Agenda and minutes

None.

It was confirmed that all items would be heard in public.

Councillors Neil Fyfe and John Oswell attended the meeting and spoke as Ward Councillors in support of the petition.

Concerns and suggestions raised at the meeting included the following:

·         Petitioners confirmed that their concerns were related to the speed of vehicles travelling down the road.

·         The road was used as a cut-through, with a steep curve at one end, and multiple areas of double yellow lines. Elsewhere, the road widened, which encouraged vehicles to speed up.

·         The officer's report stated that no police reorded collisions had been recorded along the road. Petitioners asserted that this was not the case, and reference was made to a resident being involved in an accident wherein both cars were written off. The accident was caused due to parked cars, which had resulted in poor visibility of the road when pulling out, together with the travelling vehicle's speed.

·         Residents had had a number of cats killed by speeding vehicles.

·         Resident safety, and particularly that of children, was a key concern.

·         A local car park was the site of antisocial behaviour using vehicles.

Councillor Oswell addressed the Cabinet Member, and stated:

·         The road was long, straight, and wide, which encouraged motorists to drive at excessive speeds.

·         The road was used a 'rat run' from Lansbury Drive.

·         Speed tables or similar measures would deter speeding.

Councillor Fyfe addressed the Cabinet Member, and stated:

·         Previous petitions, and resultant speed checks, had not resulted in a solution to the issues in Grosvenor Avenue.

·         Visible displays of speed limits or vehicle activated signs (VAS) were not effective in curbing speeding.

·         Speed cables were not wholly effective, as motorists often slowed down before crossing them.

·         Two collisions had occurred at the junction of Grosvenor Avenue and Kings Hill Avenue, and perhaps a stop sign was required.

·         Speed tables were felt to be effective at deterring speeding.

Councillor Burrows listened to the concerns of the petitioners and responded to the points raised. Regarding the accident statistics referred to within the officer's report, petitioners were advised that Police records for accidents only listed incidents where someone had been killed, or had been seriously injured (KSIs). With regard to VAS, these had been seen to be effective across the Borough, thought it was accepted that these may not work in every area.

Councillor Burrows understood the petitioner's concerns, and therefore moved the following recommendations:

RESOLVED:  Meeting with the petitioners, the Cabinet Member:

1.    Considered their concerns regarding vehicle speeds in Grosvenor Avenue, Hayes;

2.    Noted the results of the four previous speed and traffic surveys undertaken in Grosvenor Avenue, Hayes;

3.    Instructed officers to undertake further classified traffic volume and speed survey(s) at location(s) to be agreed with petitioners and the relevant Ward Members; and

4.    Instructed officers to report the stated antisocial behaviour within the local car park to the ASBIT team for investigation and reporting back to the Cabinet Member.

Reasons for recommendations

To allow the Cabinet Member the opportunity to hear directly from the petitioners of their concerns and suggestions.

Alternative  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Councillors Shehryar Ahmad-Wallana and Peter Davis attended the meeting and spoke as Ward Councillors in support of the petition.

Concerns and suggestions raised at the meeting included the following:

·         Petitioners confirmed that both ends of Violet Avenue had parking permit schemes, which had adversely parking in the middle section of the road.

·         The area was used by a number of non-residents, including staff and visitors to the nearby hospital and schools, as a parking area. Because of this, residents were having difficulty in entering and exiting their driveways, or even entering their vehicles.

·         Cars were often double parked on the side of the road. This made travelling the road difficult for motorists. Buses often had to drive on the opposite side of the road, which was a safety concern.

·         Emergency services would not have sufficient access to properly service the areas.

·         Cars often speed down the road, which was a safety concern.

·         This was an all-day issue, not limited to mornings and afternoons.

·         Pedestrian safety was compromised due to the parked cars.

Councillor Ahmad-Wallana addressed the Cabinet Member, and stated:

·         The three roads in question were residential areas, near primary schools.

·         Parking by hospital staff was seen as the main issue, through this was exacerbated by parents picking up and dropping off children, to and from the schools.

·         Safety of residents, including children, was of key concern.

·         Having visited the area and having spoken to local residents, it was clear that most residents were in favour of some kind of parking management scheme.

Councillor Davis addressed the Cabinet Member, and stated:

·         Hillingdon Hospital was the main issue.

·         Some of Violet Avenue was already under a parking management scheme, and actions to address the issue, such as limited hours of parking, should be explored.

Councillor Burrows listened to the concerns of the petitioners and responded to the points raised, confirming that a limited hours parking scheme would apply to everyone, including residents of the area.  In an area where not everyone would have access to off-street parking, this could result in further problems.

With regard to the middle area of Violet Avenue's exemption from the parking management scheme, this was as a result of a consultation that had been held previously, which had shown that residents at that time did not support a blanket scheme.

Issues of speeding in the area had been recognised, and a road safety scheme to address this within Violet Avenue was currently being progressed within the Council.

Councillor Burrows understood the petitioner's concerns, and therefore moved the following recommendations:

RESOLVED:  Meeting with the petitioners, the Cabinet Member:

1.    Discussed with petitioners their concerns with parking in Violet Avenue, Heather Close and Campion Close;

2.    Noted the results of the previous consultations with residents of the area on a possible Parking Management Scheme; and

3.    Asked officers to add the request to the Council's extensive parking programme for further informal consultation.

Reasons for recommendations

To allow the Cabinet Member the opportunity to hear directly from the petitioners  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Concerns and suggestions raised by Petitioners at the meeting included the following:

·         Waterloo Road and many fo the surrounding roads had parking management schemes in place. As St John's Road did not, non-residents were using the area to park their vehicles before then going to work. This had resulted in residents having no space to park their cars.

·         Residents were unclear who these non-residents were, and there were concerns that the influx of unknown people into the area could contribute to an increased risk of burglary.

Councillor Burrows read a message from Ward Councillor Tony Burles, who was unable to attend the hearing. Councillor Burles confirmed his support for the petition and the residents' request for parking bays within St Johns Close. Councillor Burrows also confirmed that Ward Councillor Judith Cooper had been in contact to confirm her support for the petition.

Councillor Burrows listened to the concerns of the petitioners, confirming that as Ward Councillor, he knew the area well, and understood the petitioner's concerns.

Councillor Burrows therefore moved the recommendations as follows:

RESOLVED:  Meeting with the petitioners, the Cabinet Member:

1.    Discussed with petitioners their concerns with parking in St Johns Close; and

2.    Asked officers to add the request to the Council's extensive parking programme for further informal consultation.

Reasons for recommendations

To allow the Cabinet Member the opportunity to hear directly from the petitioners of their concerns and suggestions.

Alternative options considered / risk management 

None at this stage.

Councillors John Hensley attended the meeting and spoke as Ward Councillor in respect of the petition.

Concerns and suggestions raised at the meeting included the following:

·         Petitioners confirmed that the initial consultation to set up a parking scheme in Ickenham started in 2014. In 2016, the parking scheme was implemented across all of the estate, with the exception of Austins Lane, Tavistock Road, and Sussex Road.

·         Commuter and school traffic/parking was then displaced into these roads, and a further consultation to include those roads in the scheme was held in 2017. This resulted in 18 households wanting the scheme, and 11 households against the scheme.

·         Residents were then informed in August 2017 that the scheme was to go ahead, and were issued permits.

·         Subsequently, implementation of the scheme within the southern end of Sussex Road was placed on hold, as the Council had received a petition against the scheme. A further petition was then submitted in favour of the scheme, which had led to the petition hearing in question.

·         Petitioners asserted that the majority of the residents of the southern end of Sussex Road were in favour of the scheme.

·         It was felt that the Council was inconsistent in applying the parking schemes within the area, as all other streets listed in the consultation had been treated as one street. It was felt that by splitting Sussex Road, the Council had allowed a small number of residents to delay the implementation of the scheme against the wishes of the majority.

·         Since the 9th October 2017, the southern end of Sussex road was being used as free parking by commuters using Ickenham station.

·         Parents driving their children to school will likely also be using Sussex road as a parking area.

·         There is not enough parking provision for these visitors and the residents of Sussex Road.

·         Safety of pedestrians is a concern. The area is a narrow cul-de-sac and vehicles turning to exit must cross pavements and driveways, at times of the day when children are often travelling on foot. A child was hit by a car on Friday 6rth October.

·         Pollution would increase due to cars sitting with their engines running while waiting to pick up children from school.

·         Residents were becoming stressed due to the lack of parking provision for guests. Carers will find it difficult to visit, and driveways are often blocked. This could lead to increased isolation for older residents.

·         If the scheme is not implemented, then many residents are planning to install dropped-kerbs, which will have a detrimental impact on the street scene.

·         It was requested that the hold placed on the scheme be dropped immediately, as per the wishes of the majority.

Councillor Hensley addressed the Cabinet Member, and stated:

·         As Ward Councillor, Councillor Hensley made regular visits to the area. The most recent visit was made on 11 October at 11.10am, a time chosen to avoid transient vehicles (such as parents dropping off children to school.)

·         On his visit, Cllr Hensley had observed a large  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.