Greenwich Council

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Rooms 4 & 5, Town Hall, Wellington Street, Woolwich SE18 6PW. View directions

Contact: Jasmine Kassim  Email: jasmine.kassim@royalgreenwich.gov.uk or tel: 020 8921 5146

Items
No. Item

1.

Apologies for Absence

To receive apologies for absence from Members of the Committee.

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Sizwe James, Bill Freeman, Rajinder James, Danny Thorpe and Radha Rabadia.

 

2.

Urgent Business

The Chair to announce any items of urgent business circulated separately from the main agenda.

Minutes:

There were no items of urgent business.

3.

Declarations of Interest pdf icon PDF 45 KB

Members to declare any personal and financial interests in items on the agenda.  Attention is drawn to the Council’s Constitution; the Council’s Code of Conduct and associated advice.

Minutes:

Resolved –

 

That the list of Councillors’ memberships as Council appointed representatives on outside bodies, joint committees and school governing bodies be noted.

4.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 45 KB

Members are requested to confirm as an accurate record the Minutes of the meeting held on 30 September 2015 and 25 November 2015.

 

No motion or discussion may take place upon the Minutes except as to their accuracy, and any question on this point will be determined by a majority of the Members of the body attending who were present when the matter in question was decided.  Once confirmed, with or without amendment, the person presiding will sign the Minutes.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Resolved -

 

That the minutes of the meetings of the Highways Committee held on 30 September 2015 and 25 November 2015 were confirmed and signed as a true and accurate record subject to the appending of the Car Utilisation document to the Minutes of 30 September 2015.

 

NB  The following items were listed as laid out in agenda, not necessarily as taken at the meeting.

 

5.

Petition Report - Parking Issues in Hector & Mineral Street pdf icon PDF 517 KB

The Committee is requested to note the petition and the response to the petition as set out within this report.

Minutes:

The report was introduced by the Traffic Group Manager who summarised the content of the report. 

 

In response to Members’ questions, the Traffic Group Manager stated that an attitude survey on Controlled Parking Zones (CPZ) proposals would be held in the spring of 2016 with a view to consulting on further CPZ proposals during the 2016/17 financial year.  This would be the earliest that the survey could be undertaken as resources were assigned to other priority projects. It was likely that there would need to be a cycle of reviews for the Plumstead and Abbey Wood area due to the opening of the Crossrail station.  The Traffic Group Manager explained that the previous review had covered an area up to Lakedale Road, however, the next review would probably push the boundary further.

 

Officers and Members discussed the impact on roads that chose not to participate in the CPZ. Members were informed that policy had included future-proofing parking which meant that the Council could tinker with the margins of the CPZ otherwise the CPZ might end up being nonsensical. 

 

In response to questions, the Traffic Group Manager stated that the amount of parking at Abbey Wood Crossrail station would be slightly less as cycle parking was being prioritised.

 

The Assistant Director (Transport) stated that the Council was working with Transport for London and pressing for a co-ordinated transport plan.  Officers were also working in consultation with their counterparts at the London Borough of Bexley. There would be business and residents permits but the places would be shared with Pay and Display for customers of nearby shops.

 

Members discussed introducing one-way systems but were informed that this would fall outside of the remit of the CPZ and had the effect of  speeding up traffic which risked the safety of pedestrians and other road users.

 

Members discussed the issues of dangerous parking, particularly on corners and the need for these to be kept clear and were informed by the Group Traffic Manager that this would be an integral part of the design of the CPZ. 

 

Resolved –

 

That the Highways Committee noted the petition from Hector Street and Mineral Street requesting resident only parking and limited waiting restrictions. It also noted that that the matters would be addressed in 2016 as part of the programmed review of the Plumstead Station CPZ.

6.

Petition Report - Parking Issues on Caletock and Flamstead Estates (Armitage Road & Glenister Road) pdf icon PDF 388 KB

The Committee is requested to note the petition and the response to the petition as set out within this report.

 

Minutes:

The Traffic Group Manager summarised the content of the report.  The Committee were informed that if proposals were approved, officers from Housing Management and Directorate of Regeneration Enterprise and Skills would identify an arrangement which gave equity over the eligibility for CPZ permits, recognising that some residents on the Caletock and Flamstead estates already had access to a housing permit scheme.

 

Two members of the public addressed the Committee stating that they were in favour of a controlled parking zone but were concerned that if parking controls finished at 6.30pm it would not ease their parking problems. They explained that to obtain a nearby parking space they had to leave work early and curtailed activities like taking children out to cubs or children’s clubs as they could not be sure of finding a parking space on their return.  They described how the situation was deteriorating as resident’s moved into the new housing developments and that there was also a problem with construction workers’ vehicles parking in the streets rather than on-site.  The speakers explained that whilst one of the new developments had an underground car park only the owners of the three and four bedroomed houses were allocated parking permits leaving everyone else to find street parking.

 

The speakers stated that inappropriate parking particularly on corners had led to an increase in accidents.  During discussions the speakers stated that there were rumours that parking permits for the housing estates were being duplicated, hired out or sold on. The Committee were concerned with the potential fraudulent use of permits and suggested that the allegation be investigated.

 

The Highways Committee considered the potential for car park spaces allocated for the car club; the need for construction workers on the developments being given on-site parking space and limiting the time for visitors car parking.

 

In response to questions, the Traffic Group Manager stated that a scheme would be introduced as soon as possible.  However, due to the size and layout of the CPZ it was likely that a second separate CPZ would be introduced to stop drivers with permits for the Westcombe Park CPZ using the proposed new CPZ spaces.

 

The Assistant Director (Transportation) advised that the concerns relating to the times of operation of the scheme could be raised during the consultation phase but noted that parking enforcement did not operate 24 hours a day.  He stated that there was no perfect solution as  estates and roads had not been built to accommodate parking for the number of cars now in use. 

 

Resolved –

 

To note the petition from Caletock and Flamstead Estates requesting resident parking allocation in Glenister Road and note the response to the petition and that the matter of permit parking would be addressed in the 2016/17 as part of the on-going review for Westcombe Park CPZ.

7.

Petition Report - Parking Issues in Eltham Heights pdf icon PDF 2 MB

The Committee is requested to note the petition and the response to the petition as set out within this report.

 

Minutes:

The Traffic Group Manager introduced that report, focusing on the difficulties of introducing parking controls due to objections from the London Borough of Bexley. 

 

The meeting was addressed by a member of the public who supported parking controls as the local roads were dangerous due to 100% increase in parking and 150% increase in the number of passing vehicles.  He felt that a risk assessment was needed because of excessive speed which increased the likelihood of accidents and the loss of amenity to residents. 

 

In response to questions, the Group Traffic Manager stated that no speed or volume surveys had taken place.

 

A Committee Member agreed with the speaker and recommended the imposition of a 20 mile per hour speed limit for the area.  He explained that it was not possible to use driveways without having to reverse in or out therefore badly parked vehicles increased possibility of accidents. The London Borough of Bexley objected to the proposed Controlled Parking Zone fearing displacement parking in their roads however many of those parking on the Greenwich side of the border were likely to be Bexley residents.

 

The Committee asked whether there was any data relating to accidents and near misses in the Eltham Heights Area and were informed that any data was collated by the police and supplied to the Council when assessing the priority areas for the introduction of 20 mile per hour speed schemes. Although Coalpits Road was not currently listed as a high priority however this could change when the next data assessment was made. 

 

Resolved –

 

That the petition from Eltham Heights residents requesting the Council to implement the Falconwood CPZ be noted.  That the response to the petition as set out within the report be noted.  That an options paper be prepared for consideration by the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Transport, following which officers would meet with petitioners and Ward Members to discuss an appropriate way forward.

8.

Update on the Highways Improvement & Local Labour (HILL) Project pdf icon PDF 38 KB

The Committee is requested to note the progress made in the delivery of the Highways Improvement & Local Labour project and to note the proposed list of works to be delivered in 2016/17, as part of the project.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The report was introduced by the Assistant Director (Transportation) who summarised the content and informed the Committee that part of the consideration in allocating works was to ensure that there were no planned works by utility companies.  

 

The Committee discussed the project and considered that the introduction of trees into the scheme not only improved the street scene but also had a positive impact on air quality.

 

 

Resolved

 

That the content of the report be noted.

 

 

The meeting closed at 8.03 pm.