Agenda and minutes

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 Members:-

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:

Agenda Item 10 – Information Report: Petitions Relating to (5) Elgin Avenue/Kenmore Avenue, Harrow

Councillor Ajay Maru declared a personal interest in that he was ward councillor for Kenton West.  He would remain in the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

Agenda Item 11 - Allocation of Local Transport Fund schemes (Transport for London funding) 2011/12

Councillor Mrs Vina Mithani declared a personal interest in that she was ward councilor for Kenton West.  She would remain in the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

Agenda Item 17 – Information Report: Capital Programme Update – Traffic and Parking Schemes

Councillor Brian Gate, declared a personal interest in that he was a resident of West Harrow.  He would remain in the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

To appoint a Vice-Chairman of the Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel for the Municipal Year 2011/12.

RESOLVED:  To appoint Councillor Jerry Miles as Vice-Chairman of the Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel for the 2011/2012 Municipal Year.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 2 February 2011 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 10 February 2010 be read and signed as correct record of the meeting, subject to clarification in relation to the items Members were in attendance for listed on page 5:

The Panel agreed to consider Agenda item 16, Controlled Parking Zone: Rayners Lane Controlled Parking Zone – Results of Statutory consultation  and item 17, Information Report: Capital Programme Update Traffic and Parking Schemes before agenda item 9, Reference from Cabinet, to allow the relevant deputations to be heard early on in the proceedings. 

To receive questions (if any) from local residents or organisations under the provisions of Executive Procedure Rule 51 (Part 4D of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that the following public questions were received:

To receive petitions (if any) submitted by members of the public/Councillors under the provisions of Executive Procedure Rule 49 (Part 4D of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that no petitions were received at this meeting.

To receive deputations (if any) under the provisions of Executive Procedure Rule 50 (Part 4D of the Constitution).

 RESOLVED:  That in accordance with Executive Procedure Rule 50 (Part 4D of the Constitution), that the following deputations be received:

(1)               Residents of Raynton Close, Trescoe Gardens, Newlyn Gardens, Waverley Road, entrance to Roxbourne Park – (Nursery & Scout Hut).

The first deputee, a resident of Raynton Close, stated that:

·                    in the 44 years he had lived in Raynton Close, emergency vehicles, refuse vehicles and the council’s transport bus had had no difficulty in accessing this road;

·                    placing Double Yellow Lines on the right side of the road would force emergency vehicles to drive on the wrong side of the road;

·                    this would both inconvenience residents and have health and safety implications;

·                    to his knowledge, none of the Members of the Panel represented Rayners Lane, had not visited the ward or spoken to residents about this issue;

·                    properties with even numbers all had unpaved front gardens, whereas properties with odd numbers had off-road parking; this had been the case for over 40 years.  The property deeds of some of these houses stated that driveways must be kept clear;

·                    he requested that the Double Yellow Lines be implemented on the opposite side of the road.

The second deputee, a resident of Trescoe Gardens, Rayners Lane stated that:

·                    Trescoe Gardens was too narrow a road to allow cars to be parked on both sides;

·                    emergency and delivery vehicles had been able to access the road, however, if the current proposals were implemented, this would block residents’ access to their drives;

·                    these proposals were not essential or desired by residents and the money for this scheme would be better spent on other local services for residents.

(2)               West Harrow Residents Group (WHRG), regarding the Review of the Double Yellow Lines (DYL’s) in West Harrow.

The deputee, a resident of Vaughan Road, stated that:

·                    the conclusions in the document produced by WHRG, ‘10/5 – The Residents’ Solution’, had been rejected by Traffic officers;

·                    he encouraged Panel Members to read the 10/5 report as a great deal of work, effort and expertise had gone into it and it was based on common sense;

·                    at the meeting between traffic officers and residents in October 2010, residents had stated that they were against the DYLs and since their introduction, there had been 5 accidents due to increased vehicle speeds.  This should be taken into consideration;

·                    officers had failed to hold a meeting requested by WHRG;

·                    the Police and Fire Brigade reports on tests carried out by the emergency services had only been released recently; WHRG required more time to consider these reports, ask questions and get further advice before arranging a meeting between residents and officers;

he hoped that it would be possible to arrive at a solution before the September 2011 Panel meeting.

To receive the following reference from Cabinet:

(a)   Petition relating to parking problems on Elgin Avenue.

Reference from Cabinet meeting held on 19 May 2011.

The Panel received a reference from the Cabinet meeting held on 19 May 2011: the reference related to a petition received from the residents of Elgin Avenue, Kenton, seeking resolution to the parking problems in this road.

RESOLVED:  That the reference be received and noted.

Report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services.

The Panel considered a report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services on the appointment of non-voting advisers to the Panel for the 2011/12 Municipal year.

With the agreement of the Panel, the Chairman invited the advisers present to participate in the meeting, pending formal approval of their appointment.

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

That the following non-voting advisers be appointed to the Panel for the 2011/12 Municipal Year:

1.                  Mr Alan Blann, representing the Cyclists Touring Club ‘Right to Ride’;

2.                  Mr Eric Diamond, representing the North West London Chamber of Commerce;

3.                  Mr Len Gray, representing Pedestrians’ Interests;

4.                  Mr Anthony Wood, representing Harrow Public Transport Users’ Association.

Reason for Decision:  To appoint advisers for the 2011/12 Municipal Year to assist in the work of the Panel.

Report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director, Community and Environment, which outlined the proposed programme of schemes to be implemented with the £100K local transport fund allocated to the Council in 2011/12.  An officer stated that these schemes had to adhere to both the Local Implementation Plan (LIP), the Mayor of London’s Transport Strategy and Harrow’s Corporate Priorities.  It also focused on locally determined priorities, particularly on those schemes likely to have the greatest local benefits and impact.

The report recommended four such schemes, which had been developed following discussion between Traffic officers and the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety.

Members of the Panel stated that in future, they would prefer to be given a wider choice of schemes, prior to making a recommendation to the Portfolio Holder.

Following questions from Members of the Panel, an officer stated that all relevant stakeholders would be consulted in relation to the traffic management projects on Kingshill Avenue.  He added that the contra-flow cycle scheme on College Road would extend from the footway outside St Ann’s car park but that the proposal could only be fully developed once the funds were received.   The off-side bus stand, pedestrian, cyclist and bus driver safety would need to be factored in, as would any possible future alterations to the bus garage.  Officers were in discussion with TfL regarding a possible bicycle scheme similar to the Barclays bicycle hire scheme currently in operation in the central London area.

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

That the proposed programme of local transport schemes be approved, as summarised in the table below:

Reason for Decision: In order for the Council to spend the £100,000 allocated by Transport for London on prioritised local transport schemes within the 2011/12 financial year.

Report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment relating to the consultation relating to Mollison Way, streets for people scheme initiated in partnership with Transport for London (TfL).  Of the responses received, approximately 80% supported the proposals, which had been developed over 18 months working with the local community.  He added that officers may apply for finance to extend the scope of the project at a later date with a view to making localised changes to the road to best accommodate parking and through traffic.

The ‘CTC Right to Ride’ Adviser to the Panel requested a copy of the Consultation documents, which traffic officers undertook to forward to him after the meeting.

Resolved to RECOMMEND: (to Cabinet)

That the Mollison Way, streets for people scheme as set out in the report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment, proceed to statutory consultation and implementation.

Reason for Decision: To implement the Mollison Way, streets for people scheme as identified in the Local Implementation Plan for the benefit of the local community.

Report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director of Community and Environment, which set out the procedure for discharging the Council’s network management duty in respect of filming on the highway and regulating such activity in accordance with current legislation.

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

That the procedure regarding Filming on the Highway contained in the report of the Corporate Director of Community and Environment be adopted and kept under review.

Reason for Decision:  In order that the Council fulfils its responsibilities under the Traffic Management Act and to mitigate inconvenience to local residents and businesses.

Report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director of Community and Environment which outlined the methodology to be adopted to determine the suitability of off-road shared pedestrian and cycle facilities and the measures that could be taken to mitigate any conflict.

Following questions from Members of the Panel, an officer reported that it would be difficult to enforce fixed penalty notices against persons caught cycling on pavements and it was preferable to educate cyclists in cycling etiquette through a number of different schemes, such as cycling training.

A Member of the Panel proposed an amendment to the recommendation, which was seconded and agreed unanimously.

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

That the procedure outlined in the report of the Corporate Director of Community and Environment be used to assess the suitability of off-road shared cycle / pedestrian facilities, but that consideration for the safety of pedestrians must always be paramount.

Reason for Decision: To enable the Council to deliver cycle schemes and take account of the needs of pedestrians and cyclists in order to benefit the wider community and to be able to meet the objectives set out in Harrow’s Local Implementation Plan.

Report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director of Community Environment which set out the revised parking programme for 2011/12 following confirmation of the capital programme allocation and also the methodology associated in considering schemes for parking controls under the Local Safety Parking Schemes programme.

A Member suggested that the ‘Service Request Assessment’ criteria should be amended so that requests from the emergency services had a higher priority on the table.

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

That

(1)               the revised priority list of schemes shown in Appendix A to the report of the Corporate Director of Community and Environment be agreed  for 2011/12;

(2)               the criteria and process involved in considering sites under the Local Safety Parking Schemes programme (formerly known as the Problem Streets programme) be agreed.

Reason for Decision:  To prioritise the Controlled Parking Zones, Parking Schemes and Local Safety Parking Schemes programme in 2011/12.

Report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director of Community and Environment which provided the results of the formal statutory consultation, which had followed an exhibition, stakeholder meeting and informal public consultation, regarding the proposed extension of the Rayners Lane Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ).

In response to the earlier deputation relating to Rayners Lane, an officer stated that they had taken into consideration the fact that there had been in some roads and sections of road no majority support from residents for a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ).  He added that consultations focused on safety and amenity and a consistent approach was taken for all such consultations.  A detailed site visit had also been conducted by officers and some restrictions had been proposed to allow access for emergency vehicles. 

Following questions from Members of the Panel, the deputee who was a resident of Raynton Close responded that under current proposals, emergency vehicles would be forced to enter the road from the ‘wrong’ side’, and residents’ request to position the DYLs  on the opposite side of the road should not impact the effectiveness of the scheme.  An officer explained that parking schemes under consideration were amended and refined on the basis of responses to consultations to ensure that any final proposals included those aspects of the scheme that received majority support from residents.

Following questions from Members of the Panel, an officer reported that when formulating double yellow lines (DYLs), the intention was to maximize  available parking spaces.  He added that Harrow residents’ parking requirements currently outstripped availability.  A lack of DYLs encouraged irresponsible parking and officers tried to carry out reviews and consultations in the most economic and cost effective way, whilst taking local factors into consideration.

An adviser to the Panel stated that traders and businesses in Harrow did not, on the whole, support DYLs as they restricted economic growth by making it difficult for shoppers and delivery vehicles to park in the vicinity of businesses.

Following a point raised by a Panel Member, an officer stated that the Pinner Road traders had rejected the Council’s suggestion of allocating a section of their forecourts for inset parking bays and agreed he had received a request from the Honeypot Lane traders near Canons Park Station to introduce parking controls as road space was regularly taken up by commuters and would be explored further.

It was agreed by Panel Members and officers that the length of Alfriston Avenue outside the proposed CPZ together with Fernbrook Drive be included in a re-consultation.

A Member, who was not a Member of the Panel, stated that although 90% of the residents consulted about the proposed Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) in Rayners Lane supported it, traffic officers had met with some of those residents who were against the CPZ proposals.  Officers had agreed to take on board the suggested reduction of the double yellow lines in specific locations, however, these had not been included in the proposals. 

An officer responded that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 72.

Report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director of Community and Environment outlining petitions that had been received since the meeting of the Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel on 2 February 2011.

Green Lane – Request for permanent road closure

Officers had met with the two lead petitioners and looked at the results of traffic surveys of the area, carried out observations of traffic flows during a planned closure of Green Lane in May 2011, and reviewed all personal injury accident data for Green Lane and looked at available traffic data about the area.

Following consideration of the above information, officers did not recommend a permanent closure of Green Lane at the junction of Stanmore Hill or the alternative left turn ban suggested by the petitioners.  It may be possible to revisit this issue in the future once the traffic signals along Stanmore Broadway corridor were completed, as it was possible that traffic patterns and levels of capacity may change.

Uxbridge Road – traffic scheme – objection to the removal of the pelican crossing near the Grimsdyke Road junction

Officers had agreed with the Portfolio Holder that the existing pelican crossing be retained and the proposed zebra crossing be omitted from the final scheme.  Additionally:

·                    the timing of the Pelican crossing would be amended to help ease congestion along this corridor;

·                    the proposed additional zebra crossing west of Anselm Road would be replaced by a pedestrian refuge;

·                    the crossings would be monitored once the scheme was implemented.

Marlborough Hill – Request to review existing CPZ

Statutory consultation would begin in July 2011 the results of which would be reported at the September 2011 Panel meeting.

Harley Road/Harley Crescent – Request to review parking

Currently there was no funding allocated to review parking in these roads.  Additionally, the proposed re-development of the nearby Kodak site could impact on parking patterns in the area.  The area would be considered as part of the next annual parking scheme prioritisation, which would be reported at the February 2012 Panel meeting.

Elgin Avenue/Kenmore Avenue – Request for parking controls

The location would be examined under the Local Safety Parking Schemes Programme (LSPS).  If the scope of the parking problems proved to be outside the scope of the LSPS, then the issue would be placed on the priority list and considered at the Panel meeting in February 2012.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director of Community and Environment which provided an update on the delivery of the Capital Programme of transport schemes for 2011/12.  This included schemes funded by Transport for London and those schemes included in Harrow’s Capital Programme. 

Further to the deputation from the West Harrow Residents Group, the Chair stated that this scheme had been widely consulted on and there had been two trials.  The scheme review under consideration took safety issues and expert advice from the emergency services into consideration and would benefit the wider community.

A Member stated that he welcomed the ‘10/5 – The Residents’ Solution’ report and the expert advice provided by the Police and Fire Brigade, however, safety issues had to take priority.  The emergency services agreed that the 10/5 proposals were currently not viable in their present form and that there would be further discussion of this at the Panel meeting in September 2011.

A Member of the Panel stated that there needed to be stricter control of unlawful parking in the borough, particularly since the Council were now effectively responsible for enforcing a number of the rules contained in the Highway Code .

Following questions from Members of the Panel, an officer stated that Harrow council’s policy towards reducing car ownership and usage focused on a ‘modal shift’ and was in accord with national policy.  An officer also stated that Traffic officers would continue to engage in dialogue with residents in West Harrow.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

In accordance with the provisions of Executive Procedure Rule 48.2 (part 4D of the Constitution)

RESOLVED: At 9.59 pm to continue until 10.15 pm.