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 Panel;

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

RESOLVED:  To note that the following interest was declared:

Agenda Item 13 – West Harrow Controlled Parking Zone – Honeybun Estate and Whitmore School Area: Results of Statutory Consultation

Councillor David Perry declared a personal interest in that the Labour Party offices were in close proximity to the West Harrow Controlled Parking Zone.  He would remain in the room during the discussion and decision making on this item.

Councillor Jerry Miles declared a personal interest in that the Labour Party offices were in close proximity to the West Harrow Controlled Parking Zone. He would remain in the room during the discussion and decision making on this item.

Councillor Ajay Maru declared a personal interest in that the Labour Party offices were in close proximity to the West Harrow Controlled Parking Zone. He would remain in the room during the discussion and decision making on this item.

Councillor Mrinal Choudhury declared a personal interest in that the Labour Party offices were in close proximity to the West Harrow Controlled Parking Zone. He would remain in the room during the discussion and decision making on this item.

Councillor Brian Gate declared a personal interest in that he resided in Butler Road, West Harrow.  This road was not affected by the proposed parking controls. He indicated that he would remain in the room to make representations and to listen to the debate on this item.

To appoint a Vice-Chairman of the Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel for the Municipal Year 2012/13.

RESOLVED:  To appoint Councillor Jerry Miles as Vice-Chairman of the Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel for the 2012/13 Municipal Year.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 8 February 2012 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 8 February 2012 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 the following public questions were received:

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), the following deputation be received:

1.                  Hatch End Parking Scheme

The threedeputees, all of whom worked at the Jigsaw Nursery, made the following points:

·                     the Jigsaw Nursery School in Hatch End was based in the Scout Hut alongside the Grimsdyke Road Car Park and had been operating for over 30 years.  The nursery had been rated as ‘Outstanding’ following a recent OFSTED inspection;

·                     the proposed implementation of parking charges in the car park had caused much concern amongst the staff and parents who used the car park on a daily basis, as they may incur significant additional expenses to park there or stop there to drop off and pick up their children from the nursery.  The nursery was open 38 weeks a year, employed 20 staff and served over a over 100 families and 40 children per session;

·                     the main areas of concern were the safety of parents and children during busy dropping off and picking up times, which were as follows: 9.00 am, 12.00-12.30 pm and 3.00 pm;

·                     parents required adequate time to escort children into the nursery and sometimes to settle them in;

·                     nursery staff were seeking clear guidelines from the Council regarding how long parents could park in the Grimsdyke Car park, when dropping off and picking up their children, without incurring parking charges;

·                     the deputation contained 94 signatures.

Following questions from Members of the Panel, one of the Deputees responded that:

·                     the nursery was in a fenced-off area by the car park;

·                     40 children attended each half day session, which was a total of 80 children per day;

·                     it was a pre-school nursery and there were no plans to introduce either breakfast or after school clubs there.

An officer stated that as part of the evaluation process, officers had monitored the use of the car park on Grimsdyke Road.  Some parents dropped off their children on their way to work and only used the car park for a few minutes, whereas other parents took longer.  If parking charges were introduced at the car park, then enforcement officers would be under instruction to permit parents adequate time to drop off and pick up their children. 

Following questions and comments from Panel Members, the officer advised that designating a single parking bay for the exclusive use of parents would not be best use of a parking space.  He added that the proposed parking charge of 20 pence per hour was a nominal amount and was the equivalent of £1 per week.

(a)   To receive a petition from the residents of Knowles Court, Cymbeline  

Court, Lime Court and Charville Court, Harrow, relating to unregulated parking in the access road off Gayton Road, Harrow;

(b)   to receive any other petitions submitted by members of the

      public/Councillors under the provisions of Executive Procedure Rule   

      49 (Part 4D of the Constitution).

RESOLVED: To note the receipt of the following petition which was referred to the Divisional Director of Environmental Services for consideration:

Petition from the residents of Knowles Court, Cymbeline Court, Lime Court and Charville Court, Harrow, containing 75 signatures, relating to unregulated parking in the access road off Gayton Road, Harrow, with the following terms of reference:

“Since the access road off Gayton Road near the junction with St John’s Road, for Knowles Court, Lime Court, Cymbeline Court and Charville Court has been adopted by Harrow Council, it has been the only road in that part of Harrow that has unregulated parking.  This has made it a regular target for people to park in the road for free.  The road is too narrow for parking and when cars are parked there it impedes the access of ambulances and other emergency vehicles into the area as well as being a general nuisance to the residents of the courts and those residents trying to use the road as access to their parking places.  Ambulances use this access road from time to time as Cymbeline Court is sheltered housing.

The undersigned residents of the Courts call upon Harrow Council to extend the double yellow line no parking restrictions that apply generally to that part of Harrow into the full length of this access road.”

To consider and confirm the Panel's Terms of Reference.

The Panel considered its Terms of Reference.  Following brief discussion, Panel Members agreed that minor amendments be made to its Terms of Reference:

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (to Cabinet) 

That the Panel’s Terms of Reference be amended as follows:

(a)               ‘promotion of road safety’, be added to paragraph 1;

(b)               ‘Bus consideration’ and ‘Cycle schemes’, be added to paragraph 2.

Reason for Decision:  To reflect other areas of the Panel’s work.

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 the position regarding the appointment of non-voting advisers for the 2012/13 Municipal Year.

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

(1)               the advisers detailed in paragraph 2.4 of the officer report be re-appointed for the 2012/13 Municipal Year;

(2)               nominations for an additional adviser, representing the business sector, be sought from Harrow in Business (HIB).

Reason for Decision:  To appoint advisers to the Panel for the 2012/13 Municipal Year, to assist in the work of the Panel.

Report of the Divisional Director, Environmental Services.

The Panel received a report of the Divisional Director Environmental Services, which outlined the proposed programme of schemes to be implemented with the £100k local transport fund allocated to the London Borough of Harrow by Transport for London (TfL) in 2012/13.  An officer advised that the costs of the schemes set out in the report did not jointly add up to £100k and the Panel had the option to prioritise several schemes, the total cost of which amounted to £100k.

Following a brief discussion, the Panel unanimously agreed that both the Krishna Avanti School and the Wood Lane Schemes had important road safety features that would benefit the local community, and therefore recommended that these be progressed. 

Following questions from a Member of the Panel, an officer advised that any schemes not prioritised this year, would either be considered for funding from alternative sources, or be put forward for consideration by the Panel in the 2013/14 Municipal Year.

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 2012/13 financial year.

Report of the Divisional Director, Environmental Services.

The Panel received a report of the Divisional Director Environmental Services, which set out the results of the public consultation undertaken to introduce Pay & Display parking in the Hatch End Broadway area.  An officer advised that in 2005/06 Hatch End traders had requested the implementation of Pay & Display charges in local service roads as they had concerns about long term parking in those roads, which was proving detrimental to local shoppers.

The officer stated that 1500 properties in the area, Hatch End Traders’ Association (HETA) and Hatch End Residents’ Association (HERA) had been consulted about the proposals.  However, the results of the public consultation not shown overall support for the introduction of parking charges, and the Panel therefore had the option of taking forward parts of the Scheme and requesting further consultations or abandoning the scheme and assigning funds available to another scheme in 2012/13.

The officer added that the introduction of parking controls was part of the Council’s overall strategy of demand management and standardising parking charges across the borough.  Parking charges were also a cost effective method of controlling the length of stay of vehicles.  The proposed charges were nominal and would cover enforcement costs.

The officer highlighted the following aspects of the consultation results:

·                    44% of respondents had identified parking issues in the area and some  felt that there were too many disabled parking bays in service road, which led to congestion;

·                    some respondents had flagged up the unfairness of free commuter parking in the vicinity of Hatch End station;

·                    officers had received a petition from residents of Anselm Road, Hatch End, which raised concerns about displaced parking in roads surrounding the area of the proposed parking controls;

·                    8.6% of respondents felt that local trade would be adversely affected. 7.5 % of respondents were in favour of a 1 hour parking restriction during the day to discourage all day commuter parking;

·                    some respondents had suggested a free period of between half to one hour.  However, this would not be permitted under the Council’s current parking charges policy, but the current borough-wide review of parking charges was considering the viability of concessionary levels of charge in smaller commercial centres.

An adviser to the Panel stated that it was the Council’s policy to be guided in its decision-making by the majority views of respondents and pointed out that the majority had been against the proposed parking charges.  He suggested that the introduction of parking charges in the bays in the service roads and maintaining free parking in the Grimsdyke Car Park would encourage shoppers and benefit local traders.

A Member of the Panel stated that Hatch End was becoming an increasingly difficult area to park in.  She had received a number of complaints from residents in Dove Park who were concerned that parking charges would lead to displaced parking in surrounding streets.  She added that traders would suffer if shoppers could not park in the vicinity of shops and therefore felt that abandoning the Hatch End Parking Scheme was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 126.

Report of the Divisional Director, Environmental Services.

The Panel received a report of the Divisional Director Environmental Services, which set out the results of the statutory consultation carried out during March 2012 on the proposed changes to the parking layouts on Pinner Road between The Gardens and Neptune Road and the immediately adjoining sections of the County roads within the existing Pinner Road Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ).

An officer stated that following the Panel meeting on 20 September 2011 and subsequent approval by the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety, officers had worked closely with Transport for London’s (TfL) Network Assurance Team to amend the parking proposals.  This had required reversing the location of the proposed Pay & Display bays and the bus stop on Pinner Road.  The relocation had not meant the loss of any parking bays. He added that officers had also received a petition from businesses and their customers on Pinner Road supporting the revised location of the Pay & Display bays outside the shops.

The Panel congratulated officers for their excellent work in successfully re?negotiating the proposals with TfL.  A back benching Member thanked the Panel and officers for their hard work in developing the proposals and made the following points:

·                    lack of adequate parking and the introduction of Double Yellow Lines in the Pinner Road shopping area were having a negative impact on the vitality and vibrancy of an important shopping area;

·                    the previous TfL ruling against any on street parking had been successfully challenged by Council officers;

·                    the proposed Scheme would go a long way to helping shoppers, residents and traders in the Pinner Road area.

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

That the Parking Scheme be implemented as set out below:

(1)               proposed Pay & Display parking bays be situated and implemented in front of the shops outside nos. 156 to 166 and nos. 170 to 176 Pinner Road, operating from Monday to Saturday 7.00 am to 7.00 pm;

(2)               the existing bus stop shelter and bus stop clearway markings situated outside nos. 170 - 176 and nos. 176 – 184 Pinner Road be relocated;

(3)               one proposed disabled parking place be situated outside no.154 Pinner Road;

(4)               the existing loading restrictions (7.00 am – 10.00 am & 3.00 pm – 8.00 pm Mon - Fri and 8.00 am - 6.30 pm Sat & Sun) in front of the shops on Pinner Road (except at junctions) be removed;

(5)               waiting and loading restrictions opposite the shops on Pinner Road between Neptune Road and The Gardens be changed as follows:

(a)               Waiting restrictions outside nos. 173 – 187 and nos. 201 – 217 Pinner Road to be “At any time”; 

(b)               Loading restrictions between nos. 121 – 255 Pinner Road to be 7.00 - 10.00 am and 4.00 – 7.00 pm, Monday - Friday and 11.00 am –5.00 pm Saturday and Sunday;

(6)               existing single yellow line waiting restrictions be changed to “at any time” waiting restrictions (double yellow lines) in the following  ...  view the full minutes text for item 127.

Report of the Divisional Director, Environmental Services.

The Panel received a report of the Divisional Director Environmental Services, which set out the results of the Statutory Consultation carried out during February and March 2012, on the proposed changes to the existing Controlled Parking Zones (CPZ) in West Harrow and proposed new parking control areas around the Honeybun Estate and Whitmore School areas.

An officer reported that officers had followed the same process as with other recent scheme consultations where only those areas with majority support in favour of the proposed parking controls had been progressed.

Members of the Panel congratulated officers for their hard work on the proposals and made the following comments on them:

·                    they had been well formulated and showed that officers had taken on board the comments of residents in roads and sections of roads;

·                    they would provide safer and better access for residents, drivers and emergency vehicles and that this was a satisfactory conclusion to what had been a controversial issue for several years;

·                    Panel Members also expressed regret at the aggressive behaviour of some residents who had been opposed to any form of CPZ in West Harrow.

A back benching Member stated that:

·                    some of the residents affected by the Scheme continued to be dissatisfied with the final proposal and that this had implications for community cohesion;

·                    there continued to be a great deal of tension among West Harrow residents regarding these proposals;

·                    although the report stated there were 43 properties on Pool Road, there were in fact only 13 properties there and there was no parking available outside these properties;

·                    most of the properties on Farmborough Close comprised of sheltered housing which had Double Yellow Lines outside.  Friends and family members of the residents in these properties experienced difficulty in picking up and dropping them off;

·                    Farmborough Close, which also had sheltered housing, had unauthorised disabled parking bays outside;

·                    the Adults Social Care section should also have been consulted regarding any parking proposals outside the sheltered housing in Farmborough Close;

·                    Heath Road should not have been included in the proposals as its residents’ views were split on the proposals.

A Member of the Panel stated that it was not possible to please all the residents of all the time.  The important issue was that these proposals had been developed and agreed on a cross-party basis, in an open and transparent way, with sufficient opportunities for residents to engage with and provide feedback to the Council.

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

That the Parking Schemes be implemented as set out below:

(1)               Bouverie Road between Vaughan Road and the existing CPZ W - be included within CPZ W with the exception of properties numbered 2-10 and 1-19 as advertised;

(2)               Butler Avenue - the existing section not within the existing CPZ zone V remain outside of the CPZ, as advertised;

(3)               Butler Road - the western extremity NOT be removed from the existing CPZ zone W;

(4)               Drury Road (Vaughan Road to Sumner Road) -  ...  view the full minutes text for item 128.

1. Roxeth School and safety matters in Brickfield, Harrow on the Hill

2. Butler Road, West Harrow: Objection to removal of CPZ

3. Anselm Road, Hatch End: Request for Parking Restrictions

4. Grimsdyke Car Park, Hatch End: Objection to introduction of parking

    charges

5. Pinner Road: Petition to support introduction of Pay and Display Bays

6. 40 Eastcote Road , Pinner: request for parking restrictions

7. Objections to the proposed bus service along Wood Lane

Report of the Divisional Director, Environmental Services.

The Panel received a report of the Divisional Director, Environmental Services which set out details of the petitions that had been received since the last meeting of the Panel and provided details of the Council’s investigations and findings where these had been undertaken.

An officer made the following points about the petitions listed below:

Roxeth School and Safety Matters in Brickfield, Harrow on the Hill

An officer explained that he had met the lead petitioner on site to discuss road safety concerns.  The issue of the worn road markings has been passed to the maintenance section for attention and the parking enforcement issues referred to parking enforcement.  A road safety education officer from the Council had given a talk at the school which had addressed some off the concerns raised by the petitioner.

An officer advised that further details concerning the petitions relating to Butler Road West Harrow, Anselm Road Hatch End, Grimsdyke Road Car Park Hatch End and Pinner Road had been provided earlier in the meeting under minute items 126 and 128.

40 Eastcote Road, Pinner - request for parking restrictions

An Officer explained that In this particular instance there is an alternative to waiting restrictions due to the position of the zebra crossing and favourable consideration is being given to a modest extension of the crossing zig?zags which does not require consultation in the same way as waiting restrictions.  

Objections to the proposed new bus service along Wood Lane

Re-routing of the 615 bus service to include Wood Lane and increasing the frequency of the service had been agreed following negotiations between officers, Hertfordshire County Council, the bus operator and TfL.

Panel Members congratulated officers on successfully negotiating the changes to the 615 bus route.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Report of the Divisional Director, Environmental Services.

The Panel received a report of the Divisional Director Environmental Services which provided an update on progress of the 2012/13 programme of traffic and parking schemes which included schemes funded by Transport for London (TfL) and schemes included in Harrow’s Capital Programme.

An officer highlighted the following aspects of the report:

·                    both the Mollison Way major project scheme and the linking of five sets of traffic signals in Stanmore Hill were substantially complete;

·                    the freight management scheme and the development of the associated signage scheme were underway.

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

·                    most of the accidents on Old Redding had involved vehicles rather than pedestrians;

·                    a full impact assessment of the proposals relating to the sports ground at The Hive at Canons Park had yet to be carried out.  Parking controls may be necessary on match days and a Section 106 agreement may be necessary to mitigate against parking problems and congestion.

A Member of the Panel stated that she was extremely pleased to see initiatives such as The Hive being submitted to the Panel and well as to the Planning Committee for consideration and comment.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Which cannot otherwise be dealt with.

Kodak Site Proposed Re-development

In accordance with the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, the following item was included late on the agenda as a Special Planning Committee to discuss the proposed re-development of the Kodak Site was scheduled to take place on Tuesday 26 June, and this would be the only opportunity that the Panel would have to discuss the application before a decision was taken. 

An adviser to the Panel stated that in the past, planning developments had been presented to the Panel for consideration and comment.  The Panel should be requested to become involved in any such planning developments earlier in the consideration process.  He added that Transport for London (TfL) had been asked to consider converting the H14 bus route to a double decker bus and an additional bus service from the proposed housing estate to Wealdstone and then Harrow Town Centre should also be requested.

An officer advised that funds had been identified for additional H14 buses. However, TfL had indicated that the introduction of a double decker bus on this route was unlikely.  He added that there had also been some discussion around the possibility of diverting the H9 and H10 bus routes for the convenience of residents on the proposed housing estate.

Panel Members made the following comments regarding the proposals:

·                    Section 106 funds were available for a mini roundabout by the site and the nearby traffic lights may need to be looked at;

·                    residents would be cut off from the Wealdstone shopping area by the presence of the low bridge;

·                    at a recent meeting to discuss the redevelopment of the Kodak site, attended by local stakeholders, traffic congestion in Wealdstone had been highlighted.  The presence of a new Free School in Wealdstone would further add to this congestion.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted and that the Vice-Chairman feedback comments from the Panel to the Special Planning Committee meeting on 26 June 2012.