Agenda item

RESOLVED:  That, in accordance with Executive Procedure Rule 48 (Part 4D of the Constitution), the following deputation be received:

1.            Action to alleviate traffic problems on to Headstone Lane and George V Avenue

The first deputee stated that she had been a resident of Elmcroft Crescent for 23 years and made the following points:

·                     there were safety issues relating to the existing right hand turn into Headstone Lane because the Double Yellow Lines (DYLs) on both sides of the junction were not long enough therefore sightlines were obstructed particularly when larger vehicles were parked on Headstone Lane close to the junction;

·                     vehicles tended to speed towards Headstone Lane station therefore there was a collision risk and there had been 7-8 such collisions in recent years, one leading to a serious injury;

·                     her car had been hit by a speeding car when she pulled out of the side road in November 2014 and her car had been written off;

·                     she was also concerned for the safety of motorcyclists and cyclists on this road.  The Council had a duty of care to ensure the safety of all road users by minimising risks.  Most local residents were of the view that the DYLs should be increased in length and traffic calming measures introduced in Headstone Lane for safety reasons.

The second deputee stated that he had been a resident of Elmcroft Crescent for 20 years and was a retired police officer.  He circulated photos regarding the issues discussed below to the Panel and officers.  He stated that:

·                       he had seen vehicle accidents occur when turning from Elmcroft Crescent into Headstone Lane.  There were also problems turning into both George V Avenue and Headstone Lane due to poor visibility, particularly at night due to parked vehicles (belonging to both local residents and to staff from Nower Hill School), speeding vehicles, a high bank and vegetation that obscured sightlines.  All of this had been exacerbated by the removal of the speed camera on George V Avenue.  He requested that traffic calming measures be introduced in those streets to resolve these issues.

Following questions and comments from Panel members, the deputees stated that the vegetation that was obstructing sightlines was between Hillview and Elmcroft Crescent rather than in residents’ gardens.

Officers advised that:

·                       it was likely that the large vehicles parked on Elmcroft Crescent belonged to residents and was not as a result of displaced commuter parking;

·                       Headstone Lane was a key strategic route used by a number of buses and therefore was not suitable for the introduction of conventional traffic calming measures as these would impact on bus services and their passengers.  It would not be possible to install a mirror there.  The petitions report highlighted that fact that the Department for Transport no longer accepted applications for the erection of mirrors on the highways, for a number of reasons;

·                       speed cameras needed to comply with set criteria and Transport for London had strict criteria regarding the use and siting of speed cameras;

·                       DYLs had been introduced in those streets as part of the North Harrow Controlled Parking Zone.  The length of the DYLs were calculated using standard criteria and a tracking model;

·                       traffic officers would carry out an assessment of those streets.  This would include an assessment of the efficiency of the DYLs at the junctions, any obstructions to sightlines, a speed survey and all other road safety issues and would consider any possible mitigating measures;

·                       Headstone Lane was a busy distributor road, and therefore physical traffic calming measures would not be a viable option;

·                       officers would look at the issue of sightline obstruction by vegetation on George V Avenue.

An adviser to the Panel stated that there was a cycle route on Headstone Lane however, it was not appropriate for cyclists as vehicle speeds on the road could be quite high therefore a more radical solution was required.

A Member back benching, supported the deputees and stated that:

·                     she understood that TfL had recently agreed to re-instate the speed camera at the cost of £100k.  This was due to the high speeds of vehicles on those roads, particularly at junctions, where the average speed was above the legally set limit;

·                     she had visited comparable roads in the vicinity of Long Elmes and had personally measured the DYLs, which were approximately 50 feet long and requested that the DYLs in the above junctions be extended for safety reasons.

Another Member back benching stated that:

·                     the traffic related issues on the above mentioned streets had been long-standing and the council needed to be pro-active to ensure the safety of drivers, pedestrians and cyclists;

·                     he was disappointed to learn that the officer report stated that the DYLs at the junction of Elmcroft Crescent and George V Avenue were sufficient, and requested that they be re-evaluated.

The Chair stated that the Panel would await to hear back the results of the traffic officers’ assessment of the above streets and junctions.