Agenda and minutes

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 11 November 2021 as an accurate record.

The minutes of the meeting held on 11 October 2021 were agreed as an accurate record.

Members and co-opted Members of the Council are reminded that, in accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct and the statutory provisions of the Localism Act, they are required to consider in advance of each meeting whether they have a disclosable pecuniary interest (DPI), an other registrable interest (ORI) or a non-registrable interest (NRI) in relation to any matter on the agenda.  If advice is needed, Members should contact the Monitoring Officer in good time before the meeting.  

If any Member or co-opted Member of the Council identifies a DPI or ORI which they have not already registered on the Council’s register of interests or which requires updating, they should complete the disclosure form which can be obtained from Democratic Services at any time, copies of which will be available at the meeting for return to the Monitoring Officer.

Members and co-opted Members are required to disclose any DPIs and ORIs at the meeting.  

-       Where the matter relates to a DPI they may not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter and must not stay in the meeting unless granted a dispensation.  

-       Where the matter relates to an ORI they may not vote on the matter unless granted a dispensation.   

-       Where a Member or co-opted Member has an NRI which directly relates to their financial interest or wellbeing, or that of a relative or close associate, they must disclose the interest at the meeting, may not take part in any discussion or vote on the matter and must not stay in the meeting unless granted a dispensation.  Where a matter affects the NRI of a Member or co-opted Member, section 9 of Appendix B of the Code of Conduct sets out the test which must be applied by the Member to decide whether disclosure is required.

The Chair will invite Members to make their disclosure orally at the commencement of Agenda item 3, to be recorded in the minutes.

There were none.

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.

There were no items of urgent business.

The report considers comments and objections received during consultation on Traffic Management Orders (TMOs) to introduce permanent cycle lanes and other changes to the London Road between Brigstock Road and Bensham lane. The recommended measures would make permanent the current temporary cycle lanes (plus associated temporary restrictions and measures) and bringing about further improvements, including pedestrian crossing facilities and public realm improvements.

The Committee received a report which considered comments and objections received during a consultation on Traffic Management Orders (TMOs) to introduce permanent cycle lanes and other changes to the London Road between Brigstock Road and Bensham lane. The recommended measures would make permanent the current temporary cycle lanes (plus associated temporary restrictions and measures) and bringing about further improvements, including pedestrian crossing facilities and public realm improvements.

Ian Plowright (Head of Strategic Transport) provided the Committee with an introduction which set out:

• In May 2020 the Secretary of State for Transport released guidance on Network Management to Support Recovery from COVID-19. Croydon had responded swiftly to the call to enhance walking and cycling in the borough and the London Road Corridor was one of the original measures implemented;
• The government had subsequently announced that the measures implement should remain in place and local authorities were encouraged to introduce more measures;
• The scheme had been a implemented under a Temporary Traffic Management Order and the recommendation was to make the scheme permanent with improvement including increased pedestrian crossings;
• Objections had been received which were included in the report and covered the scheme not being necessary, loss of loading bays and slow traffic; and
• Members were informed that the Equalities Officer had suggested two further areas for more focus within the Equalities Analysis (EA) since publication relating to the affordability of electric bikes and to the provision of seating/rest areas. The EA covered the whole programme and would be revised and published with the next papers which covered cycle schemes.

Angus Hewlett (speaking on behalf of Croydon Cyclists) addressed the Committee in support of the scheme and set out the following:

• Croydon Cyclists welcomed the scheme but felt additional steps could be taken, such as ensuring the southern end of the scheme joined up with the Broad Green scheme;
• Safety concerns remained in relation to the side roads and it was suggested that level crossings could be introduced; and
• Measures should be put in place to reduce the risk of hook roads.

A statement was read out on behalf of John Hopper and set out that Qualityfix Ltd had been trading on London Road for over 50 years and he had written to the council over the previous two years to raise the following concerns:

• There was an accident waiting to happen as the cycle lane gave cyclists and scooter drivers too much confidence that they were protected and travelled too fast;
• Ambulances were regularly held up in traffic and could no longer pass due to the cycle lane;
• He was a cyclist and often cycled to work. He found that where there were no cycle lanes there were no issues and that cycle lanes caused more concern as pedestrians walked out and cars pulled out with looking;
• Shop keepers needed to trade and cycle lanes made it impossible to receive goods as they could not be transported to neighbouring roads;
• He had counted the number of cyclists who used the cycle  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4/22

The report outlines comments and objections received during consultation on Traffic Management Orders (TMOs) for measures focussed on the High Street.  It recommends making TMOs to implement permanent changes to the High Street, and neighbouring streets, principally to provide segregated cycle lanes in the High Street, improve the pedestrianised section of High Street, and improve pedestrian crossing facilities.  Improvement to the public realm would accompany implementation of these measures.

The Committee received a report which outlined comments and objections received during consultation on Traffic Management Orders (TMOs) for measures focussed on the High Street.  It recommends making TMOs to implement permanent changes to the High Street, and neighbouring streets, principally to provide segregated cycle lanes in the High Street, improve the pedestrianised section of High Street, and improve pedestrian crossing facilities.  Improvement to the public realm would accompany implementation of these measures.

Ian Plowright (Head of Strategic Transport) provided the Committee with an introduction which set out:

• This had been a temporary scheme in response to guidance issued by the Secretary of State for Transport on Network Management to Support Recovery from COVID-19;
• The scheme was located on a high priority cycling corridor, which had been identified in two Transport for London (TfL) analysis;
• The proposal for the permanent scheme was to move the cycle lane from east to west in much of the High Street and would include public realm uplift; and
• Objections had been received which were addressed within the report and included concerns relating to parking, loading and coach access.

Charles King (speaking on behalf of Croydon Council Mobility Forum) addressed the Committee and set out the following:

• Thanked officers for meeting with members of the Mobility Forum to discuss concerns in relation to the temporary scheme. Following the meeting it was felt that many of the issues had been resolved;
• It was noted that bus stops would be utilised much more and the proposed scheme would not require taxis to take longer routes which would cost more; and
• A meeting was requested with officers and representatives of Transport for London to discuss outstanding issues such as which buses would stop as which stop and enabling access to low kerbs for drops offs.

The Chair thanked Charles King and the Mobility Forum for their work on working with officers to improve the scheme.

Angus Hewlett (speaking on behalf of Croydon Cyclists) addressed the Committee and set out the following:

• The proposed scheme was a good compromise and alleviated the burden of buses running southbound;
• Queried whether further modelling had been undertaken in terms of the impact of the scheme on high street traffic. It was hoped that the volume of traffic on the High Street would be reduced;
• Noted that it was important that cycle schemes linked up and highlighted the Brighton Road scheme which was being developed;
• Queried how public realm would be recovered from traffic to support public transport; and
• Suggested that Fell Road could be used for bus routes turning left into Fell from the Fell Road slip road.

The Committee discussed the report and raised the following points:

• Committee Members were pleased to see the scheme had been changed from the temporary scheme and highlighted the improved bus routes; and
• Also queried whether Fell Road could be used for bus routes.

In response the Head of Strategic Transport confirmed a meeting would be arranged with TfL, to which the Chair of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5/22

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.”

This item was not required.