Agenda and minutes
PDF 188 KBVenue: Town Hall, Main Road, Romford
Contact: Taiwo Adeoye 01708 433079 Email: taiwo.adeoye@havering.gov.uk
| No. | Item | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 24 January 2012, and to authorise the Chairman to sign them.
Minutes: The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 24 January 2012 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
SUSTRANS CONNECT 2 - Phases 2 & 3 Highway Works (Pages Wood to Rainham Village) Report Attached
Additional documents:
Minutes: The Committee considered the report that recommended that various highway improvement works between Pages Wood (Harold Wood) and Rainham Village are approved for implementation to support the Sustrans Connect 2 scheme, following the completion of public consultation.
At its meeting of 15 July 2009, the Council’s Cabinet approved the Sustrans Connect2 scheme for the Ingrebourne Valley in principle. This approval was subject to funding (with Cabinet Member for Regeneration approvals for each phase) and various consents being in place.
The scheme was supported with £880,000 of Big Lottery grant funding provided through Sustrans and additional Council capital funding, grants via the Transport for London Local Implementation Plan and Veolia Havering Riverside Trust.
The scheme’s overarching aim was to improve local travel in 79 communities around the UK by creating new walking and cycling networks for everyday journeys.
By means of bridges, tunnels and other crossings, barriers such as busy roads, rivers and railways can be overcome to make travelling on foot or bike easier and more direct. With each new crossing linking to a local network of walking and cycling routes, there will be direct access to local schools, shops and workplaces, as well as green spaces.
In terms of design, the route was being designed for pedestrians, both the experienced and inexperienced cyclist and equestrian riders where possible.
Sustrans and the Council were promoting a scheme for the Ingrebourne Valley which would build on, connect to and improve existing routes, some of which had been in place for some time.
The 13 mile route, called the “Ingrebourne Way” would form the new National Cycle Route No.136, starting in Noak Hill and ending at Rainham Marshes, running through Harold Hill, Harold Wood, Harold Park, Cranham, Upminster, Hornchurch, Elm Park and South Hornchurch.
The project was split into three phases with Phase 1 (Noak Hill to Pages Wood) had been completed.
The current focus of activity was now Phases 2 & 3 which would complete the scheme between Pages Wood and Rainham Marshes by March 2013.
As well as any statutory consultation processes, the project was overseen by the Connect 2 Steering Group which sought to engage various stakeholders in the development of the route. The group included Council Staff, Sustrans, local walking and cycling groups, Forestry Commission, Environment Agency, biodiversity groups and others as required.
The route and design of the various features had also been reviewed by Sustrans both from a network planning and engineering point of view and fully acceptable to the organisation. In accordance with the public participation arrangements the Committee was addressed by three residents who expressed their views for and against parts of the scheme.
In accordance with the public participation arrangements, the Committee was addressed by an objector followed by two speakers in support of the scheme. With its agreement Councillor Tebbutt addressed the Committee. Councillor Tebbutt raised questions in relation to the proposed move of the bus stop; external funding; public consultation requirements.
During the debate members raised general concerns ... view the full minutes text for item 70. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
395 - 405 BRENTWOOD ROAD (Lay-by Parking Controls) Report to follow if available Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee considered the report and after a brief debate, RESOLVED to reject the recommendations of the report. The Committee considered that the scheme would be suitable for inclusion as part of a comprehensive parking review for the area.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
SCHOOL CROSSING PATROL IMPROVEMENTS - Rainham Village Primary School Report to follow if available Minutes: The report before the Committee recommended improvement works to the school crossing facility outside Rainham Village Primary School following the completion of public consultation.
During a brief debate the Committee questioned whether the east bound bus stop outside the clinic could be better placed by moving it towards Rainham Village to allow for drop offs at the clinic.
A motion was moved to recommend the implementation of the scheme with further consideration given to the positioning of the east bound bus stop by the Head of Street Care in conjunction with London Buses. The motion was seconded.
The Committee RESOLVED:
1.To recommend to the Cabinet Member for Community Empowerment that the work to the pedestrian crossing facility outside Rainham Village Primary School be approved for implementation as shown on drawing: QK009/NC/41.A
2.To recommend to the Cabinet Member for Community Empowerment that the addition of two new bus stop clear ways on Upminster Road South and in the vicinity of Rainham Village Primary School be approved for implementation the position of the east bound bus stop is to be the subject of a further review by the Head of Street care in conjunction with London Buses whose findings will be presented to this in a further report to this committee.
3.That it be noted that the estimated cost of the scheme would be £600 which would be met from the 2011/12 Transport for London Local Implementation Plan allocation for School Travel Plans Implementation.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
PROPOSED PARKING SCHEMES - Comments to advertised proposals Report to follow if available Minutes: Each scheme was presented to the Committee and voted on as a separate item
1. Oldchurch Road/ Dagenham Road – Drawing No. DAG/01/03
The Committee considered the report and without debate, RESOLVED to recommend implementation of the scheme.
2. Heather Glen– Drawing No. HG/01/01
The Committee considered the report and after a short debate, a motion was moved to reject the scheme on the basis that the scheme would not solve the parking problems on the road.
The motion was seconded.
The Committee RESOLVED that the scheme be rejected.
3. Pond Walk – Drawing No. FLP/01/01
The Committee considered the report and after a short debate amotion was moved toimplement the ‘At any time’ waiting restriction as advertised and shown on drawing FLP/01/01 and to reject the proposed 8.00am – 6.30pm waiting restriction. The motion was seconded.
The Committee RESOLVED to recommend implementation the ‘At any time’ waiting restrictions by 7 votes in favour to 1 against.
4. Collier Row Road, Clockhouse Lane and Associated Waiting Restrictions – Drawing Nos. QK056-OF-101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108. FLP/01/01
The Committee considered the report and after a short debate amotion was moved toimplement the scheme with the following amendments: · proposed free parking bay on drawing QK056-0F-102 to be changed to residents bay to assist residents of flats and shopkeepers · proposed free parking bay on drawing QK056-0F-103 to be changed to residents bay · proposed free parking bay on drawing QK056-0F-107 to be changed to residents bay
The motionwas seconded.
The Committee RESOLVED to recommend the scheme as amended.
5. Hacton School
The Committee considered the report and after a short debate, a motion was moved to reject the scheme. The motion was seconded.
The Committee RESOLVED to reject the scheme.
6. Clunas Gardens – Drawing No. QJ123-OF-101
Without debate, a motion was moved to reject the scheme. The motion was seconded.
The Committee RESOLVED to reject the scheme by 7 votes in favour to 1 against.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
HIGHWAYS SCHEMES APPLICATIONS The Committee is requested to consider the report relating to Highways Schemes Applications Additional documents: Minutes: 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 en bloc.
The Committee’s decisions were noted as follows against each request:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
TRAFFIC AND PARKING SCHEMES REQUESTS The Committee is requested to consider the report relating to Minor Traffic and Parking Schemes.
Additional documents: Minutes: 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:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||