Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 8 November 2016, and to authorise the Chairman to sign them.

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 8 November 2016 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The report before the Committee detailed responses to a consultation for the experimental closure of Cedar Road which was implemented to prevent the use of the street by through motorists and sought a recommendation on whether or not the restriction should be made permanent.

Following the implementation of the scheme on an experimental basis to enable the proposal to be tested and for residents and other highway users to provide comments on a ‘live’ scheme officers provided details of the outcome.

The report informed the Committee that officers’ recommended the position of the closure be just southwest of the junction with Chesham Close in order that those driving to the industrial area could clearly see the closure.

The Committee also noted that the restriction did not apply to cycles and arrangements were made for the London Fire Brigade to gain access through the closure (via a removable bollard or similar with a fire brigade lock) in the event of emergency. Officers informed that there was the potential for traffic reassignment to take place, but this would be onto the A12, North Street or Mawney Road which were more appropriate for the use.

The report informed that during public consultation 495 letters were sent on 18 February 2016 to residents and businesses in the local area who could potentially be affected by the experiment. The information was also sent to the standard consultees (Emergency Services, London Buses, special interest groups etc.), Ward Councillors and Committee Members. The experimental Order was published and site notices also placed.

Automatic traffic counts were undertaken on Cedar Road at the beginning of February 2016, before the experiment came into force and late May 2016 when the experiment was in force, so that changes in traffic flow could be measured.  The summary of the data was appended to the report.

It was noted that during the experiment, feedback was received on the traffic signs advising of the restriction and the Fire Brigade bollard being removed by unauthorised persons. Additional signage was provided to advise that there was no though route for motor traffic and positive signage was provided to guide commercial drivers to the Chesham Close industrial estate.

Further to the receipt of objections and a petition against the closure, Officers’ wrote to residents and businesses within the consultation area to explain that the Council proposed to end the experiment early and therefore any other views were required.

In response to the communication dated 23 May 2016, many responses in support of the scheme and a second petition from residents of Cedar Road were received. The petition contained a majority in support, but with some against the scheme.

The report informed that officers’  were instructed to write to those in the consultation area advising that the experiment would continue and the revised date for comments would be 28^th October 2016 to ensure that a full six-months for comments would be provided. The letter also explained that there had been a change in cabinet responsibilities  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

The report before the Committee detailed responses to the provision of a partially accessible bus stop on Firbank Road and sought a recommendation that the proposals be implemented.

The proposal was to provide accessibility improvements outside Nos. 9 and 11 Firbank Road whilst retaining the bus stop flag at the same location and providing a 37 metres and 24 hour bus stop clearway. The proposal would allow for a single door to be accessible as there was no alternative position on the road.

In accordance with the public speaking arrangements the Committee was addressed by a resident who was opposed to the proposed scheme.

The resident spoke against the proposal stating that he had a mobility disability and that the scheme would hinder the use of his drive way. The resident added that he was a member of the target group for the proposed accessibility improvements yet had no problem accessing the bus stop as it currently is. He added that the proposal would prevent him using his car. The resident questioned whether the proposals included moving the bus drivers toilet from its current location.

During a brief debate, A Member sought clarification on the extent of the proposals and in response the Committee was informed that there was no proposal to relocate the stand but simply to make the current stop accessible with a 37 metres and 24 hour bus stop clearway.

In response to another Member asking if the vehicle crossing dropped kerbs would be affected, Officers informed the Committee that the proposal would not impact on the kerb lines.

Following the debate, the Committee RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Environment, Regulatory Services and Community Safety that  the bus stop accessibility improvements on Firbank Road as outlined in drawing QP006-OF-B75-A be implemented;

That it be noted that the estimated cost of £750 for implementation (all sites) would be met by Transport for London from the 2016/17 Local Implementation Plan allocation for Bus Stop Accessibility.

The voting in favour of the proposal was 10 votes to 1 against.

The report before the Committee detailed responses to a consultation for the provision of fully accessible bus stops on Bevan Way and a new footway link on Hacton Lane.

The report stated that at its meeting on 6 September 2016, due to the level of objection from residents, the Committee rejected a proposal and asked officers’ to consult on an alternative which kept the stops in their current positions.

The report offered a revised proposal that included a new footway link along Hacton Lane which would provide a direct walking connection from the southbound stop on Bevan Way and the existing pedestrian refuge servicing the area to the east of Hacton Lane.

The Committee noted that a response had been received with the comments outlined in the report and that Ward Councillors had been consulted and had requested the footway link be part of the proposal.

In accordance with the public speaking arrangements the Committee was addressed by a resident who was opposed to the proposed scheme.

The resident stated that he lived at No. 12 Bevan Way and that he had to park his car away from his house owing to the position of the stop. The resident stated that he needed to cross Bevan Road to get to his car, which he was required to do with his two young children. The resident pointed to the dangers of crossing a busy road like Bevan Way with two young children. The resident cited a range of child casualty statistics and commented that the implementation of the scheme would show a clear disregard for the safety of his family. He also stated that the case for the accessible kerb was flawed and insisted that widths could be reduced to allow  sufficient space for a vehicle crossing at his residence.

During the debate a number of Members of the committee questioned whether a compromise could be found to accommodate the accessible stop and provide the resident with a vehicle crossover.

A Member suggested that one door be made accessible in order to meet the resident’s crossover request.

The Committee was reminded that an alternative scheme had already been designed and consulted on at a different location on Bevan Way which would have enabled the construction of the crossover at No.12. The Committee was reminded that this scheme had been  rejected because of objections to a loss of trees.

A deferral was proposed in order to allow Ward Councillors to discuss the matter with residents and officers.

Further to the brief discussion, a motion to defer the proposal was tabled by Councillor David Durant and seconded by Councillor Joshua Chapman.

The Committee RESOLVED todefer the matter to allow Ward Councillors, the residents and officers to discuss the matter.

The report before the Committee detailed the following accessibility improvements proposed for various bus stops along Upper Rainham Road:

Following the presentation and in response the Committee noted that the various work would not lead to any loss of parking spaces but provide for the build out by one metre depth the bus stop on two locations (Cheshunt Avenue and Laburnum Avenue)

Having considered the report and the representations made it was RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Environment, Regulatory Services and Community Safety:

a.    that the bus stop accessibility improvements on Upper Rainham Road as set out in the report and shown on the following drawings be implemented;

·                 QP006-OF-B53-A OPTION 1  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62.

The Committee considered the report and without debate RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Environment, Regulatory Services and Community Safety that the bus stop accessibility improvements on Hall Lane outlined on drawing QP006-OF-B19&B20-A of the report be implemented, including the provision of a new pedestrian refuge and reduction of the speed limit from 40mph to 30mph.

That it be noted that the estimated cost of £16,000 for implementation would be met by Transport for London through the 2016/17 Local Implementation Plan allocation for Bus Stop Accessibility.

The Committee considered the report and without debate RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Environment, Regulatory Services and Community Safety that the bus stop accessibility improvements on St Marys Lane outlined on drawings QP006-OF-B39&B40-A, QP006-OF- B41-A, QP006-OF-B42&B43-A and QP006-OF- B44-A of the report be implemented.

Members noted that the estimated cost of £23,000 for implementation would be met by Transport for London through the 2016/17 Local Implementation Plan allocation for Bus Stop Accessibility.

Following clarification that the withdrawn site would remain in a similar position, the Committee considered the report and without debate RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Environment, Regulatory Services and Community Safety that the bus stop accessibility improvements on Upper Brentwood Road outlined on drawings QP006-OF-B48&49-A and QP006-OF-B52-A (including upgrade of fire access Durham Avenue) in the report be implemented

That it be noted that because of the level of objections received from respondents and Royal Liberty School, that the proposals shown on Drawing QP006-OF-B50&B51-A be withdrawn and officers’ would consult on a revised layout and bring a further report to the Committee.

Members noted that the estimated cost of £10,000 for implementation would be met by Transport for London through the 2016/17 Local Implementation Plan allocation for Bus Stop Accessibility.

The Committee considered the report and without debate RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Environment, Regulatory Services and Community Safety that the junction speed table outlined on drawing No. QP001-3/1 be implemented.

Members noted that the estimated costs of £15,000 would be met from the Transport for London’s (TfL) 2016/17 Local Implementation Plan allocation for Accident Reduction Programme.

The report before the Committee detailed responses to a public consultation for the implementation of safety and accident reduction programme scheme that was approved by Transport for London for funding.

The report informed the Committee that a feasibility study had been carried out to identify safety improvements in the area and 20mph zone, humped pelican crossing, speed tables, build out, gateway measures with coloured surfacing and 20/30mph roundels, 20mph roundels road markings, 20/30mph road signs, roundabout centre line road markings were proposed.

During a brief discussion a Member sought clarification on how the scheme came to realisation. In response officers’ informed the Committee that following various injury and collisions sustained in Western Road and around the Ring Road, especially those involving pedestrians, the scheme had been prepared.

A Member commented that Romford Town centre did not require a blanket approach and felt the proposals should be more bespoke. The member noted that the scheme had positive elements which could be taken forward and implemented.

Another Member questioned the use of speed tables and felt they were overkill.

Another Member was supportive of the speed tables on crossing points only.

Officers informed the Committee that funding for the scheme was time limited and any review would need to be done quickly. 

Another Member expressed his support for the scheme.

A Member suggested that there was a need for officers and Ward Councillors to discuss the proposals and report back to the Committee for its recommendation.

Following the debate, a motion to defer the proposal was tabled.

The Committee RESOLVED todefer the matter to allow Ward Councillors and officers to review the proposed scheme.

The voting was agreed 10 votes to 1 abstention.

The Committee considered a report showing the new highway scheme 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 decision was noted against the request and appended to the minutes.