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 that there were no Reserve Members in attendance at this meeting.

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 interest was declared:

Agenda Item 10 – Transport and Disabilities Procedure

Councillor Susan Hall declared a personal interest in that she was a member of the Harrow Association of Disabled People.  She would remain in the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 20 September 2011 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 20 September 2011 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

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 no public questions were put, or petitions or deputations received at this meeting.

Report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment, which provided a review of how the Public Realm Infrastructure (PRI) service addressed transport issues for people with disabilities. 

An officer advised that this report did not outline a new strategy but was an amalgamation of different policy strands into a single document.  The officer added that this policy took into account the Council’s public sector equality duty and looked at the ‘total journey’ experience of people with disabilities.

Following questions from Members of the Panel, an officer advised that:

·                    a scheme to turn off street lights in the borough during specific times at night was currently being consulted on and the officer undertook to ensure that any proposals arising from the consultation would be considered at a future meeting of the Panel;

·                    it was clarified that parking on double yellow lines at dropped kerbs was not permitted and those not eligible to park there would be liable to pay a penalty charge notice if caught;

·                    the reason for the introduction of white H bar lines in a few specific locations in the borough had been to highlight an access, however, these are advisory and not enforceable, and this initiative will be kept under review;

·                    Blue Badge holders were eligible to park on both single and double yellow lines for up to three hours in areas where there were no loading restrictions and provided their vehicle was not causing an obstruction.

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

That the Transport and Disabilities Procedure be adopted.

Reason for Decision:  To provide greater clarity and transparency as to how transport and disabilities issues are addressed by the Council for the benefit of the public, Members and officers.

Report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment outlining proposals to implement temporary parking controls in the lead-in period and during the 2012 Diamond Jubilee Celebrations and the Olympic and Paralympic Games.  It also set out the costs and methodology on how the measures could be implemented.

An officer advised that a maximum sized scheme covering the area around the four Jubilee Line Stations and including an enlarged area around the existing Stanmore Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) would cost approximately £262k, and a minimum sized scheme covering three Jubilee Line Stations and encompassing very minor areas outside the current Stanmore CPZ would cost approximately £110k.  He added that a temporary scheme would mean residents would be issued with free temporary parking permits, and at least half of the costs of the scheme would be spent on administering it.

Following questions from Members of the Panel, the officer advised that:

·                    if a temporary scheme was adopted and acted as a successful deterrent to illegal parking, then the likelihood of increased income from Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) would be low and the scheme would be unlikely to recoup any costs;

·                    funding for either a maximum sized or minimum sized scheme would only be possible if a permanent scheme was omitted from the 2012/13 Capital Programme.

Panel Members agreed that they would prefer not to omit a permanent scheme from the 2012/13 Capital Programme in favour of a temporary one, and agreed that Option 2, coupled with enforcement and the use of PCNs would be their preferred solution.

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

That advisory posters at a cost of £6k be erected on roads around Jubilee Line Stations at Stanmore, Canons Park, Queensbury and Kingsbury within Harrow, to indicate that parking controls would be vigorously enforced during the Diamond Jubilee and Olympic and Paralympic Games period in order to minimise the negative impact on residents and businesses.

Reason for Decision: To mitigate the effects of the 2012 Diamond Jubilee,  Olympic and Paralympic Games on residents and businesses within Harrow.

Report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services.

The Panel received a report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services, which set out nominations received for the position of adviser to the Panel for 2011/12.  The report was admitted late to the agenda to allow the Panel to recommend adviser appointments to the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety.  A nomination from Living Streets was tabled at the meeting with the agreement of the Panel to allow Members to give consideration to all nominations received.

Following consideration of the report, partly in a private session, Panel Members unanimously agreed that the following three nominees be recommended as adviser appointments to the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety:

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

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

(1)               Mr Anthony Wood, representing Harrow Public Transport Users’ Association;

(2)               Mr Len Gray, representing Living Streets;

(3)               Mr Alan Blann, representing the Cyclists Touring Club ‘Right to Ride’

Reason for Decision:  To appoint advisers 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 outlining petitions that had been received since the meeting of the Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel on 20 September, and the Council’s investigations where these had been undertaken. 

Kingshill Avenue – Area Traffic Management Scheme

An officer reported that two petitions had been received objecting to the Council’s proposals for a traffic management scheme in the area.  Signatories to the petition and the majority of residents consulted were in favour of the ‘do nothing’ option.  However, as the consultation results had shown support for the introduction of double yellow lines, these would be implemented subject to the outcome of statutory consultation.

Canons Corner

The statutory consultation relating to the introduction of pay and display parking near the shopping parade had not received any formal objections, and was being progressed following discussions with the Portfolio Holder.  Other sites which were part of the Stanmore Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) had received objections and these were being reviewed with a view to being resolved.

Station Parade Canons Park – Petition for Better Parking

The petition related to parking around the Canons Park Retail Parade and was included in the Canons Park Station area review, which would be going to public consultation shortly.  The results of the consultation would be reported to the February 2012 Panel meeting.

Following a request from a Member, an officer undertook to update residents of Rees Drive/Berry Hill regarding the progress of the CPZ.

Following questions from Members of the Panel, an officer reported that the proposed Double Yellow Lines in Morecombe Gardens had been deferred following discussions with the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety, as the adjacent grass area infront of dwellings was not part of the public highway but under the remit of the housing department.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment, which provided an update on the parking review, following the borough-wide parking consultation and the Cabinet meeting of 18 October 2011, which had considered the consultation results.  It also provided information on the way recommended changes would be introduced.

An officer reported that the consultation results had shown that residents were in favour of the following options, all of which had been adopted and would be developed further:

·                    introducing 4 different cost rates for on-street parking zones across the borough;

·                    introducing just 4 different costs rates for car parks across the borough;

·                    providing an option to pay using credit/debit cards;

·                    moving to a single cost borough-wide visitor permits;

The officer reported that several options had not been supported at consulation and would not be progressed further:

·                    moving to a residents’ permit system based on environmental emissions;

·                    introducing a peak hour charge for car parks.

The officer added that there would be a range of costings which would be submitted to the Portfolio holder for consideration. The timeline for this scheme was tight as revised parking charges would need to be included in the annual fees and charges report to Cabinet in February 2012.

Following questions from Members, an officer reported that the final proposal to Cabinet would take into consideration the following:

·                    detailed financial information about income levels and other demographic information about each area as well as which of the following four categories an area fell into according to the Local Development Framework Area Action Plan:

Metropolitan (for example Harrow Town Centre); Major (for example Edgware); District Centre (for example Pinner); Local Centre (for example Pinner Road);

·                    current levels of parking revenue from an area, possible impact of raising or lowering the charges in a particular area;

·                    input from the Economic and Research Development Unit into the decision-making relating to parking charges;

·                    the rationale behind the revised parking charges which had been to improve turnover rather than reduce demand.  The intention was to rationalise and synchronise charges across the borough.

Members noted that officers had considered several options prior to going to consultation.  The consultation documents had explained the rationale for variable parking charges.  It was possible that South Harrow may be placed in one of the lower parking price bands, however, any pricing structures agreed would be in keeping with the Local Development Framework priorities.

Following a question from a Member, an officer advised that the doctor’s parking permit scheme discussed in the report related to surgeries and GP practices.  The officer advised that there were already other permit schemes operating to deal with nurses and carers visiting patients in the borough.

A Member expressed her disappointment at the slow pace of the Hatch End parking review, as the parking problems there were spilling over into neighbouring areas and adversely affecting local traders.  She added that the implementation of parking meters would help resolve the situation and generate income for the Council.  An  ...  view the full minutes text for item 99.

Report of the Corporate Director Community and Environment.

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

An officer reported that:

·                    officers had attended a useful quarterly signal liaison meeting with TfL and received estimates for linking the five signals in Stanmore Hill/The Broadway/Elm Park/Marsh Lane/pelican crossing outside Sainsbury’s;

·                    works on the speed cushions in Dalkeith Grove had been completed and were proving effective in traffic calming;

·                    the Mollison Way project was due to be completed shortly.  A Heritage trail relating to the aviation history of the area would be launched in the New Year with support from TfL;

·                    following consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety and relevant stakeholders, a number of safety measures were due to be implemented on Whitchurch Lane;

·                    a number of safety measures were due to be implemented on Honeypot Lane;

·                    a number of proposals to improve road safety in Shaftesbury Avenue/Porlock Avenue had been developed and would be implemented in early 2012;

·                    the roads outside Priestmead Primary and Canons High Schools had recently been changed to 20mph zones.

Following questions from Members of the Panel, an officer stated that:

·                    the safety measures on Honeypot Lane had been proposed due to a marked increase in personal injury accidents.  Monitoring had shown that drivers were using the bus lane at off peak times and that this made it difficult for pedestrians to cross two live lanes of traffic.  Officers were in the process of analysing the results of a recent consultation exercise and the trial closure of an access off Honeypot Lane near Winchester Road.  The results of traffic surveys in the area and Members comments that the operation of the bus lane should remain as 7:00 -10:00 am and 4:00 -7:00 pm would be taken into consideration;

·                    following feedback from a Member back benching, officers undertook to investigate the possibility of moving the pedestrian crossing outside Sainsbury’s on the Broadway in Stanmore further along the road, this would have to be in consultation with TfL;

·                    the £5k quoted in appendix A for the Shopmobility Scheme related to staffing costs for the schemes to operate on weekends and busy festive periods.

A Member of the Panel reported that the measures implemented outside Rayners Lane Station were a success and had greatly reduced congestion in the area.  An officer reported that the installation of CCTV and pay and display parking bays in December would improve the situation further.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

RESOLVED:  That in accordance with Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item for the reason set out below: