Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 10 November 2015, and to authorise the Chairman to sign them.

The minutes of the meeting held on 8 December 2015 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The report before Members set out the responses to the proposals to introduce Waiting Restrictions in Hill Grove.

The report informed the Committee that, following a number of complaints from residents regarding access issues within Hill Grove, the proposal was to install a single yellow line operational between 8:30am and 6:30pm Monday to Saturday inclusive, along the even side of Hill Grove, to deter commuter and obstructive parking.

At the close of a public consultation on 27 November, a total of 31 responses had been received; 29 respondents were in favour while 2 residents were against the proposals. A table that summarised these responses was appended to the report.

In officers’ view, installing a waiting restriction along the even side of Hill Grove would ensure the road is accessible at all times most especially for council and emergency services vehicles.

In accordance with the public participation arrangements the Committee was addressed by two members of the public, one of whom spoke against the proposal and the other who spoke in favour of the scheme. A resident speaking against the scheme stated that he had lived in the area for over six years and accepted there was an issue with commuter parking and obstruction of residents’ driveways. The resident also agreed that the proposal would assist emergency and council refuse vehicles to drive through the road. The resident was of the opinion that the proposal would lead to the loss of about half the parking spaces in the road. The resident also stated that a better solution was the provision of parking bays at the top of the road and the introduction of permits to residents. 

A resident who had lived in the area for over two years spoke in favour of the proposals stating that parking in the area had got worse following the introduction of parking restrictions on Mashiters Walk and that majority of the residents of Hill Grove supported the scheme. It was suggested that most of the commuters who parked in the road were bus drivers, Police Officers and people who worked in the Town Centre. It was mentioned that the obstructive parking had affected the collection of refuse in the area for eight consecutive weeks. The Committee was informed that the indiscriminate parking by commuters had also caused damage to cars and the inability of residents to access their driveways.

During the debate a Member was of the opinion that the implementation of the proposal would have a knock on effect in the area displacing commuter parking to other streets. The Member questioned the need for an all-day parking restriction.

Another Member argued that the introduction of parking permits was not the solution to the issues in the area. The Member suggested that if commuter parking was the issue, a one hour parking restriction would resolve the matter.  

A Member sought clarification on the space along the flank wall of house number 121 with a view to the provision of parking bays. In response officers explained  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70.

The report before the Committee detailed responses to a consultation to introduce safety improvements that included a 20mph zone, speed tables, zebra crossing with illuminated beacon posts, ‘Gateway’ measures with 20mph and 30mph roundel with red surfacing, road signs and road markings.

The report informed the Committee that the following safety improvements were proposed along Collier Row by Ramsden Drive, Collier Row Road between Melville Road and Hamden Hill Roudabout, Hampden Road by Clockhouse Lane, Chase Cross Road between Hamden Hill and Collier Ron Lane to reduce vehicle speeds and minimise accidents.

The report informed the Committee that at the close of a public consultation, four written responses had been received: from a Member of the Committee, two cycling representatives and a resident and the comments were summarised in the report.

Officers’ indicated that the proposed safety improvements would minimise accidents in the Collier Row Area which include part of Collier Row Road, Clockhouse Lane, Chase Cross Road and Collier Row Lane. It was therefore recommended that the proposed safety improvements be recommended for implementation.

In accordance with the public participation arrangements the Committee was addressed by a speaker representing two local shop keepers located at numbers Nos 104 and 106 Collier Row Road. The speaker stated that the location of the zebra crossing and placement of zig-zag signs would adversely impact businesses on the north side of the street by presenting access difficulties to forecourts; impeding deliveries; and restricting on street parking. The speaker also commented that the recently installed bicycle stand near the same businesses was in the wrong location. It was suggested that the crossing would be better suited elsewhere in the road.

During the debate a Member stated that he was of the opinion that the proposed zebra crossing was at the appropriate location to provide safety improvement for pedestrians.

A Member enquired if London Buses were consulted and had commented on the scheme as a whole. In response, the Committee was informed that no reply had been received from London Buses.

A Member sought clarification on the proximity of the zebra crossing to Ramsden Drive. Officers confirmed that the crossing could be located within five metres of the junction. Further the crossing had been placed along the pedestrian desire line for people walking from Ramsden Drive to the new supermarket on the south side of Collier Row Road and also to assist drivers turning left out of Ramsden Drive to get a good view of the crossing position.

Another Member stated that the crossing was about balancing the needs of pedestrians against the ability of parking by the shops. It was suggested that in terms of customers, there was plenty of research that suggested that over time, it was those shoppers who arrived on foot who tended to spend the most.

A Member enquired if the existing signalised crossing outside the Esso Petrol Station could be relocated to avoid the need for the installation of the proposed pedestrian crossing. In reply Officers confirmed that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

The Committee considered a report on proposed safety improvements in the Upminster Road and St Mary’s Lane area. The improvements included a pedestrian refuge, 20mph zone, speed tables, speed table with pelican crossing, speed table with pedestrian refuges, ‘Gateway’ measures with 20mph and 30mph roundel with red surfacing, road signs and road markings.

Officers’ confirmed that the proposed safety improvements would minimise accidents along Upminster Road and St Mary’s Lane within the study area. The Committee was informed that Hornchurch High Street was the closest local example of a route with speed tables,

Following clarification that London Buses and the London Ambulance Service were consulted and did not comment on the proposals for the speed tables on the route, it was RESOLVED:

1.         To recommend to the Cabinet Member for Environment that the safety improvements as detailed below be implemented:

(a)  Upminster Road by Glanville Drive

    Pedestrian refuge outside nos. 21 and 23

(b)  St Mary’s Lane between Bridge Avenue and Gridiron Place

-       Speed table by Bridge Avenue

-       Speed table between Highview Gardens and Boundary Road at the existing pedestrian refuge

-       Speed table outside ‘The Sacred Heart of Mary RC School‘ entrance

-       Speed table by Cranbourne Gardens at the existing pedestrian refuge

-       Speed table by Champion Road at the existing pelican crossing

2.      To note that as a result of public consultation, the following proposals would be omitted from the original proposals.

-       20mph zone along St Mary’s Lane between Bridge Avenue and Gridiron Place

-       20mph and 30mph roundels along St Mary’s Lane between Bridge Avenue and Gridiron Place

-       Speed table along Glanville Drive by Upminster Road

3.      To noted that the estimated costs of £84,000, would be met from the TfL 2015/16 Local Implementation Plan allocation for Accident Reduction Programmes.

The Committee considered the report and without debate RESOLVED:

1.               To recommend to the Cabinet Member for Environment that the proposed ‘At Any Time’ waiting restrictions in Brentwood Road be implemented as advertised.

a.      That the operational hours of the School Keep Clear marking in Brentwood Road, be changed to operate Monday to Friday 8am to 5pm inclusive.

b.      That the proposals to implement a loading bay restriction operational Monday to Saturday 8am to 6pm with a 30 minute stay with no return within 1 hour in the lay-by area fronting the Tesco site, be implemented as advertised.

c.    That the effect of the agreed proposals be monitored

2.           To note that the estimated cost for the proposals in Brentwood Road, was £1000 and would be met from the 2015/16 Minor Parking Schemes budget.

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

There was no new scheme for the Committee to consider this month.

The Committee’s noted the appended schedule.

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

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

The Committee’s decisions were noted as against each request and are appended to the minutes.