Agenda and minutes

It was confirmed that the meeting would take place in public.

Councillor Dominic GIlham attended as a Ward Councillor in support of the petitioners. 

Concerns, comments and suggestions raised at the meeting included the following:

• Mr Alistair Mullins spoke on behalf of the petition submitted to the Council.
• The petitioner asked that the Cabinet Member considered the request for a parking scheme on the odd numbered side of Colham Avenue.
• During the day from 7am vehicles arrived to park on the street and go to their work place or business.
• That by 9am the road was full of non-residents vehicles.
• It was very difficult for residents to find parking on their street.
• The problem was more acute at the Fairfield Road end of the street. 

A Ward Councillor spoke and raised the following points:

• The Ward Councillor welcomed the report and what was informed by the petitioner.
• It was noted that the street was almost as 2 one-way streets.
• The Ward Councillor was looking beyond just the odd numbered side of the street.
• It was noted that in the past the resident response was against any parking measures being imposed on the street.
• The petition had 43 petitioners, which was more than the number that had responded to the original survey.
• That it was not just Yiewsley residents that were affected.
• Some people parked there and then went to the train station.
• The problem would get bigger.
• The Ward Councillor would be engaging with residents and petitioners to get a better response to consultation.
• The Ward Councillor asked the Cabinet Member to agree the officer recommendation and agree to a consultation.

Councillor Keith Burrows listened to the concerns of the petitioners and responded to the points raised:

• The Cabinet Member agreed that the road was used for people to park and use the nearby train station.
• The Cabinet Member agreed to add this to the Council’s overall parking programme for investigation.
• That all residents understand the consultation and be encouraged to complete it.
• The consultation would be done in conjunction with Ward Councillor’s to look at the streets nearby who may benefit from a resident parking scheme.
• The Cabinet Member stressed that he needed a mandate to put a residents parking scheme in place. It was therefore for residents to tell the Council want they wanted. 

Officers advised that:

• That the usual timeframe for a consultation was 6-12 months, but there was a similar consultation in the area scheduled for December. Officers would look to include Colham Avenue to this consultation.

Resolved - That the Cabinet Member:

1.                  Met and discussed with petitioners their concerns with parking on Colham Avenue, Yiewsley.

2.                  Asked officers to add the request to the Council’s overall             parking programme for subsequent investigation.

Reasons for recommendation

To give the Cabinet Member the opportunity to discuss in detail the petitioners’ concerns

Alternative Options Considered

This was discussed with petitioners.

Councillor Brain Stead attended as a Ward Councillor in support of the petitioners. 

It was noted that the petition to Council had 562 signatures, not 32 as stated in the officer report, as an additional 530 signatures had been submitted.

Concerns, comments and suggestions raised at the meeting included the following:

• Mrs Sharon Pargiter spoke to behalf of the petition submitted to the Council.
• The family and friends of Jo Larkin asked the Council for a speed reduction near Hillingdon Hospital.
• Mrs Larkin passed away in an accident outside Hillingdon Hospital.
• It was stated the lights at the junction where Jo Larkin’s death occurred could have contributed to the accident on 15 November 2010.
• Mrs Pargiter informed that the police had looked into the matter; that statements had been very conflicting on what actually happened.
• Vehicles queued into the traffic lights and were stationary at the lights due to the traffic, even when green.
• Quite often the road would be so congested that cars would remain stationary for a few minutes.
• There was confusion on who had the right of way between pedestrians and drivers.
• The vision at the junction was obscured.
• 30mph was too fast for the left inside lane for drivers that were travelling straight ahead.
• There were 6 different bus routes that used the area, these could also obscure views.
• The vulnerable, elderly and children used the roads in the area.
• Installing CCTV cameras could establish reasons for any future events that could occur.
• The petitioner stated that her mother was extremely aware of road safety.
• The case had caused unimaginable pain to her family.
• Safety measures could prevent another family to go through the pain and save another life.
• The petitioners also asked for a plaque with Mrs Larkin’s name on to put on the road in memory.

A Ward Councillor spoke and raised the following points:

• The Ward Councillor in attendance stated that all three Ward Councillor’s were in support of the petition for road safety measures and a plaque in memory of Mrs Larkin.
• The hospital was working with TfL on options looking forward.
• The accident outside the hospital was still very much in the thoughts of everyone who signed the petition.

Councillor Keith Burrows listened to the concerns of the petitioners and responded to the points raised:

• The Cabinet Member understood the petitioners concerns and gave his deepest sympathy on the events that lead to Mrs Larkin’s death.
• The Cabinet Member agreed that a plaque be placed in dedication to Mrs Larkin. He informed petitioners that they would be advised by officers when this would be put so that they could be present.
• Work was already underway and various plans had been looked at by the Cabinet Member.
• A reduction of the speed limit needed to be requested and this had to be agreed with the emergency services. The Cabinet Member advised that due to the location of the road, outside Accident & Emergency, Hillingdon Hospital, it was unlikely a speed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Councillor David Benson attended as a Ward Councillor in support of the petitioners.  The petitioners were unable to attend the meeting and had asked Councillor Benson to speak on their behalf.

A Ward Councillor spoke and raised the following points:

• The Ward Councillor had received a phone call from the lead petitioner who could not make the meeting. Therefore, the Ward Councillor informed, he was speaking on behalf of the petitioners.
• It was stated that parking in Heathrow Village had got worse and worse.
• The problem with parking was particularly bad on Windsor Park Road, especially since the new Starbucks and KFC had been built.
• It was noted that cars were being parked on Windsor Park Road and the car owners would go to Heathrow on holiday. This meant the cars could be parked there for a week or two.
• The closing of an airport staff car park had resulted in airport workers parking their cars in the area too. It is anticipated that this car park would re-open in another 2-3 years.
• People would park their cars at Windsor Park Road to visit the local shops and cause congestion for parking.
• It was also noted that surrounding parking measures in nearby streets affected the parking on Windsor Park Road.
• 22 petitioners had signed the petition, which was a high number for a small road.

Councillor Keith Burrows listened to the concerns of the petitioners and responded to the points raised:

• The Cabinet Member stated that when the original consultation for a resident’s parking scheme was sent out that the majority response from Windsor Park Road was that they did not want a scheme.
• The consultation would be wider than just one road.
• The Cabinet Member would ask the officers to move as soon as they could and the Ward Councillors would be approached before the consultation to consider how wide the area looked at should be.

Officers advised that:

• That consultation results from Harmsworth had not yet been reported. Once this had been completed that consideration on the next step would be looked at.

Resolved - That the Cabinet Member:

1.                  Met and discussed with petitioners their concerns with parking on Windsor Park    Road, Cranford.

2.                  Asked officers to add the request to the Council’s overall             parking programme for subsequent investigation.

Reasons for recommendation

To give the Cabinet Member the opportunity to discuss in detail the petitioners’ concerns

Alternative Options Considered

This was discussed with petitioners.

Item 6 and 7 were both in regard to proposed traffic calming measures for Carew Road. A petition was received in support of the proposal and a petition was received in objection. Both petitions were considered together by the Cabinet Member.

Councillor Carol Melvin attended as a Ward Councillor.

Concerns, comments and suggestions raised at the meeting included the following:

• Mrs Lisa Maclay spoke on behalf of the petition submitted which was against the proposed traffic calming measures for Carew Road.
• It was noted that the petition was signed by residents of Carew Road.
• Petitioners felt the proposals were too extreme.
• That if the proposed measures went ahead it would result in a ‘jungle’ with the extra road furniture.
• There were only brief periods of traffic; in the morning and afternoon.
• Councillor Scott Seaman-Digby’s comments had been emailed and received by the Cabinet Member.
• The proposals would have a detrimental impact.
• There would be an increase of noise from cars going over traffic tables.
• The traffic tables and humps would cause homes to shake. 
• That any problems on the road were caused by a lack of consideration by parents dropping their children to school.
• The introduction of a zebra crossing would not prevent the parking by parents.
• Parking spaces were already limited.
• The road humps would cause discomfort to the elderly.
• The petitioners had researched into traffic calming measures and it was noted that the Mayor of London asked Councils to consider alternatives to road humps.
• Road humps lowered the tone and caused a nuisance.
• Another Council had planned to get rid of street clutter.
• Petitioners agreed that there could be a compromise but felt the proposals were out of context.
• They asked that a 20mph zone be looked at as a trial.

• Mrs Millet spoke on behalf of the petition submitted which was in support of the proposed traffic calming measures.
• It was noted that there were 2 schools at either end of Carew Road. But there was nowhere safe for children to cross.
• There was an accident 2 years ago when Mrs Millet was walking her 9 year old daughter to school. A car knocked into her daughter.
• This encouraged Mrs Millet to look into road safety and traffic calming measures.
• If the proposals were enforced then traffic would be forced to travel at a slower speed.
• The local traffic would think twice before using the road as a cut through.
• Parents may consider walking their children to school.
• Last year 26 children died on British roads, and 1,600 were seriously injured.
• As stated by the Royal Society of the Prevention of Accidents, speed significantly increases the chance of injury and fatality.
• It was noted that travelling at 20mph resulted in a 2.5% fatality chance, and travelling at 30mph resulted in a 40% chance of a fatality.
• Mrs Millet stated that speed tables were quite different to speed humps, and were noise free.
• Mrs Millet used to walk the last 5 minutes to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.