To receive the following deputation under the provisions of Executive Procedure Rule 50 (Part 4D of the Constitution):
Request for half hour free parking in Pinner.
Minutes:
The Panel received the following deputations:
1. The Secretary of Pinner and District Business Club requesting half hour free parking in Pinner
The Chairman stated that this Deputation related to an item on the minutes.
A Representative of Pinner & District Business Club stated that the Residents and Business community of Pinner wished to express their concerns about the detrimental impact high parking charges in Pinner were having on businesses and residents, in comparison with other local High Streets in the area.
A Member of the Panel stated that half an hour free parking, if introduced, would need to be a borough-wide initiative. However, he believed that the costs of such an initiative would be prohibitive. He added that the current parking policy in Harrow was inconsistent and needed to be reviewed and reported back at a future meeting of the Panel.
A Member stated that the shopping parades in Belmont and Hatch End did not have parking charges, and agreed that the costs of extending this scheme borough-wide would be prohibitive.
A Member of the Panel stated that approximately 68% of Harrow’s total parking revenue came from one hour off-street parking charges, the loss of which would impact negatively on other Council Services.
An Adviser to the Panel requested information on the costs of introducing half hour free parking throughout the borough. An officer undertook to provide further information and revenue figures for parking across the borough to the next meeting of the Panel due to take place in November 2010.
A Member, who was not a member of the Panel, stated that Marks and Spencer were offering to refund car parking charges to customers in Pinner. He added that numerous shops and businesses in Pinner had closed recently and that parking charges were a contributing factor to this. He stated that a Council-led, borough-wide initiative was required to tackle this problem.
The Chairman stated that a petition on the same subject as the deputation had been presented at Council on 8 July 2010, and would be considered at the next ordinary meeting of Council in November and the results reported back to a future meeting of the Panel.
2. Clinicians of Bacon Lane Surgery requesting changes to the proposed prohibited parking times in the area surrounding Bacon Lane.
A Representative of the Clinicians from Bacon Lane Surgery requested changes to the proposed parking times in the area surrounding Bacon Lane to 1.00-2.00 pm to enable clinicians to drive to visit housebound patients between clinics and when emergency call outs are required. This would enable clinicians to drive to work and so have their car at their disposal to undertake home visits. He stated that the alternative would be for clinicians to commute by other means, which would significantly reduce the availability of resources available to undertake home visits, which may impact on the weekly number of home visits the practice is able to offer. He also requested that the Council grant the Surgery two free and permanently allocated Doctor Parking Spaces.
A Member of the Panel asked if two additional parking spaces or special parking permits could be made available to staff at the Surgery. Following questions from Members of the Panel, the lead deputee stated that the Surgery had been offered two additional business permits but these only covered vehicles owned by the business and not by staff.
An officer stated that there were 25 parking bays in the immediate vicinity of the Surgery, with a total of 40 in the local area. An officer stated that the Surgery was eligible to purchase a further two business permits and they would need to write to the Council to request these.
An adviser to the Panel stated that staff at the Surgery provided a necessary and vital service to the community and the request for two additional spaces should be granted. An adviser to the Panel agreed that those carrying out essential jobs in the community should not be penalised.
A Member stated that further consultation had been undertaken following representations from residents in the Bacon Lane area. Residents had requested that parking be available from 12.00-2.00 pm in the vicinity of the Surgery, as it was possible that Barnet Council would introduce a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) on their side of Bacon Lane, which would impact on both the Surgery and the school run. She stated that the CPZ had been introduced for the convenience of residents, adding that the population of Harrow was over 220,000 people, and increasing numbers of residents were car owners. In such circumstances, the Council had to take proactive measures whilst continuing to respond to residents’ needs.
An officer explained that there was provision in the parking permit scheme for health workers on-call in Harrow, but this permit did not permit health workers to park outside their work premises.
The Chairman stated that it would take some time to resolve this situation and asked that a more detailed response be provided at the next meeting.
3. Bacon Lane Surgery Patients’ Committee requesting changes to the proposed prohibited parking times in the area surrounding Bacon Lane.
A Representative of Bacon Lane Surgery Patients’ Committee expressed his disappointment at the fact that the recent consultation regarding proposed parking restrictions in the vicinity of Bacon Lane did not take into consideration over a hundred responses from patients at the Surgery. He stated that the consultation results were not, therefore, an accurate reflection of public opinion. He added that the Surgery should not be considered a business premises, because its ethos was different from that of a business and requested that parking time limits should be extended for patients at the Surgery if their appointments overran.
4. Residents of Waverley Road requesting improvements to the double yellow lines planned for 169-200 Waverley Road.
Two residents of Waverley Road stated that it was a safe and quiet road with no recorded accidents on it. They added that most of the properties on the road had narrow frontages and requested that the double yellow lines planned for the above section of Waverley Road be confined to the inner bend of the road only.
Following questions from Members of the Panel, an officer stated that ‘tracking’ involved creating a computer simulation that calculated how much space was required by, for example, an emergency vehicle when negotiating a road. The simulation showed how much unused road space remained under different conditions, for example, during light or heavy traffic flow, or with the inclusion of double yellow lines.
A Member, who was not a member of the Panel, stated that the roads in question were essentially quiet roads used mainly for access. Placing double yellow lines on the inside of the bend would clear sightlines but would not affect the outside bend and may encourage drivers to speed. He suggested that the scheme ought to be implemented in two stages, starting with the implementation of double yellow lines to the inside bend, and monitoring the situation.
A Member, who was not a member of the Panel, stated that the proposals contained in the deputation had merit and supported the previous Member’s suggestion of introducing double yellow lines to only one side of the road.
A Member of the Panel stated that the Rayners Lane scheme had not reached the statutory consultation stage yet, and the discussions above would be taken into consideration as part of the consultation.
RESOLVED: That
(1) information and revenue figures for parking in the borough be provided at the next meeting of the Panel in November 2010;
(2) information about parking permits for staff at Bacon Lane Surgery be provided at the next meeting of the Panel in November 2010;
(3) the deputations be noted.