Agenda and minutes

The Panel received a deputation from a resident of Dennis Lane, Stanmore, who wished to seek a Panel recommendation to extend the double yellow line that already covered part of Dennis Lane.

Members were informed that Dennis Lane was a long narrow road which had a deep bend and steep hill, it was thought that the road was built in the Roman age, so the structure was incomparable to contemporary roads around the borough.  The Lane was described to have a pedestrian pavement on one side of the road whilst the other had a grass verge where cars parked along. 

The deputee highlighted that there had been a number of accidents along the Lane as a consequence of cars being parked on the road, particularly at the bend, thus resulting in cars going up and down the road on the wrong side, it was imagined that, it would only be a matter of time before a fatal accident occurred; hence the request to extend the double yellow line.

Members asked whether all residents on Dennis Lane were in favour of the extension, should the Panel decide to implement them. The deputee responded by saying yes because almost everybody had off-road parking, and went on to indicate that the people who parked their cars on Dennis Lane were mainly commuters.

A Member asked whether residents were prepared to have a greater flow of traffic probably travelling at a faster speed, which might present problems in getting to and from drives.  The deputee answered by saying there was a consensus amongst residents that, they would prefer to have a faster speed of traffic rather than cars parked along the road causing car accidents.

After much debate amongst Members regarding the possible introduction of traffic calming measures, such as a speed camera and signs, the Panel agreed to the deputee’s request of extending the double yellow line on Dennis Lane immediately.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:

Officers were instructed to give priority to the investigation of the double yellow line waiting restrictions request, and prepare a Portfolio Holder report to deal with the implementation of a scheme.

The Panel received an update report of the Interim Head of Environment and Transport, which was presented by the Principal Engineer (West) regarding charges for business parking permits.

Members were reminded that this report followed the one made to September’s Panel meeting, where it was explained that on-street parking provision for business use, carers and teachers were being reviewed.

The officer explained that four options had been considered, and in-depth research into those options had been undertaken to ascertain the advantages and disadvantages. Members were advised that, out of the four options proposed and given the high demand for on-street spaces, and the need to encourage off-street parking in preference to on-street, business permits would be restricted to off-street in Harrow town centre. For all other areas, £300 per annum (p.a) charge would be levied for an on-street permit, which would make it lower than the off-street charge, in real terms the on-street charge would be equivalent to 2 hours paid parking per day, and holders would be entitled to park at pay and display spaces for 2x3 hours per day, and this would be applied across the borough except Harrow town centre.

The officer advised that the business permit charge was tax deductible, and the demands for business permits were currently unknown, therefore, the charge might be reviewed in light of experience to reflect demand and capacity to meet that demand.

Members were advised that off-street parking was only available at centres were there was spare capacity in car parks.  It was also highlighted that off-street charges were normally set lower than on-street charges to encourage vehicles to park off-street.  But in respect of business permits, different conditions apply for on and off-parking.  Off-street parking was unrestricted, whereas on-street parking was limited to operational vehicles with a 3 hour maximum stay.  Providing the vehicles were not essential to the operation of the business, there were no time restrictions, and this would be reflected in permit price.

It was highlighted that off-street charges for vehicle specific business permits were currently charged at £700 a year in Harrow Town Centre and £470 elsewhere.  For company specific permits the current charges were £750 and £617p.a respectively.  The officer concluded that there would be no need to review the off-street business charge if an on-street permit charge of £300p.a was set across the borough.

Members discussed the four options proposed and the possible effect of the £300p.a charge on smaller businesses in Wealdstone.  The officer responded that careful consideration had been taken to weigh up the pros and cons of each option, particularly as not to preclude shoppers from entering areas such as Wealdstone, he went on to say that it was thought that £300p.a was a reasonable amount, of which Members agreed.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (To Executive)

That the Panel (i) recommend to Cabinet, when they consider the annual report on the review of fees and charges, that the charge for on-street business parking permits should be £300 p.a., to apply in  ...  view the full minutes text for item

The Panel received a report of the Interim Head of Environment and Transport, which detailed an objection received to the proposed alterations to the double yellow line on the High Street, Harrow on the Hill.

Members were requested to set aside the objection received, which asked that the proposed waiting restrictions at The ‘green’ be extended to cover the whole length of The ‘green’.  The officer urged Members to continue with the Traffic Order which centred upon implementing a six metre length of double yellow line on the High Street, on the west side at the junction with the road leading to Byron Hill Road; Members were reminded that the main aim of introducing a further length of waiting restriction was to improve visibility for vehicles exiting Byron Hill Road.

Members debated the objector’s request and the officer’s report, and arrived at the same conclusion as the officer, in that a reasonable compromise between safety and parking needs had been achieved, and therefore agreed with the officer’s recommendation. On the suggestion of the Panel advisor, Members agreed that the parking spaces adjacent to The ‘green’ could be removed by two spaces instead of one, which would improve visibility further, which was agreed by the officer.

The Chair thanked the officer and asked that the Panel be kept updated of the developments that take place on Harrow on the Hill.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (To Executive)

It was agreed that (i) the objection be set aside for reasons given in the report and the objector be advised accordingly and officers be authorised to implement the scheme;

(ii)  two parking spaces adjacent The ‘green’ be removed instead of one, by extending the existing double yellow line waiting restrictions in High Street on the north west side of from a point 3 metres south of a point opposite the party wall of 41 and 43 High Street to a point 10.5 metres south of that point; and

(iii)  a report in due course be submitted to the Panel on the Harrow on the Hill Forum’s request for bringing forward the 20 mph zone scheme, and that a review of the yellow line waiting restrictions be carried out for the section between The ‘green’ and West Street, and the outcome be included in the same report.

REASON:  To control parking and to safeguard the viability of the businesses on the Hill.

[Councillor E Kinnear advised the Panel that she intended to raise an item related to traffic management on Harrow on the Hill, and a letter from the Chairman of the Harrow on the Hill Forum was tabled.

The Panel received a report of the Interim Head of Environment and Transportation, which was presented by the Principal Engineer (East) regarding speeding traffic, footway parking and litter problems at Pangbourne Drive.  

The officer explained that a 14-page petition had been received regarding various issues raised and was explained to involve a number of council sections which had already been informed of the problems.  In relation to traffic and road safety, the Officer advised the Panel that in January 2002 a traffic calming assessment was carried out, which placed Pangbourne Drive in fourth place on the current traffic calming priority list.  It was highlighted that due to a large demand for traffic calming and limited resources, the Council had established a criteria to prioritise traffic calming schemes.  Members were informed that, the first two top roads on the priority list were programmed for implementation in 2004/05 financial year, subject to funding by Transport for London (TfL).

In order to address the issue related to speeding traffic, it was hoped that the Panel would support a bid being included in the next Borough Spending Plan (2005-06) for traffic calming.  It was also emphasised that, where the petition calls for the erection of posts on grass verges to deter people from parking, the Parking and Enforcement section had already been notified and would allocate resources to prosecute offenders. Street Cleansing had also been informed of the litter problem that was reported in that area.

Members welcomed the joined up thinking and agreed with the recommendations outlined in the report.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (To the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Transport)

It was agreed that (i) a bid be included in the next Borough Spending Plan submission to Transport for London for funding a traffic calming scheme in Pangbourne Drive;

(ii)  the footway parking complaint be addressed by the Parking and Enforcement section by taking action against offenders; and

(iii)  the head petitioner be informed of the above and that McDonald’s have been contacted about litter problems as requested.

REASON:  To address the petitioners’ complaints.

The Panel received a report of the Interim Head of Environment and Transport, which was presented by the Principal Engineer (West).

Members were advised of planned proposals under the London Cycle Network.  The report covered detailed plans of a route from Kenton Recreation Ground to Edgware.

Members discussed the plans proposed, and agreed with the recommendations outlined.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (To Portfolio Holder of Environment and Transport)

That the (i) proposals for Belmont Circle, Wemborough Road (Belmont Lane to Abercorn Road) and Whitchurch Lane (Montgomery Road to High Street, Edgware) be  the subject of a public consultation with frontages affected and other interested parties as shown at Appendix B and as detailed in paragraph 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5 of the [officer] report;

(ii)  proposals for a cycle route as shown at Appendix B between Kenton Recreation Ground and Edgware to be introduced under delegated powers be noted; and

(iii)  certain junctions along the cycle route shown at Appendix B are the subject of further investigation and a future report may be forthcoming be noted.

REASON:  To encourage the use of more sustainable transport.

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

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

To receive declarations of interest (if any) from Members of the Committee arising from business to be transacted at this meeting.

RESOLVED:  To note that there were no declarations of interests made by Members in relation to business transacted at this meeting.

To consider whether any of the items listed on the agenda should be considered with the press and public excluded on the grounds that it is thought likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, that there would be disclosure of confidential information in breach of an obligation of confidence or of exempt information as defined in the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985.

RESOLVED:  That (i) all items be considered with the press and public present; and

(ii)  item 9A on the First Supplemental Agenda regarding 20 mph zone on Harrow on the Hill, which was raised by Councillor E Kinnear, be considered after item 8B on the Main Agenda.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 17 September 2003, having been circulated, be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 17 September 2003, having been circulated, be taken as read, and that authority be given to the Chair to sign the minutes outside of the meeting to ratify that it was an accurate account of the meeting that took place.

To receive questions (if any) from local residents or organisations under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 15 (Part 4B of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that there were no public questions.

To receive petitions (if any) submitted by members of the public/Councillors under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 13 (Part 4B of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note receipt of the following petition:

(i)                   Re:  One way traffic at the ‘Close’ – handed in by Councillor John Nickolay.

To receive deputations (if any) under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 14 (Part 4B of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note the receipt of the following deputation:

(i)                 Re:  Painting of Double Yellow Lines on Dennis Lane: From a resident of Dennis Lane (see Recommendation 1). 

[The Panel voted to suspend Standing Orders under Committee Rules 26.1, allowing this deputation to be made at this meeting.]