Agenda and minutes

An officer presented a report of the Divisional Director of Environmental Services which outlined the results of a public consultation for the proposed introduction of a one way system in Bedford Road and Pinner View that would form part of the Pinner Road Local Safety Scheme.

The officer advised that the aim of the proposal was to improve vehicle access and reduce personal injury accidents.  He believed that this combined with vehicles turning at the junctions and the volume of pedestrian movement at peak times on Pinner Road between Pinner View and the Gardens, disrupted the flow of traffic and caused queues of traffic along each arm of the junction. 

He added that officers had received overwhelming responses from residents to the consultation, including a petition with 151 signatures from households in Bedford Road, Rutland Road and adjoining roads objecting to the proposed one way scheme.  The signatories believed that if the scheme was introduced, there would be a substantial increase in traffic, congestion and dangers to pedestrians, cyclists and motorists.

He confirmed that a written response to a number of detailed questions had been sent to the lead petitioner.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (to the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety)

That the Pinner Road Local Safety Scheme proposal of a one way system in Pinner View and Bedford Road (up to the junction with Sussex Road) be removed from the full set of proposals developed for the Pinner Road Local Safety scheme due to the results of the public consultation exercise and the petition opposing the proposed one way system.

[Reason for Recommendation:  To avoid a potential increase in traffic flows and to enable a more comprehensive assessment of conditions in the Pinner View area following the introduction of other traffic management measures.]

An officer tabled an amendment to the recommendation contained in the report, which had been revised in light of the late responses to the consultation that had been received.  He explained that the tabled amendment reflected the revised plan of properties on Sussex Road that would form part of the proposed Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) recommendation.  The Panel unanimously agreed to the circulation of the tabled amendment.

The officer then introduced the report on the findings of the public consultation on the proposed introduction of:

·                     a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) west of Harrow town centre; and

·                     associated parking restrictions (double yellow lines and waiting and loading restrictions) on Pinner Road and at junctions in the Headstone South ward.

The Panel were informed that the consultation had resulted from continued complaints received from residents when trying to park and use junctions in the “County Roads” to the north of Pinner Road and east of Pinner View, since the introduction of the existing Harrow CPZ and permit parking.  The officer referred the Panel to Appendix C of the report which outlined the proposals and the reasons for them.  He added that a petition entitled “Save the Pinner Road Shopping Parade” had been received on 10 October 2008 from the Pinner Road Small Business Group (“the Group”), which represented 16 shops and other businesses, between 124-184 on the northern side of Pinner Road, Harrow.  The petition contained 322 signatures and requested for the council to consider providing parking bays and pavement parking in front of the shops for shoppers.  A request for the Council to work with Transport for London (TfL) in finding an acceptable parking scheme had also been made.  A petition containing 356 signatures headed “A petition to save our small businesses on the Pinner Road” attached to the aforementioned petition was also received.

The officer reported that the petitions and a written response had been forwarded from a meeting involving the Group on 15 September 2008.  This was discussed further in a meeting attended by officers, the Chairman of the Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel and a representative of the Group held on 28 October 2008 following receipt of these petitions.

The officer advised the Panel that the majority of residents had supported the implementation of double yellow lines and that there had been a clear majority against creating a new CPZ when all responses returned by residents were considered collectively.

In response to a number of points raised on behalf of residents by a Ward Councillor, the Chairman advised the Committee, that double yellow lines would be introduced at all junctions within the consultation area and that the Controlled Parking Zone would be introduced where there was majority support in favour of its implementation.

Rising from a number of comments and questions by Members, the officer confirmed that:

·                     a meeting held with residents largely of Devonshire Road on 25 November 2008, assured that further modifications to the scheme would consider their concerns;

·                     the  ...  view the full minutes text for item

An officer tabled an amendment to the recommendation contained in the report.  He explained that the tabled amendment reflected the new position of the Council and amended one of the proposed recommendations.  The Panel unanimously agreed to the circulation of the proposed recommendation.

The officer provided the Panel with an update on the proposed extension to the Edgware Controlled Parking Zone TB and associated parking restrictions at junctions within the review area.  The officer also advised the Panel of the proposed introduction of pay and display parking bay in High Street, Edgware.

He reported that the success of the present CPZ scheme had caused parking to become displaced to roads nearby that were currently outside of the CPZ.  He added that residents in these roads had requested for the zone to be extended, so that congestion and obstructive parking during the evenings could be managed effectively and residents concerns regarding safety and access for emergency vehicles be addressed.  The request also extended to businesses nearby, who had complained that visitors and customers had not been able to use off peak parking spaces on the High Street as other drivers had been using them to park their vehicles.

In response to a number of questions raised by Members, the officer confirmed that:

·                     the amended recommendation no longer included Dukes Avenue as a road for inclusion in the CPZ;

·                     the two corner properties on Dukes Avenue at the junction with Lake View had been included in the CPZ, so that residents of these properties had the option to use permit parking facilities on Lake View;

·                     parking controls could be implemented on the unadopted highway if residents and boundary sharers unanimously supported the proposals outlined in the consultation;

·                     the proposed charges for pay and display parking had been considered alongside the fee charged by Barnet Council, who were responsible for parking on the opposite side of the High Street.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (to the Portfolio Holder of Environment and Community Safety)

That (1) the existing CPZ zone TB be extended to include property Nos. 21?41 and 54?68 Canons Drive, 24 and 33  Duke Avenue, Chestnut Avenue and Lake View to operate Monday to Friday 11.00 am to 12 midday, as shown at the amended Appendix G of the report;

(2)  double yellow line restrictions be introduced at the junctions/locations shown at Appendix C of the report;

(3)  short term pay and display parking be introduced outside property Nos. 85-93 High Street, Edgware as shown at Appendix H of the report;

(4)  the existing ‘Permit parking only’ signs in the CPZ, Zones TA and TB, be amended to indicate the control hours;

(5)  the existing pay and display signs to the shared pay and display parking bays in Canons Drive, Handel Way, High Street, Edgware, Mead Road, and Montgomery Road be amended to replace the wording ‘Business permits holders and Resident permit holders’ with ‘Permit holders’;

(6)  officers be authorised to make minor amendments and finalise the detailed design of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item

The Panel received a report of the Divisional Director of Environmental Services, which considered the objection made by representatives of Marlborough Hill School.  This included the deferred report from the last Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel meeting in September 2008.  The report outlined officers’ consideration of the objections to the proposed extension of the Wealdstone CPZ Zone C and associated parking restrictions.

The officer commented that at a meeting with the Portfolio Holder of Environment and Community Safety, representatives of the school expressed their concerns regarding the implications of the loading and unloading restrictions outside of the school for coaches used in school trips.  The officer clarified that coaches used by the school should be unaffected by the proposed restrictions.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (to the Portfolio Holder of Environment and Community Safety)

That the formal objections to the advertised traffic orders for the extension and revision to the Wealdstone Controlled Parking Zones C and CA incorporating a residents parking scheme and some associated waiting and loading restrictions be set aside for reasons given in the report, the objectors be informed and officers proceed with the order making and implementation.

[Reason for Recommendation:  To control parking at various locations in the Wealdstone area as shown at Appendix A in the report.]

An officer advised the Panel of the proposal to install double yellow lines in the report, making it illegal for drivers to park at any time on the northbound bend approaching Headstone Lane station.  The officer asserted that the introduction of these traffic measures would maintain good visibility for drivers and pedestrians crossing the road at the nearby traffic island.  He added that the proposal for clearly marked parallel parking bays in the nearby lay?by, also shown in Appendix A of the report, had been a direct response to concerns about pedestrian and driver safety that had been caused by cars impeding onto the carriageway as part of the current echelon parking.

In addition to the above proposals the Panel also considered a separate proposal to install controlled parking in the lay?by in front of numbers 193 to 207 Headstone Lane, Harrow.

Officers were commended on their considered response to safety issues encountered by pedestrians and motorists on this particular stretch of road.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (to the Portfolio Holder of Environment and Community Safety)

That (1) the formal objections to the advertised traffic orders for the double yellow lines adjacent and opposite the pedestrian refuge island be set aside for reasons given in the report, the objectors be informed and officers proceed with the order making and implementation;

(2)  the formal objections to the advertised traffic orders for the double yellow lines at the junction of Headstone Lane and Broadfields be set aside for reasons given in the report, the objectors be informed and officers proceed with the order making and implementation;

(3)  the formal objections to the introduction of 4 parallel parking bays in the lay by in Headstone Lane be set aside for the reasons given in the report, the objectors be informed and officers proceed with the order making and implementation;

(4)  (a) officers be given delegated powers to consult and take all necessary steps under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to advertise the traffic orders, and to implement controlled parking in the lay?by outside 193 to 207 Headstone Lane as detailed in the report, subject to consideration of objections;

(b) the Traffic and Highway Network Manager be authorised to determine any objections to the scheme received as a result of the statutory consultation or otherwise in consultation with the Portfolio Holder of Environment and Community Safety.

[Reason for Recommendation:  To allow the implementation of the double yellow lines and parallel parking bays.]

The Panel received a report of the Divisional Director of Environmental Services updating them on the progress made in addressing safety concerns at the junction of George V / Pinner Road and Headstone Lane.

An officer explained that the Council had been working with Transport for London’s (TfL) signals unit and had forwarded two detailed reports of the junction to TfL for consideration.

The officer advised that the proposals for the junction would benefit pedestrians and drivers.  The signal timings and phases would be modified to improve safety at the junction and should address concerns regarding right turn accidents.  There would not be a dedicated pedestrian phase in the revised timings, however, pedestrians at the junctions would have an opportunity to cross at the junction as a result of the changes to signal timings.

.

In response to comments received by the Panel, the officer confirmed that:

·                     the accident record at the junction would be considered when reviewing the alignment of turning traffic;

·                     the process of cars stopping for pedestrians and school children using the existing island would be formalised by the introduction of a zebra crossing in Pinner Road opposite the entrance to Nower Hill High School;

·                     the possibility of introducing revised signal timings would be considered as part of the proposals, in order to strike a balance between road safety and congestion on the road network.

Resolved to RECOMMEND: (to the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety)

That (1) officers be authorised to ask Transport for London (TfL) to reinstate the George V / Pinner Road / Headstone Lane scheme in the Local Safety Schemes programme;

(2)  officers be authorized to request the Director of Traffic Operations (DTO) of TfL to review our detailed assessment and traffic modelling data of the junction in order to progress the proposals to address the personal injury accident problems at the junction;

(3)  officers be authorised to report the outcome of the review to a future TARSAP meeting.  

[Reason for Recommendation:  To address safety concerns at the junction.]

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:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 17 September 2008 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 17 September 2008, 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).

The Panel received a late request for a public question from a member of the public.

RESOLVED: That the request be rejected.

[Note:  Officers agreed that a written response to the question raised would be provided to the member of the public.]

To receive petitions (if any) submitted by members of the public/Councillors under the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 14 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

     (i)            Pinner Road - objections to parking proposals for Pinner Road;

   (ii)            Pinner Road Safety Scheme - objections to the proposed one-way system between Bedford Road and Pinner View.

Information report of the Head of Property and Infrastructure.

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).

To receive any references from Council and/or other Committees or Panels.

(a)               Petition re: Parking Controls and the Proposed One-Way System in Pinner View and Bedford Road. Reference from Cabinet meeting held on 23 October 2008.

(b)               Petition re: Parking Controls on Rayners Lane and Alexandra Avenue. Reference from Council meeting held on 30 October 2008.

(1)                 The Panel received a reference from the Cabinet meeting held on 23 October 2008.  The reference contained a petition, which had been presented by Councillor Bill Stephenson to Cabinet.  The petition containing 96 signatures of residents drew attention to the proposed implementation of a Controlled Parking Zone and the introduction of a one?way system between the southern end of Pinner view and Bedford Road.

RESOLVED:  That thepetition be received and noted

(2)                 A reference from the meeting of Council on 30 October 2008 was received by the Panel.  The reference referred to a petition that had been presented by Councillor Ashok Kulkarni to Council.  The petition containing 95 signatures of retailers objected to the placement of double yellow lines on Rayners Lane and Alexandra Avenue and advised of the fall in trade since the restrictions became operational on 27 October 2008.

RESOLVED:  That thepetition be received and noted

(See Minute 128 (ii))

Report of the Head of Property and Infrastructure

(See Recommendation 1)

Report of the Head of Property and Infrastructure

(See Recommendation 2)

Report of the Head of Property and Infrastructure

(See Recommendation 3)

Report of the Head of Property and Infrastructure

(See Recommendation 4)

Report of the Head of Property and Infrastructure

(See Recommendation 5)

Information report of the Head of Property and Infrastructure

An officer presented an information report of the Divisional Director of Environmental Services, informing members on the guidance and regulations on traffic calming measures that were available.  Members were also advised of the implications that should be considered when applying new traffic schemes and reviewing existing measures, including emergency vehicles and transport operator considerations.

The Panel were advised that:

·                     recent traffic calming schemes were more considered and better focussed to ensure that  appropriate road safety measures were implemented;

·                     road humps were one of the options in the hierarchy of traffic calming measures;

·                     every scheme implemented had reduced vehicle speeds and accidents;

·                     a majority of residents had been in favour of the existing traffic schemes that had been introduced by Harrow Council;

·                     dialogue with emergency services had proved useful;

·                     the use of camera technology as a traffic calming measure was currently subject to Home Office approval.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Report of the Head of Property and Infrastructure

(See Recommendation 6)

Information report of the Head of Property and Infrastructure

An officer presented an information report of the Divisional Director of Environmental Services, which provided Members with information regarding the progress of a number of traffic management projects.

Honeypot Lane / Streatfield Road Roundabout

In response to questions asked by the Panel, an officer advised that additional funding to investigate capacity improvements had been received from TfL.

Honeypot Lane Bus Lane (Northbound)

An officer advised that public consultation with residents, stakeholders, Ward Councillors and the emergency services was underway.  He confirmed that consultation documents would be forwarded to the Safer Neighbourhood Team and that results from the responses received would be reported for a future Portfolio Holder decision.

Eastcote Road / Ellement Close, walking scheme

As a result of public consultation, the walking scheme had been revised to provide a pedestrian refuge in Eastcote Lane near Ellement Close and incorporated into a London Cycle Network scheme which should provide compensatory parking spaces.

Rayners Lane between Imperial Drive and Village Way East

A Member of the Panel requested for the enforcement of double yellow lines on parking bays on Imperial Drive to be reviewed and considered as part of the proposed exercise to reduce congestion on Rayners Lane.  An officer confirmed that the proposed scheme would review echelon parking on Rayners Lane and introduce new parking bays on Imperial Drive between Rayners Lane station and Warden Avenue to increase parking availability.

Petts Hill Bridge and Highway Improvements

The Panel were advised that the current works were on course and that the junction would be closed to all traffic between 22 December and 7 January 2009.  The rail track would also be closed between 24 December 2008 and 27 December 2008.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

To note that the date of the next meeting of the Panel will be held on Wednesday 11 February 2009 at 7.30 pm.

RESOLVED:  That the date of the next meeting of the Panel would be held on Wednesday 11 February 2009 at 7.30 pm.