Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 12 July 2011, and to authorise the Chairman to sign them.

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 12 July 2011 were agreed as a correct record subject to an amendment to item 13 which should have read that “staff concluded that a scheme should not be taken forward” with this amendment the minutes were signed by the Chairman.

Councillor Kelly proposed a motion to defer the item to allow officers to carry out a wider consultation which would include consulting with local businesses and residents.

Councillor Breading seconded the motion.

It was RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Community Empowerment that the scheme be deferred for further consultation to be carried out in particular with Ward Members.

Outcome of questionnaire consultation – Report Attached

The report before the Committee presented the views of those responding to a parking survey for the Ambleside Avenue area and proposed further action based on the responses received.

During discussions members felt that yellow lines on one side of the road would be excessive        and that a one hour restriction may have been more suitable. It was also felt that the current arrangements in place were acceptable and a motion to reject the scheme was proposed by Councillor Kelly and seconded by Councillor Breading.

It was RESOLVED that the Committee recommend to the Cabinet Member for Community Empowerment the following Recommendation 1(c):-

The Head of StreetCare should not proceed further with the scheme

Outcome of consultation on proposed parking scheme

The report presented the views of those responding to a public consultation on an extension to the Romford Controlled Parking Zone, parking restrictions at junctions and other minor parking alterations.

During discussions members debated whether to include all the reports recommendations or whether to implement just some of the proposed improvements.

Councillor Kelly advised that the scheme should be deferred to allow officers to revisit the area and ascertain what was originally asked for by the residents.

With its agreement Councillor Andrew Curtin addressed the Committee on behalf of the residents living in the affected area.

Councillor Curtin spoke for the residents of Clifton Road and outlined their need to be included in the existing Controlled Parking Zone.

Officers advised that the responses to the survey from residents in the Clifton Road area had been of a low level and did not show support for any traffic scheme.

Through Councillor Curtin several residents explained that the letter they had received had not been very clear and had not shown that a response was required.

Councillor Durant felt that only recommendations 1(e), 1(f) and 1(g) should be implemented.

Members again discussed the possibility of the area being revisited by officers to determine what was required by the residents.

Councillor Curtin advised that he was concerned that revisiting the site would lead to more delays in implementing any scheme that was agreed, a fact that was supported by officers who advised that following a twenty-one day consultation period a new scheme was unlikely to be in place for at least two to three months.

Councillor Kelly proposed a motion which was seconded by Councillor Thorpe that proposals 1(e) and 1(f) be implemented and that officers re-consulted on the Clifton Road and Park Lane elements by way of a compromise.

It was RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Community Empowerment that proposals 1(e) and 1(f) be implemented and that officers re-consulted on the Clifton Road and Park Lane elements.

The vote was 8 for and 1 against. Councillor Breading voted against the resolution.

Outcome of public consultation

The Committee considered the report and without debate, RESOLVED that

1.   A recommendation be made to the Cabinet Member for Community Empowerment that the speed table on Coldharbour Lane be implemented.

2.   It was noted that the estimated cost of implementing the scheme was £10,000 which could be met from the Rainham to the River 2011/12 Capital fund.

Outcome of public consultation

The report before the Committee presented the views of those responding to a survey regarding the proposed changes to the junction of Mawney Road and St Edward’s Way.

During the debate members discussed the possibility of traffic queues being created back onto the Brewery roundabout, a similar scheme that had taken place in Crow Lane, Romford that had had a similar layout working.

Officers advised that traffic modelling studies that had taken place indicated that traffic queues would not form back onto the Brewery roundabout.

There was also discussion regarding the width of the proposed cycle lanes and the possibility of cyclists and buses weaving in and out of lanes.

Councillor Kelly proposed a motion that the scheme be rejected, which was seconded by Councillor Eagling.

It was RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Community Empowerment that the scheme be rejected.

The vote was 7 votes in favour with 1 against and 1 abstention. Councillor Breading voted in favour of the scheme and Councillor Thompson abstained from voting.

Outcome of informal consultation

The report before the Committee presented the views of those responding to a parking survey for the Pond Walk area and proposed further action based on the responses received.

With its agreement Councillor Van den Hende addressed the Committee.

Councillor Van den Hende stated that she was in support of the proposals to consult with the residents regarding the introduction of double yellow lines.

Members question whether a double yellow line was needed for the length of the road.

Officers advised that the road was very narrow and parked cars were causing major obstructions.

The Committee, following the short debate, RESOLVED to recommend that the Head of StreetCare be authorised to publically advertise the proposals as outlined in the report and should any responses be received, they be reported to the Committee so a further course of action could be agreed.

Comments to advertised proposals

The Committee considered a report that outlined the responses received to various advertised waiting restrictions, which had previously been agreed by the Committee, and recommended further course of actions in each case.

1)                 Belgrave Avenue

It was proposed to introduce ‘At any time’ waiting restrictions in Belgrave Avenue from the red route boundary of the Southend Arterial Road in to Belgrave Avenue for 18.4 metres, extending into the unnamed service road fronting the Southend Arterial Road, for a distance of 10 metres.

Members noted that one letter of representation had been received from a resident of Belgrave Avenue opposing the scheme.

It was RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Community Empowerment that the scheme be rejected.

The vote was 6 votes in favour with 1 against and 1 abstention. Councillor Thompson voted in favour of the scheme and Councillor Thorpe abstained from voting.

2)         Campion School

It was proposed to introduce a 43.5 metre ‘School Keep Clear’ marking in Wingletye Lane fronting the main vehicular access to the Campion School site, which prohibited stopping from 8.00am to 5.00pm Monday to Friday inclusive.

The Committee noted that one letter of representation had been received supporting the scheme.

It was RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Community Empowerment that the scheme be implemented.

3)         Norfolk Road

            It was proposed to introduce a short stay parking bay for two vehicles in Norfolk Road to the side of 148 Upminster Road, operational from 8.00am to 6.30pm Monday to Saturday.  The bay would permit a one hour maximum stay, prohibiting a return to the bay within two hours

It was RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Community Empowerment that the scheme be implemented.

            4)         Dell Court – Ravensbourne Grove

            It was proposed to introduce a nine metre long Ambulance Bay in the lay-by area fronting Dell Court, which prohibits stopping ‘At any time’ except for Ambulances.

It was RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Community Empowerment that the scheme be rejected

The vote was 8 votes to 1. Councillor Breading voted in favour of the scheme.

5)         Mavis Grove

It was proposed to introduce six Pay & Display parking bays operational from 8.00am to 6.30pm Monday to Saturday inclusive, with a maximum stay of two hours, on the southern side of Mavis Grove, between its junction with Station Lane and the entrance to Draper Court. It was also proposed to introduce ‘At any time’ waiting restrictions on both sides of the road to cover the vehicular entrances to Draper Court and Ripon House and to restrict the remainder of the unrestricted area of the road with an 8.00am to 6.30pm Monday to Saturday waiting restriction     .

Members noted that there had been two letters of representation one in favour and one opposing the scheme.

It was RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Community Empowerment that the scheme be rejected

The vote was 6 votes to 3. Councillors Durant, Thompson and Taylor voted in favour  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

The Committee is requested to consider the report relating to work in progress and applications

The report presented Members with all new highway schemes requests in order for a decision to be made on whether the scheme should progress or not before resources were expended on detailed design and consultation.

The Committee would either make recommendations to the Head of StreetCare to progress the scheme or the Committee would reject the request.

The Committee considered and agreed in principle the schedule that detailed the applications received by the service.

The Committee’s decisions were noted as follows against each request:

The Committee is requested to consider the report relating to minor traffic and parking schemes

The report before the Committee detailed all Minor Traffic and Parking Scheme application requests in order for a decision to be made on whether the scheme should progress or not before resources were expended on detailed design and consultation.

The Committee would either make recommendations to the Head of StreetCare to progress the scheme or the Committee would reject the request.

The Committee considered and agreed in principle the schedule that detailed the applications received by the service.

The Committee’s decisions were noted as follows against each scheme:

During the discussion of remaining items on the agenda the Committee RESOLVED to suspend Council Procedure Rule 9 to allow the conclusion of consideration of the remaining items on the agenda.

To consider any other item in respect of which the Chairman is of the opinion, by reason of special circumstances which shall be specified in the minutes, that the item should be considered at the meeting as a matter of urgency.

Following a brief discussion regarding the proposed use of electronic voting at future meeting of the Committee.

It was RESOLVED that the electronic voting system be used at future meeting of the Committee.

The vote was 7 for and 2 against. Councillors Breading and White voted against the proposal.