Agenda and minutes

There were no declarations of interest.

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

The Cabinet Member considered a petition from residents requesting double yellow lines and parking bays on Kirby Road, Northwood.  A representative from the petition was in attendance and made the following points:

• Kirby Close was a small close of 9 houses, close to Northwood Town Centre and Northwood tube station. Unlike nearby closes, there were no parking restrictions in Kirby Close. This had led to it being used by people who were not residents of the Close for parking. 
• Due to the volume of non-residents parking in the close, it was often difficult for larger vehicles to enter. It was noted that there had been occasions when residents’ bins had not been collected because the bin lorry could not access the close. Concerns were raised that, in the event of an emergency, emergency vehicles would also not have been able enter the Close.
• It was noted that the lack of parking restrictions had also led to anti-social behaviour in the close. People had been congregating in their cars in the close at night and taking drugs, leaving behind litter and nitrous oxide cannisters. Concerns were raised about the safety of the young children who lived in the close.
• The petitioners considered that a proposal to extend the parking scheme from nearby streets, which operates Monday to Friday 1-2pm, would not be appropriate for the close. Although such a scheme would stop commuters leaving their cars in the close all day, it would not help reduce the anti-social behaviour related issues which had mainly been taking place at night.

Councillor Riley listened to the concerns of the petitioners and responded to the points raised. With regards to the issues surrounding anti-social behaviour on the Close, Councillor Riley agreed to pass on the issues to the Council’s Safer Neighbourhood’s Team. It was noted that the Council had just signed off some new awareness campaign posters on the use of nitrous oxide as a drug, and that these could be displayed on lampposts in the close.

With regards to the petitioners’ request for double yellow lines and parking bays, it was suggested that Kirby Close might benefit from a scheme which specified residents only parking past a certain point. Such a scheme would reduce the need for parking bays and double yellow lines, although it was noted that some double yellow lines at the entrance to the close would help to alleviate concerns about accessibility to the close for large vehicles. Petitioners welcomed the proposal and supported it to be sent out for an informal consultation by officers.

RESOLVED:

Meeting with the Petitioners, the Cabinet Member for Public Safety and Transport:

1. Met the petitioners and listened to their request for an ‘at any time’ residents’ permit parking scheme in Kirby Close; and
2. Asked officers to add this request to the Council’s extensive Parking Management Scheme Programme for a possible informal consultation.

The Cabinet Member considered a petition from residents requesting the introduction of a residents’ permit parking scheme, waiting restrictions, improvements to the area and the installation of CCTV cameras.  A representative from the petition was in attendance and made the following points:

• Tollgate Drive had seen an increase in anti-social behaviour over recent years, particularly along the stretch of the road which ran parallel to the canal. Since there were no parking restrictions on the stretch of road, people would come to the road to park and play loud music, often late into the night.
• Criminal activities such as illegal drug dealing and taking, fly tipping, theft of catalytic converters from cars, and violent and threatening behaviour were cited. Residents were feeling increasingly unsafe in their homes, with particular concern raised for the residents with young children.
• The petitioners thanked officers for their work so far in alleviating the issues raised, but noted that, in their opinion, some of the measures had been unsuccessful. Concerns were raised about the position and direction of the CCTV camera which had been installed, about the response times from emergency number displayed on public notices, and about negative impact some of the anti-fly tipping posters had been having. 

Councillor Jagjit Singh and Councillor Mohinder Birah attended the meeting as Ward Councillors and supported the petition and comments made by the petitioners. Both testified to their personal experience of issues raised by the petitioners.

Councillor Riley listened to the concerns of the petitioners and the ward councillors and responded to the points raised.  It was emphasised that the anti-social behaviour issues on Tollgate Drive were best answered with a multi-facetted approach, comprising enforcement action, parking measures and resident engagement. With regards to enforcement action, the importance of early reporting by residents was noted. It was asked of the petitioners that the dates of some of the specific incidents raised were shared with officers, and it was emphasised that sharing the number plates of any suspicious vehicles would allow issues to be followed up effectively. It was suggested that officers put the petitioners in contact with the Online Watch Link (OWL) coordinator, with a view to setting up more formal arrangements for reporting criminal activity on Tollgate Drive.

With regards to the parking measures for the road, it was agreed that implementing double yellow lines on the corner coming around towards the canal would be helpful. However, it was acknowledged that if the measure was not accompanied by a wider parking management scheme, it had the chance of moving the parking problems and anti-social behaviour further along the road. It was suggested that to accompany the double yellow lines, a scheme could be introduced which specified that only residents could park on the road past a certain point. The petitioners welcomed the suggestion and supported the possibility of it being developed and submitted for informal consultation by officers.

Resolved:

Meeting with the Petitioners, the Cabinet Member for Public Safety and Transport:

1. Met with petitioners and listened  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

The Cabinet Member considered a petition from residents requesting a change of surface material when reconstructing the footways in the Uplands, Ruislip. A representative from the petition was in attendance and made the following points:

• The Uplands was a quiet street with nice houses and a generally pleasing street scene. However, it was noted that, in the petitioners’ opinion, the street scene was blighted by the tarmacked footways. It was stated that the petitioners preferred flagstone paving like that used in neighbouring streets and requested that the tarmac was replaced.
• It was acknowledged that the request involved a financial cost to the Council which could undermine the case for agreeing to the request. Firstly, it was suggested that the flagstones could constitute an investment for the Council, since flagstones had lower maintenance costs than tarmac. Secondly, a compromise was suggested, asking that paving slabs were only placed in front of houses on the street, instead of the full stretch of the footways. It was noted that this style of paving was used on Elm Avenue, with a positive impact on its street scene.
• It was also acknowledged that since the footways on the adjoining Myrtle Avenue were tarmacked, a change of surfacing on the Uplands might require a change of surfacing on Myrtle Avenue to ensure continuity of the street scene. However, it was responded that other nearby streets did not have such continuity, and that therefore petitioners felt that this was not a great concern.

Councillor Riley listened to the concerns of the petitioners and responded to the points raised. The compromise suggested was welcomed and it was asked that officers investigate the costing of the proposal. It was noted that the cost of the works may not be proportional to the number of flagstones used which would be a limitation of the compromise suggested. It was also noted that some sections may have been tarmacked due to overriding by cars on the pavements and due to undulations in the earth below. These issues would have to be considered before any works were carried out. Given the issues raised, it was agreed that officers would defer the works on the Uplands to allow them to investigate alternative options for meeting the petitioners requests and to feed them back to the Cabinet Member.

Meeting with the Petitioners, the Cabinet Member for Public Safety and Transport:

1. Met with petitioners and listened to their request for a change in surface materials; and
2. Asked officers to defer the works to allow them to investigate options for better designing the footways.