Agenda and minutes

The Panel received a report of the Interim Head of Property and Infrastructure, which set out the findings of the public consultation on proposals to open Wealdstone High Street to traffic.  The report also considered the responses to the traffic orders and gave recommendations on the details of the scheme to be implemented.  Proposed minor amendments to the report were tabled and accepted by the Panel.

An amendment to the officer recommendation, seeking for the consultation exercise to be repeated,was moved and seconded and Members entered into debate.  A Member expressed the opinion that insufficient effort had been made to maximise turnout for the public consultation.  He also noted that the response rate was only 8.7% and that the consultation did not ask residents whether they actually wanted the scheme.  The Member further expressed the view that the proposed Public Realm improvements would make little difference to the local area.  An officer in response explained that the consultation was extensive: 3,300 leaflets had been distributed, posters were displayed on the street, press releases had been issued and exhibitions had been arranged at two venues over a period of three weeks. The proposals had also been posted on the Council’s website.  The Chairman explained that more ambitious Public Realm improvements were planned for the future of Wealdstone.

In response to a question, an officer explained that no public meetings had taken place for the consultation, but that there had been stakeholder meetings.  Some Members expressed their support for the proposed scheme, as they thought the scheme would benefit businesses in the area and that the majority of local residents supported the scheme.  A Member expressed concern that further consultation was unnecessary and would delay implementation of the scheme.  Another Member stated that many local residents opposed the scheme, as they did not want increased traffic to the area. 

Summing up, the Member who proposed the amendment explained that he was concerned about the lack of consultation and thought that people should have been consulted via other methods such as by telephone.

Having been put to the vote, the amendment was not carried.

Members further discussed the scheme, which was

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (to Cabinet)

That (1) officers be authorised to make the traffic orders set out in paragraph 2.4.1 of the report, the details of which be delegated to officers, and to implement the scheme to open Wealdstone High Street to traffic as set out in Appendices G and H, and;

(2)  to carry out public realm improvements set out in paragraphs 2.3.12, 2.3.13 and 2.3.16 of the report subject to confirmation of additional funding from TFL and confirmation of affordability.

[Reason for Recommendation:  To regenerate Wealdstone Town Centre and promote new business.] 

(See also Minute 74)

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.

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

To receive declarations of personal or prejudicial interests, arising from business to be transacted at this meeting, from:

(a)               all Members of the Committee, Sub Committee, Panel or Forum;

(b)               all other Members present in any part of the room or chamber.

RESOLVED:  To note that the following interests were declared:

(i)                   Agenda Item 9 - Opening Wealdstone High Street to Traffic – Consultation results and objections to traffic orders

Councillor Susan Hall, who was not a Member of the Panel, declared a prejudicial interest in that she was a trader in Wealdstone. Accordingly, she would leave the room when this item was discussed.

(ii)                 Agenda Item 10 – Information Report – Progress Update on key traffic schemes

Councillor Robert Benson declared a personal interest in relation to the above item arising from the fact that he is a resident of Stanmore. Councillor Jeremy Zeid and Councillor Yogesh Teli also declared a personal interest in the above item in that they were residents of Kenton.  Councillor Graham Henson declared a personal interest in relation to the above item arising from the fact that he had relatives living near to Kings Road.

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 Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

RESOLVED:  That all items be considered with the press and public present.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 25 September 2007 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 25 September 2007 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

To receive questions (if any) from local residents or organisations under the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 16 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that no public questions were received at this meeting under the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 16 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

Petition submitted by residents.

The Panel received a verbal report by officers with regards to a petition, which had been received by the Traffic Management Department. Residents of the Warren Fields Block facing Aran Drive in Stanmore, HA7 4JQ, had submitted the petition with 9 signatures.  The petition requested that the residents of the Warren Fields Block were included in the parking scheme relating to Aran Drive instead of Valencia Road.

An officer explained that the petitioners had the support of one of the Canons Ward Councillors and that the petition would be considered as part of the review and possible extension of the controlled parking zone (CPZ) in Stanmore.

RESOLVED:  That the above be noted.

Petition submitted by residents.

The Panel received a verbal report by officers with regards to a petition, which had been received by the Traffic Management Department.  The petition with 115 signatures requested controlled parking in The Gardens and other roads surrounding West Harrow Station.

An officer explained that when a consultation was carried out in 1999 and 2000, there was a lack of majority support for the scheme from local residents.  The officer confirmed that the petition would be presented at the next review of the CPZ programme.  The Panel agreed that the petition should be considered further as part of the annual CPZ programme review to be considered by the Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel on the 26 February 2008.

RESOLVED:  That the above be noted.

Petition submitted by residents.

The Panel received a verbal report by officers with regards to a petition, which had been received by the Traffic Management Department.  The petition, with 12 signatures, opposed the changes to the parking arrangements in the bay adjacent to Nos. 264 to 298 Headstone Lane.

An officer showed the Panel a map of the area and explained that the proposals aimed to make it safer for pedestrians to cross the road and for vehicles using Headstone Lane.  The officer explained that the petition would be taken into account as part of the statutory consultation that was to start on the proposed changes.  Some Members expressed the view that the proposals were necessary to improve safety and expressed their wish to refer the proposed scheme to the Portfolio Holder for Environment Services for consideration.

RESOLVED:  That the above be noted.

To receive deputations (if any) under the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 15 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that no deputations were received at this meeting under the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 15 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

Petition submitted by Councillor Mrs Sasi Suresh.

The Panel received a reference from the meeting of Council held on 18 October 2007.

The reference contained a petition, which had been presented by Councillor Mrs Sasi Suresh, to Council.  The petition contained 65 signatures of residents and drew attention to the inconsiderate and obstructive parking in Hooking Green and requested the introduction of double yellow lines around the edge of the Green.

An officer explained that since the closure of the local Safeways supermarket and the bowling alley, there had been reduced capacity for parking in the area.  The officer also explained that there was a demand from local residents for double yellow lines on the east side of Canterbury Road, close to Hooking Green.  The officer explained that consultation on parking in the area would take place in 2008.

Some Members expressed the opinion that it was necessary for restrictions to be implemented to control parking on Hooking Green.  A Member who was backbenching expressed her support for controls to be implemented quickly.

In response to a question, an officer confirmed that there was adequate parking in public car parks in North Harrow.  It was agreed that proposals to introduce controlled parking on Hooking Green should be referred to the Portfolio Holder for Environment Services for consideration.

RESOLVED:  That the above be noted.

(See Recommendation 1)

Report of the Interim Head of Property and Infrastructure.

An officer presented an information report of the Interim Head of Property and Infrastructure, which provided Members with information regarding the progress on a number of traffic management projects.

Kenton Lane – Local Safety Scheme

An adviser expressed concern about the scheme.  An officer agreed to meet the adviser outside the meeting to discuss his concerns.  A Member expressed concern that cross hatched road marking proposed along parts of the scheme could endanger cyclists.

Harrow on the Hill – 20 mph zone proposals

An officer explained that the consultation had begun with the local community, a two?day exhibition had been held at John Lyon School and that plans were available for viewing by members of the public on the Middlesex Floor at the Civic Centre.  In response to a question, an officer confirmed that the emergency services did not generally support vertical deflections on Harrow on the Hill.

Stanmore CPZ extension to deal with Wembley events parking

With regards to the proposal for an extension to the Stanmore Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) to deal with Wembley events parking, an officer explained that a dedicated team were working on the public consultation for the proposals.  In response to a question by a Member, an officer confirmed that the London Borough of Barnet were aware of the intention to review parking in the Stanmore area.

Petts Hill and Highway Improvements

With regards to the Petts Hill Bridge and highway improvements, an officer explained that there was a funding shortfall but that they were hopeful of implementing the scheme in 2008.  The officer further explained that the nature of the works meant that it was necessary to close the junction for three to four days and therefore ideally, it should be closed on a Bank Holiday in order to minimise disruption.

Bus Priority Schemes

An officer confirmed that with regard to Kings Road in South Harrow, resurfacing was for the lay-bys only.  One Member expressed the view that the scheme proposed for Common Road Junction with the High Road should be a high priority.  Another Member expressed concern regarding congestion on Honeypot Lane.  In response to concerns raised by Members regarding the proposed scheme on Honeypot Lane, an officer explained that a bus lane would only be constructed if the scheme did not have an adverse affect on congestion.

Camrose Avenue – Local safety scheme

It was confirmed by an officer that consultation for the proposed Camrose Avenue local safety scheme would end on the 10 December 2007.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Which cannot otherwise be dealt with.

A Member asked for an update on the implementation of the Green Lane Scheme.  An officer agreed to provide this outside of the meeting.

The Chairman noted that he was keen to have a report on road safety at a future meeting.

RESOLVED:  That the above be noted.