Agenda item

Councillors Andrew Retter, Jonathan Bianco and John Morgan were in attendance and spoke as Ward Councillors.

Councillor John Nickolay from LB Harrow was also in attendance. 

Concerns and suggestions raised at the meeting included the following:

• The lead petitioner advised that she was speaking on behalf of all the petitioners from Harrow and Hillingdon.
• They wished to make the road safe for residents. 
• They had a letter of support from the head teachers of the surrounding schools. 
• A traffic survey carried out showed that 85% of vehicles that drive there did an average of 39mph. 
• Homes in the area kept accident response kits indoors as they regularly had to attend accidents outside their homes. 
• An 18 year old was killed in an accident in May 2010. 
• Petitioners wished for drivers to be forced to observe the 30mph speed limit. Physical means could be used to force them such as check points, speed tables, rumble strips or average speed camera. 
• Petitioners wanted a safe place for pedestrians to cross the road. In some parts there was not a paved area on both sides of the road. 
• Petitioners requested a preference for a zebra crossing or at least a crossing island. 
• They wanted to prevent heavy/large vehicles from using the road; and petitioners suggested a width restriction being put on the road. 
• There was no room for error on the road, a little slip up caused accidents. 
• It was too important an issue to let geographical boundaries (i.e. borough boundaries) prevent anything going forward to improve the safety.
• This issue had been discussed at many lengths in many forums. 

The Ward Councillors commented on the petition:

• Councillor Retter spoke to support the petitioners and on behalf of his Ward Councillor colleagues. 
• It was a priority issue for the Ward Councillors. 
• It was a very unusual road; the road was used to link Pinner and Ruislip. 
• There had been an increase in traffic over the years in the area. 
• Some drivers drove faster than 40/50mph on the 30mph road. 
• That a tragedy would happen again if nothing was done. 
• They needed to find a way to force drivers to slow down. 
• They needed to look at way to reducing the speed limit on the road. Possibly consider a 25mph zone. 
• A safe place with high visibility was required for crossing point. 
• Speed cameras would assist in reducing the speeds of cars. An average speed camera would be more sufficient than a normal one, which would also be of use. 
• A letter could be sent from the Cabinet Member to support the request for speed cameras to TFL. 

• Cllr Bianco also spoke to explain that he shared the concerns of the residents. 
• He encouraged officers to look at all options available. 
• The Ward Councillor questioned the budget on road safety and whether the Council would have the money to do anything that was required. 
• He questioned how much dependence was placed on Harrow Council. 
• He also asked officers what timings the residents should expect. 

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

• The Council did not have any direct control over when or where speed cameras were put on roads. When these were considered figures of those killed and seriously injured (KSI) were looked at. This data was recorded on the police collision system. Slight knocks were usually not recorded. 
• The figure of KSI's needed to be a certain level before it became a priority. 
• The Cabinet Member was happy to send a letter on behalf of the residents and Ward Councillors to TFL. 
• The speed limit reduction was not easy to put in place legally. 
• A speed survey would indicate speeds, timings, etc. This information would be shared with the police if necessary.
• Residents should not feel uncomfortable trying to cross the road. 
• The Council ran a road safety education course for students of Uxbridge College. A lot of young drivers speed due to peer pressure. 
• Road Safety week was coming up and a “no drink and drive” campaign. 
• Any fatality on a Hillingdon road was one too many and the concerns of the residents were being treated seriously.  
• The road safety budget and money from TFL could be used as they saw fit for funding. 
• The boundary runs at the edge of Cuckoo Hill so the Council could make the changes as required. Harrow Council would have to be consulted if a crossing was to be put it. 
• He had recently agreed for the purchase of more road signs. 
• The officers would move as quickly as they could. They did not want another fatality. 
• Any changes would need to be advertised to see if they had any objections. 

Officers advised that:           

• The road survey could take place before Christmas. This would record the volume, speed of traffic and the type of vehicle being used. 
• In the short term signs and markings, which were on order, could be put on the road. 
• Flashing speed indicators could be put on for a 3 month period and officers would speak to Ward Councillors about the location for this. 
• In the long term a study and survey would be done for substantial measures. Work would be done into the spring on this. 
• The crossing would most likely be a traffic signal crossing. TFL would need to provide the traffic lights for this, and this could take up to 6 months to a year. 
• Council's had their own capital programme for budgeting big schemes. 
• The time line suggested by officers was, if something was agreed, next Summer/Autumn for substantial measures. 
• Emergency services used the roads as a response route so the width restrictions suggested by petitioners may not have been viable. 
• When looking at a location of the crossing the sight lines would be taken into consideration. 
• The speed survey could be done in more than one point. 
• Nothing would be introduced without consultation and dialogue with Harrow Council. 
• In terms of funding from Harrow, they would have discussions with after the work was done.  

DECISION

That the Cabinet Member

1. Met with the petitioners and discussed in detail their concerns with speeding and unsuitable vehicles using Cuckoo Hill;

2. Subject to the outcome of 1 above asked officers to investigate any feasible measures identified as part of the Council’s Road Safety programme;

3. Instructed officers to liaise with the Metropolitan Police including the local Safer Neighbourhood Team with a view to sharing information and practical solutions;

4. Instructed officers to liaise with the Police and Transport for London with regard to the case for safety cameras in the vicinity and report back to the Cabinet Member;

5. Instructed officers to explore appropriate joint initiatives with counterparts in the London Borough of Harrow.

6. Instructed officers to undertake a feasibility study to install a crossing on Cuckoo Hill and report back to the Cabinet Member. 

7. Instructed officers to undertake a 24/7 speed survey. 

Reasons for Recommendation:

The petitioners have identified a number of concerns that impact on road safety. The success of traffic measures which address these are largely successful if they are acceptable to local residents.  These can be identified with petitioners for further detailed investigation by Officers within the Road Safety programme.

Alternative Options Considered:

These may rise from the Cabinet Members discussions with petitioners.

Relevant Wards:

Northwood Hills