Agenda and minutes

Traffic Management Advisory Committee
Wednesday, 24th July, 2019 6.30 pm

Venue: Council Chamber, Town Hall, Katharine Street, Croydon CR0 1NX. View directions

Contact: Cliona May
020 8726 6000 x47279  Email: cliona.may@croydon.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

1/19

Minutes of the Previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 125 KB

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 2 May 2019 as an accurate record.

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 2 May 2019 were agreed as an accurate record.

2/19

Disclosure of Interests

In accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct and the statutory provisions of the Localism Act, Members and co-opted Members of the Council are reminded that it is a requirement to register disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs) and gifts and hospitality to the value of which exceeds £50 or multiple gifts and/or instances of hospitality with a cumulative value of £50 or more when received from a single donor within a rolling twelve month period. In addition, Members and co-opted Members are reminded that unless their disclosable pecuniary interest is registered on the register of interests or is the subject of a pending notification to the Monitoring Officer, they are required to disclose those disclosable pecuniary interests at the meeting. This should be done by completing the Disclosure of Interest form and handing it to the Democratic Services representative at the start of the meeting. The Chair will then invite Members to make their disclosure orally at the commencement of Agenda item 3. Completed disclosure forms will be provided to the Monitoring Officer for inclusion on the Register of Members’ Interests.

Minutes:

Councillor Pelling informed the Committee that he was the Vice-Chair of the London Road Safety Council.

3/19

Urgent Business (if any)

To receive notice of any business not on the agenda which in the opinion of the Chair, by reason of special circumstances, be considered as a matter of urgency.

Minutes:

There were no items of urgent business.

4/19

Objections to Emission-Based Parking Permit Charges and Diesel Surcharges for Permits pdf icon PDF 338 KB

This report considers the objections to emission-based parking permit charges and diesel surcharges for permits.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Officers introduced the report stating that the policy to introduce emission-based parking charges was linked to the Air Quality Action Plan, the Clean Air Strategy and the Mayor’s Transport Strategy.

 

A consultation on the scheme was undertaken, and officers stated that all 14,000 permit holders in the borough were contacted by email, or by post if email was not possible. From the consultation around 1,000 responses were received and had been responded to.

 

Ms Batt addressed the Committee in objection to the proposals as it was stated that residents had not been informed of the proposed increase in parking permit charges. Furthermore, it was stated that the proposal was disproportionate and unfair as only impacted those who lived in Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ), as such it remained free to park outside the CPZs. Whilst Ms Batt noted that the aim was to encourage people to replace their cars to lower emitting vehicles; it was stated that it was not possible for many as they were on low incomes or pensions and their current cars had no resale value. Ms Batt suggested that rather than charge for parking the council should consider charging on the miles travelled; and thus the emissions produced by the vehicles.

 

Ms Thomas also spoke in objection to the proposals stating that residents felt that it was an additional tax and that they had had no warning. It was stated that the charging was an unfair increase as it only impacted those who had parking permits and who wanted to park by their homes. Concerns were raised about those who drove in Croydon, but parked on roads which were not in a CPZ; that whilst they emitted emissions they were not being charged.

 

Ms McSherry addressed the Committee in objection, also, stating that she only became aware of the proposal when she was renewing her parking permit; and as such it was felt that the council had failed in its statutory requirement to consult residents on the proposals. The Equality Analysis was referenced as stating there was a risk that the proposal would disproportionally affect those with disabilities or long term health concerns and, it was suggested, the mitigations would not be sufficient. Ms McSherry noted that different authorities had different bandings for similar policies and it was felt that this was not creating a level playing field for London residents. Furthermore, it was stated that there was insufficient infrastructure to encourage residents to buy electric cars and that many residents could not afford to replace their current cars. The council was requested to look at alternative solutions which were more reasonable and proportionate.

 

Dr Nicodemi noted that emissions were an issue across the whole borough and that it was the responsibility of all to contribute to supporting the environment; however it was felt that the proposal was grossly unfair as it only impacted those in CPZs. Concerns were further raised that a number of permit holders had not received communication regarding the proposals and had only  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4/19

5/19

South Croydon Area - Results of Informal Consultation on the Proposed Introduction of a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) pdf icon PDF 144 KB

This report considers the results of the informal consultation on the proposed introduction of a CPZ into the South Croydon Area which includes roads close to the existing Croydon CPZ (West and South Permit Zones), Bynes Road CPZ and Napier Road CPZ.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Chair proposed that the order of the agenda be amended to take the South Croydon Area report as the second substantive item. The Committee agreed to vary the order of business.

 

The officer informed the Committee that the report outlined the results of an informal consultation in the South Croydon area for a proposed introduction of a CPZ. Around 22 roads were consulted around the South Croydon Bus Garage which was noted to be an area of very dense parking.

 

It was noted that across the whole area which was consulted there was a fairly negative response; however a positive response was received from Sunny Nook Gardens, Sussex Road and Bynes Road; and the recommendation was to proceed to formal consultation on those particular roads.

 

Mr Shorey spoke in opposition to the proposals stating that as a proprietor of a local business he had a vested interest in whether the area became a CPZ, and that he had spoken to many of his customers regarding the proposals. As such, he felt that the proposal would have a negative impact and would only move the issue to other roads which had not voted in support; rather than fix it. Mr Shorey stated that many local people felt that they were being ignored. Furthermore, it was suggested that the questionnaire had been confusing and some residents had voted in support when they objected to the proposal. Mr Shorey concluded by stating that he felt the proposal to extend the CPZ to three roads would have a negative impact on local businesses. 

 

Mr Humphrey spoke to the Committee in support of the recommendations; stating that as a resident of Sussex Road he had noted that parking had got worse in the local area and was now a major issue. It was suggested that the proposal would stop commuter parking, as Sussex Road was the closest road to South Croydon station which was not in a CPZ. In addition to commuter parking, Mr Humphrey suggested that parking from a local car garage also exasperated the issue as customers and staff often parked cars on the surrounding road before and after MOTs. In response to some resident concerns, Mr Humphrey stated that he had spoken to the council and had had it confirmed that the proposal was for a continuous parking bay; so no parking bays would be lost.

 

In response, the officer stated that the council was responding to petitions which had been submitted. It was recognised that parking was an issue in the area, however in response to the informal consultation it was recommended to proceed to formal consultation only where there had been support. It was anticipated that the scheme would help residents; however it was recognised that there would likely be a knock-on effect to the surrounding roads.

 

Members noted that a response rate of 30% was relatively high for parking consultations, and that the council had listened to those responses by designing a scheme which proposed extending the CPZ  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5/19

6/19

Cecil Road and Aurelia Road - Results of Informal Consultation on the Proposed Change of Hours of an Existing Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) pdf icon PDF 138 KB

This report considers the results of the informal consultation on the proposed change of restriction hours of an existing West Thornton CPZ (Controlled Parking Zone) in Cecil Road and Aurelia Road.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The officer informed Members that a petition had been received which requested the Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) in Aurelia Road and Cecil Road be extended to 8am – 8pm Monday – Sunday. An informal consultation had taken place which had resulted in 69% of respondents supporting the proposal.

 

The report recommended that the council undertake formal consultation on the proposal, which was planned to take place as soon as possible.

 

In response to Member questions the officer confirmed that it was not desirable for different roads to have different hours of operation as it could cause confusion. It was anticipated that Aurelia Road would experience a benefit from a consistent approach to the CPZ.

 

The Chair noted that many the CPZ was implemented many residents had asked for the extended operating hours, and that this consultation would support the request.

 

RESOLVED: That the Traffic Management Advisory Committee recommend to the Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport and Regeneration (job share) that they

 

1.     Consider the responses received to the informal consultation on the proposed change of hours in the existing West Thornton CPZ in Cecil Rd and Aurelia Rd;

 

2.     Agree for the reasons detailed in the report, to proceed with formal consultation regarding the proposed change the operational hours in the West Thornton CPZ (drawing no.PD-396) to 8am – 8pm, Monday – Sunday;

 

3.     If formal consultation is agreed, delegate to the Highway Improvement Manager, Public Realm Directorate the authority to give the notice; and

 

4.     Agree that the results of the formal consultation are reported to the Traffic Management Advisory Committee in order for it to make appropriate recommendations to the Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport and Regeneration (job share).

7/19

Lower Road Area - Results of Informal Consultation on the Proposed Introduction of a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) pdf icon PDF 126 KB

This report considers the results of the informal consultation on the proposal to introduce a Controlled Parking Zone to the currently unrestricted roads Lower Road, Little Roke Road and Little Roke Avenue.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The officer informed Members that a petition requesting a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) in the Lower Road Area had been received; however a low response rate, which was largely negative, had been the outcome of an informal consultation. As such, it was recommended that the council did not proceed to formal consultation.

 

The Chair noted that the council requested petitions had a large proportion of local residents support so as to ensure council resources were effectively used.

 

RESOLVED: That the Traffic Management Advisory Committee recommend to the Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport and Regeneration (job share) that they

 

1.     Consider the responses received to the informal consultation on the proposed introduction of a CPZ into the Lower Road Area;

 

2.     Agree not to proceed to the formal consultation stage regarding the proposal to introduce the Kenley Controlled Parking Zone into Lower Road, Little Roke Road and Little Roke Avenue as illustrated on Drawing No. PD 395 due to the reasons set out in paragraph 3.8 of the report; and

 

3.     Inform the organisers of the petitions of these decisions.

8/19

Outcome of Formal Consultation on School Streets pdf icon PDF 250 KB

This report considers the objections and responses from the consultation on the Public Notice of 23 May 2019 on School Streets.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Officers introduced the report stating that a pilot at three schools had been made permanent the previous year, and the report in the agenda recommended creating School Streets surrounding a further eight schools. The aim of the scheme was to improve the health of young people and to reduce congestion near schools at school pick-up and drop-off times.

 

Members noted that Fairchildes School had not been included in the report, and officers confirmed that following consultation with residents an Experimental Traffic Management Order was proposed which was supported by the ward councillors and the Head Teacher. The report on the Fairchildes scheme was due to be considered and agreed by the Executive Director Place, and would be shared with the Chair and Lead Opposition Member.

 

Officers informed Members that residents could, and had, responded on the proposals for more than one school. It was noted that all the responses received were outlined within the report, and that across the seven locations there was an even level of support and objection; although it was noted that some roads were supportive whereas others were in objection.

 

In response to Member questions, officers stated there was no specific data in relation to the number of accidents or types of accidents; however the creation of safer roads around schools would support a reduction in accidents.

 

Members raised concerns relating to the displacement of traffic in the roads surrounding Woodcote Primary School following the decision to make it a School Street in 2018. It was stated that within the local area there were a number of cul-de-sacs and closes which were being affected by the displacement of traffic, and while there were mobile patrols of the local roads residents were raising concerns. Officers confirmed that they had visited the cul-de-sacs and it was noted that the roads were saturated with parking; as such there was no opportunity for displacement. Furthermore, it was stated that the further people had to travel to park their car to drop of their children the more likely it was to encourage behavioural change to walk, cycle or scoot to school.

 

Officers informed Members that in response to the displacement experienced by residents in Coulsdon, residents were being encouraged to petition for parking controls as it was recognised that there were some difficulties in the local area in relation to parking.

 

In response to Member questions, officers stated that Royal Mail vehicles were able to access any road during the restrictions; however it was not the intention of the council to provide access to delivery vehicles as it was important to ensure the roads were safe and it was noted that uncongested roads can lead to people to drive faster. In terms of children who require to be dropped off by the school; the council required the school to inform them to allow the vehicle access to the road.

 

The Chair informed Members that the council had received a number of requests from schools to be a part of the School  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8/19

9/19

Exclusion of the Press and Public

The following motion is to be moved and seconded where it is proposed to exclude the press and public from the remainder of a meeting:

 

“That, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act, 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information falling within those paragraphs indicated in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended.”

Minutes:

The item was not required.