Agenda and minutes

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

RESOLVED:  To note that the following interests were declared:

All Agenda Items

Councillor Jeff Anderson declared a non-pecuniary interest in that he was a Ward Councillor for Rayners Lane.  He would remain in the room whilst the matters were considered and voted upon.

Agenda Items 6, 11 & 13 – Deputations; Hatch End Area Parking Review – Public Consultation; Information Report – Traffic & Parking Schemes Programme Update

Councillor John Hinkley  declared a non-pecuniary interest in that he was Ward Councillor for Hatch End Ward.  He would remain in the room whilst the matters were considered and voted upon.

Agenda Items 9 & 10 – TFL Local Transport Fund Schemes Programme 2016/17; Parking Management Schemes Programme 2016/17

Councillor Barry Kendler declared a non-pecuniary interest in that he was Ward Councillor for Edgware ward.  He would remain in the room whilst the matters were considered and voted upon.

Agenda Items 6, 11 & 13 – Deputations; Hatch End Area Parking Review – Public Consultation; Information Report – Traffic & Parking Schemes Programme Update

Councillor Jean Lammiman declared a non-pecuniary interest in that she was Ward Councillor for Hatch End Ward.  She would remain in the room whilst the matters were considered and voted upon.

Agenda Items 10 & 13 - Parking Management Schemes Programme 2016/17; Information Report – Traffic & Parking Schemes Programme Update

CouncillorAmeet Jogia declared a pecuniary interest in that he lived on Headstone Lane.  He would remain in the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

Agenda Items 9 & 10 – TFL Local Transport Fund Schemes Programme; Parking Management Schemes Programme 2016/17

Councillor Manji Kara declared a non-pecuniary interest in that he was Ward Councillor for Belmont Ward.  He would remain in the room whilst the matters were considered and voted upon.

Agenda Items  9 & 12 - TFL Local Transport Fund Schemes Programme; North Harrow Area Parking Review – Public Consultation

Councillor Pamela Fitzpatrick declared a non-pecuniary interest in that she was Ward Councillor for Headstone South.  She would remain in the room whilst the matters were considered and voted upon.

Agenda Items 9 & 10 – TFL Local Transport Fund Schemes Programme; Parking Management Schemes Programme 2016/17

Councillor Jerry Miles declared a non-pecuniary interest in that he was Ward Councillor for Roxeth ward.  He would remain in the room whilst the matters were considered and voted upon.

All Agenda Items

CouncillorMrs Vina Mithani declared a non-pecuniary interest in that she was Ward Councillor for Kenton West ward.  She would remain in the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

Agenda Items 9 & 10 – TFL Local Transport Fund Schemes Programme 2016/17; Parking Management Schemes Programme 2016/17

Councillor Nitin Parekh declared a non-pecuniary interest in that he was Ward Councillor for Edgware ward.  He would remain in the room whilst the matters were considered and voted upon.

RESOLVED:  That, in accordance with Committee Procedure Rule 4.1, the following Councillors, who were not Members of the Committee, be allowed to speak on the agenda items indicated:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 23 November 2015 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 23 November 2015 be taken as read and signed as a correct record, subject to the following minor amendment:

Page 56, final paragraph to read:

Councillor Mrs Vina Mithani declared a non-pecuniary interest in that she was Ward Councillor for Kenton West ward and was a Member of the Harrow East Conservative Association which was located on Headstone Lane.  She would remain in the room whilst the matters were considered and voted upon.

To receive any public questions received in accordance with Executive Procedure Rule 49 (Part 4D of the Constitution).

Questions will be asked in the order notice of them was received and there be a time limit of 15 minutes.

[The deadline for receipt of public questions is 3.00 pm, Monday 8 February 2016.  Questions should be sent to publicquestions@harrow.gov.uk  

No person may submit more than one question].

RESOLVED: To note that one public question had been received, however, as the questioner was not present to ask his question, a written response would be sent to him after the meeting.

To receive petitions (if any) submitted by members of the public/Councillors under the provisions of Executive Procedure Rule 47 (Part 4D of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that no petitions were received.

To receive deputations (if any) under the provisions of Executive Procedure Rule 48 (Part 4D of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  That, in accordance with Executive Procedure Rule 16 (Part 4B of the Constitution), the following deputations be received:

1.            Objection to the Headstone Lane Parking Review from Mr E Poole of the Belmont Service Centre Ltd, Chantry House, Chantry Place, HA3 6NY

The Deputee made the following points:

·           the proposed CPZ would cause the likely closure of his business, lead to substantial financial penalties to the remaining lease and investment costs, and mean redundancy for 7 employees, 3 of whom were Harrow residents. The business generated £11k in business rates for the Council.  He added that the issuing of temporary parking permits for customers would resolve the situation.

Following questions from Panel Members, the deputee stated that:

·           most customers visited the premises by appointment, and those without appointments usually only parked outside the premises for a maximum period of between 1-2 hours;

·           the business did not carry out long-term repairs on site, most of the customers were short-stay and any vehicles left overnight would be kept on the premises and not be left parked on the street.

Members back benching stated that this was a successful business and as the Council was committed to supporting SMEs in the borough, it should look into how this business could be supported.  This view was echoed by several Panel Members.

An officer advised that there was no temporary parking permit scheme in place in Harrow and he doubted whether legislation would allow for such a scheme to be introduced.  The Headstone Lane Parking Review had recently finished and officers were still analysing the results.  At this stage it was not possible to predict what the final form the scheme would be.  Officers were sympathetic to the deputees predicament and would look into what possible solution there might be, subject to legislation.

The Chair added that he would discuss the matter further with the Portfolio Holder for Environment, Crime and Community Safety and relevant Ward Councillors, with a view to finding a solution.

2.            Implementation of Harrow’s New Borough Cycling Strategy From Dr Anoop Shah of Harrow Cyclists

The deputee made the following points:

·           the new cyclic scheme at Station Road should be extended to Northwick Park Roundabout;

·           the scheme along Eastcote Lane needed to be better signposted and cycling provision along this stretch of road should cater for the needs of cyclists as well as motorists.

An officer stated that he welcomed the feedback from the deputee.  However, the improvements along Eastcote Lane were part of a bus priority scheme which had wider benefits for the community.  The road would be widened considerably and to compensate for the likely increase in driving speeds, off-lane cycle routes had been made available.  Cycle logos would be implemented in the area to alert motorists to this.  Nevertheless, the levels of investment required to achieve a cycle super highway within Harrow were not currently available.

Report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services.

Members received a report which set out the nomination for Adviser to the Panel from the Harrow Association of Disabled People (HAD), following the resignation of the previous adviser from HAD.

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

That the nomination for Adviser to the Panel, as set out in Appendix 1 to the officer’s report, be agreed.

Reason for Decision:  To appoint an adviser to the Panel for the 2015/16 Municipal Year, to assist in the work of the Panel.

Report of the Corporate Director, Community.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director, Community which set out the proposed programme of traffic schemes to be implemented with the £100k local transport fund allocated to Harrow by Transport for London (TfL).

The Chair advised that 8 schemes had been selected in accordance with a scoring system by officers and it was for the Panel to decide which of these should be recommended for implementation and that the total cost of those schemes should not exceed the £100k TfL fund available.

Following questions and comments from the Panel, an officer advised that the Chapel Lane scheme, had received a high score because a petition from residents of the road had been presented at a previous Panel meeting.  Implementing the scheme would require minimum intervention and would reduce the likelihood of accidents there.

An adviser to the Panel stated, that in his view, implementation of this scheme was desirable, but not essential and there were other schemes on the list which should be prioritised.

A Member stated that this scheme should be progressed because of the large volume of traffic and congestion in the area, which was likely to increase as a result of the new developments in the area.

A Member back benching asked what was being done to tackle the large number of potholes on Harrow’s roads and quoted statistics provided by the RAC which suggested that twenty-five thousand car breakdowns were due to and whether there was a separate budget and a programme of repairs for dealing with these.

An officer undertook to request this information from the maintenance team and forward it to the Panel after the meeting.

Panel Members expressed concern regarding the issue of potholes and the Chair stated that he would urge the Portfolio Holder for Environment, Crime and Community Safety to write to the new Mayor of London and ask the Leader to speak to London Councils to ask whether any London-wide funds were available for repairing potholes in 2017.

It was noted that the Secretary of State had announced that a fund of £6bn would be available for dealing with the problem of potholes in England, however, clarification would be sought regarding whether this included London.

The Chair proposed a motion  that schemes 2, 3, 4, 5 and 8 be recommended for implementation.  The motion was seconded, put to the vote and won by a majority of votes. 

Councillors Barry Kendler, Jerry Miles, Nitin Parekh, Jeff Anderson and Ameet Jogia voted for the proposal.  Councillor Manji Kara voted against the proposal.  Councillor Mrs Vina Mithani abstained from voting.

It was further unanimously agreed that schemes 6, 1 and 7 be earmarked for implementation in the 2017/18 Municipal Year.

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

That:

(1)          schemes 2, 3, 4, 5 and 8 be recommended for implementation;

(2)          schemes 6, 1 and 7 be earmarked for implementation in the 2017/18 Municipal Year.

Reason for Decision:  In order for the Council to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 91.

Report of the Corporate Director, Community.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director, Community which set out information about the identification, prioritisation, development and implementation of parking management schemes in Harrow.  It also detailed requests for parking schemes received by the Council and recommended a programme of work for 2016/17.

Following questions and comments from the Panel, officers advised that:

·                     following agreement of the recommendation by the Panel, it would be referred to the Portfolio Holder for Environment, Crime and Community Safety for approval and could only be implemented in the new financial year, ie after 1 April 2016.   Both an informal and a statutory consultation would be undertaken first and it was therefore unlikely that the scheme would be implemented before the summer of 2016;

·                     no representation had been received from residents of Jesmond Way with regard to the proposed scheme;

·                     making any amendments to existing CPZ’s, for example, the request from Belmont residents to change the existing Double Yellow Lines to Single Yellow Lines, would require carrying out further informal and statutory consultations and would have cost implications.   Officers would expect to implement both schemes at the same time – splitting the two would also have extensive cost implications.

A Member proposed a motion that:

1.            A decision regarding the £7.5k proposed for the review of the Hatch End CPZ be deferred and the decision be taken following further discussion between the Portfolio Holder for Environment, Crime and Community Safety, the three local Ward Councillors and the Chair of the Panel.

The motion was seconded, put to the vote and agreed unanimously.

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

That

(1)          the proposed list of parking management schemes for 2016/17 as shown in Appendix B, with the exception of the Hatch End CPZ, subject to confirmation of the capital funding allocation at Cabinet, be agreed;

(2)          officers be authorised to carry out scheme design and consultation on the parking management schemes listed in Appendix B;

(3)          officers be authorised to implement the parking management schemes listed in Appendix B, subject to further reports being provided on the outcomes of public and statutory consultation and receiving the Panel’s recommendation to proceed;

(4)          any substantive requests to undertake a parking review on existing parking schemes be referred to, and considered by the Panel for inclusion in the annual programme of work.

Reason for Decision:  To recommend the Parking Management Schemes programme for the 2016-17 financial year.

Report of the Corporate Director, Community.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director, Community which set out the results of the public consultation carried out in localised areas which had been previously agreed by the Panel for the Hatch End area to consider the alteration of existing and the introduction of new parking controls in the area.

A Member back benching queried paragraph 2.20 of the report which stated that a meeting had been scheduled with Ward Councillors, in accordance with standard practice, to discuss the results of the consultation and distribution process.  She stated that no such meeting had been scheduled and that she had not received any correspondence regarding the consultation results, and that this oversight was not acceptable.  She requested officers to contact the company responsible for co?ordinating the consultation for an explanation.  An officer apologised for the oversight and undertook to do this.

The Chair advised that although the meeting had not taken place, he had responded to officer emails regarding the results, and had copied the local Ward Councillors into his email, therefore they would have been aware of the results.

The Member asked how much weight would be given to representations from St Anselm’s Church and how would this compare to representations from individual residents living in the vicinity of the church.

An officer responded that this was a balancing exercise, and that for example, local residents living in the vicinity of the church may be affected by activities held at the Church.  The parking controls were in response to issues of commuter and long-term parking in the area.  To date, a representation from the Vicar and one from the secretary at the Church had been received.

A Member proposed a motion that the Recommendation relating to the Hatch End Parking Review be deferred until the next Panel meeting, pending further consultation with relevant Ward Councillors.

The motion was seconded, put to the vote and won unanimously.

RESOLVED:  That the Recommendation be deferred until the next meeting of the Panel.

Report of the Corporate Director, Community.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director, Community which set out the results of the public consultation carried out in the localised area previously agreed by the Panel for North Harrow to consider the extension of existing parking controls in the area around Somerset Road.

A Member back benching asked whether it would be possible to amend the scheme at the Statutory Consultation stage.  The Chair advised that any residents wishing to object to the scheme should make their views known at the Statutory Consultation stage.  Any scheme being implemented would be on the basis of the majority view expressed by local residents.

An officer advised that the previous scheme had not been progressed due to opposition in the form of petition which had been presented to the Panel.  He expected the Statutory Consultation to be carried out during May/June 2016 with scheme implementation between July-September 2016.

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

That the following  roads  and measures be considered for statutory consultation:

1.            parking controls / permit bays operating Monday to Friday 10.00 am to 11.00 am and 2.00 pm to 3.00 pm in Sussex Road (between Surrey Road and Pinner View); Cornwall Road and Somerset Road, be introduced;

2.            “at any time” waiting restrictions (double yellow lines) at junctions, in turning heads, along narrow sections of carriageway and at bends in accordance with guidance from the Highway Code and computer simulation of vehicle swept paths, be introduced throughout the consultation area.

Reason for Decision:  To regulate parking in the area as detailed in the report. The measures are in direct  response  to  residents  and  businesses  requests for  changes  to  the existing parking arrangements in their area in order to maintain road safety and accessibility for vehicular traffic.

Report of the Corporate Director, Community.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director, Community which set out details of the petitions that have been received since the previous Panel meeting and provided details of the Council’s investigations and findings where these had been undertaken.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

Report of the Corporate Director, Community.

The Panel received a report of the Corporate Director, Community which set out provide an update on progress with the 2015 /16 traffic and parking management programme of works.  This included schemes funded by Transport for London and schemes included in Harrow’s Capital Programme

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

It was noted that this was the last Panel meeting of the 2015/16 Municipal Year.  The Chair thanked Panel Members, Advisers and officers for their hard work in supporting the work of the Panel.

It was also noted that this would be the final meeting attended by Andrew Leitch as he would shortly be leaving the Council.  Panel Members thanked him for his contribution to the work of the Panel.

An adviser to the Panel stated that there were plans to close the Metropolitan line between Baker Street and Wembley Park on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday evening after 22.00 over the next two years.