extend the existing zone (S) to include the full length of Woodway Crescent.”

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

To receive deputations (if any).

RESOLVED:  To note that there were none.

The Panel received an information report which set out details of the petitions received since the last Panel meeting on 11 July 2023. This provided details of the Council’s investigations and findings where these had been undertaken. The Panel were updated on the actions taken on the petitions since the last meeting on 11 July 2023.  

Citing page 26, item 4, of the agenda pack, the Panel queried if the situation on Victor Road and surrounding areas had worsened, and if it would be covered by Section 106 funding. It was advised that the request would be assessed and placed on the priority list and reported to the annual Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel (TARSAP) meeting in February or March 2024. It was envisaged that Section 106 funding may be possible.

The Panel asked if there was a timeframe for the implementation of traffic calming features on Crown Street, as the location had been assessed and met the threshold for intervention.  It was advised that it would be done within the current financial year.

The Panel questioned whether parking restrictions for commuters accessing the church on Locket Road could be relaxed on Sundays to enable worshippers attend church services. It was advised that the congregation actually met during the week, and that worshipers could attend the church even on Sundays, using other modes of travel. Moreover, worshippers could use the on-street pay and display parking or town centre car parks. Blue badge holders could park in the Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) free of charge. These could be utilised by the worshippers on any day.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

The Panel received an information report on the 2023/24 Traffic and Parking Schemes Programme. This was an update on progress with the 2023/24 traffic and parking management programme of works.

The Panel enquired what progress had been made on the new Transport Strategy which was due to go to Members in September 2023. It was advised that the draft Strategy would be submitted to Cabinet on 16 November 2023.

The Panel asked what effect the reduction in the number of sinusoidal road humps had had on speed, with particular reference to Clamp Hill. This had also been raised at the TARSAP meeting on 11 July 2023. Clarification was sought as to why provision for cycling not been included in the scheme and what actions had been taken to ensure students cycled safely to Bentley Wood School. It was advised that provision for cycling had still not been included in the scheme, and it had not yet been established what effect the reduction of the humps had had on speed.

Regarding the junction on George V Avenue/Headstone Lane/Pinner Road, the Panel queried whether cycling improvements would be included, thus extending the protected cycle lane north from the shopping centre all the way to the school. This was popular route for students and needed to be safe.

It was advised that there would be an engagement, with a consultation process, with residents and the community, before the design was formalised. This would consider cycling improvements.

The Panel requested that an explanation to the acronyms “SCN” and “CND” be provided as Council reports were accessible to the public. This had been requested  at the TARSAP meeting on 11 July 2023  and had not been addressed. Reports should avoid the use of acronyms and abbreviations and include a key so that they were understood by all.

Furthermore, the use of the terms “Goodwill to All” and “Timber Carriage” junctions could be understood by those with long memories. They did not appear on Google Maps, thus some people may not know where they were. The Panel requested that standard descriptions be used, such as “junction of...  (road names)”.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

The Panel received an information report on the Road Fatalities Review which provided an update on traffic related incidents resulting in fatalities on Harrow borough roads in the last 18 months and outlined actions taken by officers following these incidents. 

Harrow Council, as the Highway Authority, had a statutory duty to investigate casualties and where appropriate, introduce change to mitigate the risk of further occurrences.

The Panel requested for the use of appropriate language in reports. For instance: “A cyclist is hit by a driver, not by a car. A car does not have agency until someone presses the accelerator. They are driver on driver collisions not car on car.”

The Panel asked what was being done to tackle reasons for people being killed or seriously injured and reduce road danger. As the key reason for collisions was driver behaviour, what steps would the Council take to improve driver behaviour. An officer advised that improving driver behaviour was a national issue and would be best addressed from that angle.

The Panel emphasised the need for Harrow roads be made safe for cyclists, and other road users, to reduce the number of fatalities in the borough.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.