Agenda item

Information Item - Harrow Streetspace Programme Review

Report of the Corporate Director of Community

Minutes:

Prior to the consideration of the report of the Corporate Director of Community, the Panel received seven Deputations (Minute 100 also refers).

 

Title of Deputation 1

Remove LTN02 Headstone Scheme

Reason for Deputation 1

Adverse impacts of implementation of Low Traffic Neighbourhood scheme in Headstone South Ward, LTN02.

 

In summary, the four representatives outlined how LTN02 had negatively affected the local area and highlighted that journeys were much longer and more difficult, the higher levels of pollution the economic impact and that in this particular area there had been no vehicle-to-vehicle accidents in the past 5 years.  According to data gathered, it was stated traffic in Harrow had increased, that the LTN would adversely affect house prices.  The view was expressed that the LTNs had not aided in the reduction of cases and had bought issues for those shielding and isolating and that emergency services could be negatively impacted.

 

The Panel thanked the deputees for their presentation and sought clarification on the petition in terms of the addresses of signatories.

 

The Panel questioned whether feedback had been received from other ward councillors from areas surrounding the LTN scheme and were advised that a minimal response had been received.

 

Title of Deputation 2

Mini China, not mini Holland

Reason for Deputation 2

[18]

I would like to raise the severe or complete lack of consultation and communication that has occurred with residents and other stakeholders in the implantation of these LTN schemes.  We live in a democratic borough. I would like all the LTN’s removed immediately until a correct consultation with all is done.

 

In summary the representative for deputation 2 stated that there had been a lack of communication surrounding the implementation of the LTNs.  It was highlighted these LTNs could have a negative impact on certain demographics within the community as well as businesses already affected by the pandemic.  The representative suggested there were conflicts of interest and that cars were for comfort and convenience and needed for those less able.  She concluded by requesting the removal of the LTN.

 

The Panel thanked the representative for their presentation.  The Chair advised that a consultation would be taking place regarding the LTNs.  The representative agreed that a wider consultation would be needed and stated that the scheme should be scrapped.

 

Title of Deputation 3

Objections and request to remove the Low Traffic Neighbourhood LTN04 Vaughan Road and Blenheim Road.

Reason for Deputation 3

[15 Signatories]

This scheme is adversely impacting on many residents and stakeholders of West Harrow.  They were not consulted and are now suffering considerable stress and anxiety.  An example being the large group of residents essentially trapped between the two blockades in the following roads:  Blenheim Road, The Gardens, Bladon Gardens, Grosvenor Avenue, Sandhurst Avenue, Beaumont Avenue and Dorchester Avenue.

 

In summary, the representative requested that LTN04 be removed.  Reasons included:  A single route in/out of the area had caused longer journeys; increased traffic; the diversion had caused a hazard by going past a school and creating more pollution in that area; the increased journey times had put a strain on those seeking medical care; the planters had created an area for anti-social behaviour and that it had affected local businesses in the area. 

 

The Panel thanked the representative and asked whether the deputee had thought about possible alternative schemes to promote healthy and sustainable travel to which the deputee suggested that the existing cycle lanes on the wider roads are improved.

 

Title of Deputation 4

Remove LTN06 Southfield Park

Reason for Deputation 4

[12 Signatories]

LTN06 Southfield Park has resulted in excessive negative impact for the residents of Manor Way, Parkside Way and Headstone Lane.  We want the scheme removed permanently and a proper consultation to be carried out of all residents on the blocked roads but everyone living on surrounding roads and local businesses.

 

In summary the deputees expressed concern over the negative impact of the LTNs.  They referenced traffic increase, speeding and that roads used as diversion were unsuitable for the volume of traffic created.  Pollution increase was also mentioned as a concern.

 

In response to a question as to whether traffic levels had decreased since the LTN had been removed, the representative confirmed there had been a reduction in traffic, but the lockdown may have affected this result.  In terms of emergency service logistics, the deputees gave examples of emergency service vehicles that had become stuck as well as speeding, albeit in an emergency but on a narrow, busy roads.  It was suggested that smaller roads might not be suitable for the diversions created.

 

Title of Deputation 5

Remove LTN-03 Francis Road area, Greenhill Low Traffic Neighbourhood Scheme motor vehicle roadblock.

Reason for Deputation 5

[13 Signatories]

Adverse impact due to the implementation of LTN-03 Low Traffic Neighbourhood scheme in Greenhill Ward.

 

In summary, it was highlighted that the LTN created cut throughs which were undesirable for the residents living on these roads.  Petitions had indicated that there was a preference for the LTNs to be removed.  It was also mentioned that the LTNs had caused inconvenience. The longer routes had also caused an increased amount of traffic and as well as travel times.

 

The Panel thanked the deputees for their presentation and asked how the journeys had taken prior to the introduction of the LTNs compared to present day, with a deputee describing a much longer journey in response.  Following a Member’s question in relation to the diversions, the deputee explained that the journey was more dangerous, longer and caused increased pollution.

 

Title of Deputation 6

Making Low Traffic Neighbourhoods a success for everyone – from Headstone South Residents

Reason for Deputation 6

[12 Signatories]

To support Harrow's Streetspace Schemes and in particular LTN-02 and LTN-04 as these support Harrow's active travel goals (re: item 8 of the Agenda for 11 Jan 2021:  Harrow Streetspace Programme Review)

 

In summary, the deputees outlined the benefits of the LTNs and how it would help to reduce the environmental impact, improve health, fitness and that these factors outweigh convenience.  It was also stated that fewer cars on the road would equate to less traffic.  However, they did note that data gathering could not be relied upon due to lockdowns and changes being made.  In addition, it was highlighted that driving on minor urban roads increased the risk of accidents.  One deputee pointed stated that the introduction of the LTN had benefitted their family.

 

The Panel thanked the deputees and asked several questions including what data there was about cultural behaviour in terms of moving away from the convenience of car use.  The deputees responded that there was a need to make cycling more attractive than cars and that consideration should be given to those residents in the community with disabilities.

 

In response to a question as to whether the LTNs had increased traffic and pollution, the deputees advised that traffic needed to be more closely monitored as there are contradictory findings and that the scheme should be refined rather than scrapped completely.  Finally, they wished to highlight that the issue had often been caused by a minority of anti-social motorists.

 

Title of Deputation 7

I’m a resident let me out of here

Reason for Deputation 7

[10 Signatories]

To raise concerns for resident safety as a result of only one route in or out which often becomes no route due to LTN planters.

 

In summary, the deputee stated that the LTN had caused difficulties in leaving their residential road and had affected logistics of waste collection and supermarket lorries adversely.  The closure of roads would be a hazard, limiting emergency service access. The LTNs had also caused hazards for the school that was now on the new diversion route.

 

The Chair thanked the deputees and highlighted that the scheme was introduced due to a health emergency to reduce the use of public transport and to increase cycling and walking space.  The monthly reviews would continue with the goal of improving road safety and air quality.

 

The Panel received a report from the Corporate Director of Community, which updated Members on the delivery of the London Streetspace Programme (LSP) in Harrow as a response to the COVID-19 public health pandemic.

 

An officer provided an update which detailed how the current pandemic had affected how people travelled, that measures promoting sustainable transport were required by government and that the cycling and walking schemes also aligned with current transport policy.  Harrow received funding from TfL and DFT for the schemes that had been implemented and these were regularly reviewed.

 

The officer explained that the regular reviews had been reported to the Portfolio Holder for Environment and that changes to the schemes had been made and highlighted that feedback was being listened to.  He added that further engagement was planned to address the issues raised.  A further meeting of the Panel would allow for a more comprehensive review after 6 months of operation of the schemes.

 

In response to a request for clarification of the mitigating factors in relation to Manor Way, the officer explained that this road did already have some traffic issues prior to the pandemic and that possible solutions have been considered. Investigations were ongoing and feedback.

 

In terms of timelines, the officer advised that the consultation would be completed as soon as possible, with engagement being a priority.

 

The Panel agreed that a number of Councillors could address the meeting and the issues raised included:

 

-               There was concern that the public had not been listened to and the importance of representation was stressed;

-               The LTN scheme should end;

-               It was urged that a consultation takes place;

-               Traffic problems need to be addressed;

-               A need for long term schemes that were accepted by the residents;

-               Current data had not been easily comparable due to the current situation and changes made to the scheme;

-               Emergency service access needed to be in place;

-               ANPR must be considered within the consultation;

-               To address the closed zebra crossing at West Harrow Station;

-               SC09 had not worked as well as it should with feedback suggesting there had been a negative response to the scheme.

 

In response to the comments made, members of the Panel made the following comments:

 

-               Further consultation would be welcomed.

-               There was sympathy for both supporters of and objectors to the schemes. Listening to residents would be the way forward to finding a solution.

-               Views of residents living outside of the LTNs should also be heard.

-               To recognise that this was a pilot scheme with feedback considered and that it should be fixed as opposed to scrapped.

-               There was concern surrounding the data gathered, or lack of, for this scheme.

-               A 20mph borough wide speed limit would have multiple benefits for the community, and that full width humps should be used.

-               To reduce traffic, it was necessary to improve alternative modes of transport, such as cycling.

-               Cycling, believed to be underused in Harrow, the LTNs provide strategic cycle routes and make driving an inconvenience, which would generate early opposition.

-               Trials typically last 6 months in order to allow for travel behaviour to change and for a more informed decision to be made.

 

The Chair thanked the Members for their participation.

 

Councillor Ameet Jogia moved an amendment to the recommendation which requested the removal of LTN02.  This was duly seconded, put to the vote and was lost.  (Voting for the amendment was as follows:  Councillor John Hinkley, Councillor Ameet Jogia, Councillor Anjana Patel.  Against the amendment: Councillor Peymana Assad, Councillor James Lee, Councillor David Perry, Councillor Jerry Miles).

 

Councillor Ameet Jogia moved an amendment to the recommendation which requested the removal of LTN03.  This was duly seconded, put to the vote and was lost.  (Voting for the amendment was as follows:  Councillor John Hinkley, Councillor Ameet Jogia, Councillor Anjana Patel.  Against the amendment: Councillor PeymanaAssad, Councillor James Lee, Councillor David Perry, Councillor Jerry Miles).

 

Councillor Ameet Jogia moved an amendment to the recommendation which requested the removal of LTN04.  This was duly seconded, put to the vote and was lost.  (Voting for:  Councillor John Hinkley, Councillor Ameet Jogia, Councillor Anjana Patel.  Against: Councillor Peymana Assad, Councillor James Lee, Councillor David Perry, Councillor Jerry Miles).

 

Councillor Ameet Jogia moved an amendment to the recommendation which requested the removal of LTN06.  This was duly seconded, put to the vote and was lost.  (Voting for: Councillor John Hinkley, Councillor Ameet Jogia, Councillor Anjana Patel.  Against: Councillor PeymanaAssad, Councillor James Lee, Councillor David Perry, Councillor Jerry Miles).

 

Councillor Ameet Jogia moved an amendment to the recommendation which requested the removal of SC01.  This was duly seconded, put to the vote and was lost.  (Voting for:  Councillor John Hinkley, Councillor Ameet Jogia, Councillor Anjana Patel.  Against:  Councillor PeymanaAssad, Councillor James Lee, Councillor David Perry, Councillor Jerry Miles).

 

Councillor Ameet Jogia moved an amendment to the recommendation which requested the removal of SC03.  This was duly seconded, put to the vote and was lost.  (Voting for:  Councillor John Hinkley, Councillor Ameet Jogia, Councillor Anjana Patel.  Against:  Councillor Peymana Assad, Councillor James Lee, Councillor David Perry, Councillor Jerry Miles).

 

Councillor Ameet Jogia moved an amendment to the recommendation which requested the removal of SC09. This was duly seconded, put to the vote and was lost.  (Voting for: Councillor John Hinkley, Councillor Ameet Jogia, Councillor Anjana Patel.  Against: Councillor Peymana Assad, Councillor James Lee, Councillor David Perry, Councillor Jerry Miles).

 

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Supporting documents: