Report for: Portfolio Holder Decision 03...Portfolio Holder Decision Subject: Gordon Road Area Review ... 6. The introduction of shared use (resident and pay and display) parking bays

Ref PHD – 003 – 20/21

Report for:

Portfolio Holder Decision

Subject:

Gordon Road Area Review – Results

of Statutory Consultation

Portfolio Holder: Paul Walker - Corporate Director, Community

Key Decision: Varsha Parmar Portfolio Holder for Environment

Urgent/Non Urgent: No

Responsible Officer: Non-Urgent

Decision subject to

Call-in:

Yes

Power to be

exercised:

Paragraph 2(iii) of the Delegated Powers of the Portfolio Holders, Appendix to the Executive Procedure Rules, Part 4D of the Constitution.

Exempt: No

Wards affected: Wealdstone

Enclosures: Appendix A – Consultation leaflet Appendix B – Objections and officer response Appendix C – Shared use bay proposals

Section 1 – Summary and Recommendations

This report sets out the results of the statutory consultation on proposals to introduce a new controlled parking zone (CPZ) in streets in the Gordon Road area.

Recommendations:

The Portfolio Holder (“PH”) for Environment is requested to consider the responses to the consultation and to approve the scheme and to proceed to implementation, taking into consideration the objections, as detailed below:

1. Gordon Road, Havelock Road, Wellington Road, Wolseley Road, Cardinal Way, Graham Road, Whitefriars Avenue and Cecil Road be omitted from the existing zone (CA) which will be operational Monday to Friday 10am to 11am and 2pm to 3pm and be included in the existing extended zone C1 operational Monday to Sunday 8am to midnight.

2. Eligible properties in the following roads or sections of roads in Headstone

Drive, Ellen Webb Drive, The Bridge, Palmerstone Road, Canning Road, George Gange Way, High Street and Gladstone Way be omitted from existing zone (CA) which will be operational Monday to Friday 10am to 11am and 2pm to 3pm and be included in the existing extended zone C1 operational Monday to Sunday 8am to midnight.

3. Introduction of “At any time” (double yellow lines) at key locations throughout

the consultation area at junctions, bends and narrow sections of the road to help remove obstructive and dangerous parking and improve access.

4. Introduction of new resident permit bays in Cardinal Way.

5. The section of Tudor Road northwest of Cecil Road is omitted from zone (CA)

as detailed in the consultation leaflet.

6. The introduction of shared use (resident and pay and display) parking bays in Whitefriars Avenue operational Monday to Sunday 8am to midnight, see appendix C for details.

7. The introduction of shared use (resident and pay and display) parking bays in

Wolseley Road which will be operational Sunday 10am to 9pm. Outside these hours the bays to remain resident parking only, see appendix C for details.

8. The shared use bays in Graham Road, opposite the church, to remain shared

use throughout the operational hours of the zone, Monday to Sunday 8am to midnight.

9. The London Borough of Harrow (“LBH”) Travel Planning team contact the

organisations that have raised objections to encourage them to adopt travel plans and alternative modes of transport when attending the venues.

Reason: (For recommendation)

To act in accordance with the results of the statutory consultation that was undertaken in direct response to residents and businesses requests for changes to the existing parking arrangements in their area.

Section 2 – Report

Introduction

At the Council’s Cabinet meeting on 11 July 2019, the Cabinet agreed a new parking management and enforcement strategy. The parking management and enforcement strategy sets out the Council’s approach to parking control and enforcement in the borough of Harrow and will ensure that the parking policies in the approved third Transport Local Implementation Plan are effectively taken forward to address the significant environmental and economic challenges faced by Harrow residents and businesses. This is required to facilitate Highways Authority functions under the Highways Act 1980. The Council’s programme of CPZ schemes/reviews have historically been demand led and address parking pressures highlighted by local residents and businesses. This report sets out the results of the statutory consultation on proposals to introduce new controlled parking zone (CPZ) operational hours in streets in the Gordon Road area in response to a residents’ petition.

Options considered

Parking is not a static situation but dynamic and constantly changing. This can be due to factors such as new development, conversion of dwellings, changes to rail fares and economic situations. Existing controls introduced over 10 years ago to mitigate the problems at that time may now no longer be appropriate for the area covered or times of control. The only option available is to take forward parking management schemes because these form a key part of national and local transport strategies and make a significant contribution to the wider aspirations of improving safety, reducing congestion and encouraging modal shift and sustainable transport. The design of a CPZ can vary depending on the types of problems that need to be addressed. The proposed CPZ for Gordon Road area was designed to address the concerns of the residents regarding long term non-residential parking whilst taking into account the needs of the shops and businesses who require parking for their staff, customers and delivery companies.

Background

This report sets out the results of the statutory consultation on proposals to introduce changes to the existing parking controls in Gordon Road, Havelock Road, Wellington Road, Wolseley Road, Cardinal Way and Cecil Road including Whitefriars Avenue and Graham Road. These roads are currently situated within the existing controlled parking zone (CPZ) CA which is operational on Monday – Friday between 10.00am – 11.00am and 2.00 – 3.00pm.

They are busy residential roads situated within close proximity of the local shops, offices, train station, industrial units, new large cale residential developments and one mosque and two churches which are all contributing to the parking and access problems being experienced in the area.

Informal Public Consultation

In August 2019 an informal public consultation exercise was undertaken in the Gordon Road area. The results indicated that 84% (49/58) of respondents preferred the existing controls of zone CA to be extended to that of the nearby zone C1 (Monday to Sunday 8am to midnight), and therefore the PH agreed to proceed to statutory consultation.

Do you agree

that parked

vehicles are

causing

access

problems in

the evenings?

Do you or

your visitors

find it difficult

to find a

convenient

parking

space near

your property

in the

evenings?

If you said

‘No’ to Q1 &

Q2 would you

change your

mind if

adjoining

roads have

parking

controls

extended into

the evenings?

If you answered ‘Yes’ to

Q1, Q2 & Q3 what times

would you prefer parking

controls to operate?

Monday to Sunday 8am to midnight (Same as CPZ C1)

Mon – Sat 8am – 6.30pm

Yes 56

(87.5%)

57 (89%) 3 49 9

No 8 7 5

Statutory Consultation

A statutory consultation exercise was carried out between 20th February and 11th March 2020 which included Whitefriars Avenue, Graham Road, Gordon Road, Havelock Road, Wellington Road, Wolseley Road, Cardinal Way and Cecil Road. Leaflets were distributed to all households in the agreed consultation area and street notices advertising the proposals were placed on each street. In addition, detailed plans of the scheme were included on the council’s website and hard copies were made available for inspection at the Civic Centre. The proposals were also advertised in the Harrow Times and London Gazette. (Details of the consultation leaflet can be seen in Appendix A) It should be noted that there are a number of roads or sections of roads (Headstone Drive, Ellen Webb Drive, The Bridge, Palmerstone Road, Canning Road, George Gange Way, High Street and Gladstone Way) which

are currently within zone (CA) that could become isolated from nearby zone (CA) resident parking spaces, if the scheme proceeds to implementation. Therefore, these roads were also included in the statutory consultation exercise to allow residents to comment on the proposals. It is recommended that if the scheme is approved, eligible properties in these roads, will be informed that their existing zone permits will be replaced with permits allowing them to park in the new extended zone (C1). The roads affected can be seen in the plan below on the bottom left of the map. It is also proposed to omit a small area in Tudor Road from the existing zone (CA). This will not affect the existing parking controls along this section of the road. The zone entry and exit signs will be relocated south east of Tudor Road near its junction with Graham Road. All other existing zone entry/exit signs that will be affected by the proposed changes will be will amended accordingly. Details of the scheme proposals in full can be seen in the plan below. There is a key in the plan which explains the measures consulted on.

Responses

During the statutory consultation period 298 objections and comments were received. Most of these objections and comments were from the following post codes:

Postcode Number of responses

HA1 43

HA2 27

HA3 128

HA4 1

HA5 3

HA6 5

Outside of the local area 91

Total 298

The main topics raised by the objectors are summarized in the table below.

Comment Officers Response

Residents of the roads under consideration objecting to the proposed extended hours;

The initial consultations indicated support from all roads for the proposed operational hours. It appears that the residents now objecting either did not reply to the initial consultation or voted against the majority support.

Users of the Wealdstone Baptist Church, New Life Bible Church, Cornerstone Pentecostal Church, Holy Trinity Church who feel they will not be able to attend services and other church activities; standard worded letters received following a conversation with a member of the congregation.

Parking controls assist in encouraging less car use. In line with the Mayor for London transport strategy – to have 80% of all trips in London by foot, cycle or public transport by 2041. There are options for members of churches who of necessity use cars to attend services and other activities. Blue badge holders can park on double or single yellow lines for up to 3hours and can park for free for unlimited time in resident parking and, pay and display and shared use bays. There are spaces available in Peel Road car park - a 3minute walk, and pay and display in Graham road and Lockett Road.

The extended hours will have a detrimental effect on the High Street shops and businesses.

The existing parking controls in the High Street will not be changed. Shoppers who currently park in the residential roads will have to use the Peel Road car park which is as close to the shops as the roads.

A full list of all the comments and objections received during the statutory consultation along with officers’ comments are tabulated and can be seen in Appendix B.

Summary of main objections

During the consultation period objections were received from attendees of a number of religious organisations within the proposed zone C1 extension. The Sri Lanka Muslim Cultural Centre located in Whitefriars Avenue submitted a petition containing 201 signatures objecting to the hours of the scheme. The wording of the petition is as follows: “We, the undersigned members of the congregation of the Sri Lanka Muslim Cultural Centre (UK) based in Whitefriars Avenue wish to express our great concerns and strong objections in respect of the proposed Parking restrictions and amendments to be introduced shortly. Notice has been served that roads from the remove the above roads from the existing zone CA Monday to Friday 10-11am, 2-3 pm and to include them in the existing zone C1 Monday to Sunday 8am – Midnight.” Wealdstone Baptist Church located in the High Road submitted 222 Proforma letters from members of the church and users of the various groups – mainly the toddler group. The proforma letter read: “I am writing to express my opinion that the proposed CPZ for Wealdstone is contrary to promoting community life and business in Wealdstone. I attend church services / shop for items in Wealdstone in the proposed affected areas and I drive my car to Wealdstone for church services along with my family to shop in Wealdstone. This proposed parking ordinance will eliminate my being able to attend church services and/ or shop in Wealdstone. It should be a basic right that those that cannot travel by public transport be allowed to worship where they so choose and shop where they choose. This anti vehicle proposal will eliminate that right as there is precious little parking in Wealdstone and were that amount removed seven days a week that would effectively that right for myself and my family and many others to attend church services and shop. I can only imagine the vendors in Wealdstone objecting to the removal of quite a number of their customers and potential customers. It is for those reasons I strenuously object.” The Cornerstone Pentecostal Church: 17 letters stating, “I attend Cornerstone Church (Located in the Baptist Church Wealdstone) and the proposed restrictions will make it extremely difficult for me to attend my weekly worship.” Holy Trinity Church: The Vicar of Holy Trinity Church has written expressing his concern about the proposal. Thirty objections were also received from roads within the consultation area objecting to the proposed operational hours the majority of the objectors at the statutory stage did not respond to the initial informal public consultation in August / September 2019.

Commentary

The proforma letters received from the congregation of the various churches commented that the restrictions will make it extremely difficult for people to attend weekly worship and other activities. The breakdown of post codes indicates that most of the respondents from the churches live in the same post code as the churches, within approximately 1km of the churches. This is a distance that can reasonably be expected to be walked by healthy adults and children. Similar comments were also received from users of the toddler group, the users of which indicated they would find it difficult to reach the venue without driving. There seems to be hesitation on the part of the religious establishments and their associated groups to investigate alternatives to the car. In order to address this, it is suggested that the management of these religious establishments should be approached by the LBH travel planning team with a view to providing information and assistance in developing a travel plan to consider other alternatives such as car sharing or using alterative modes of transport. A review of responses at the informal consultation stage indicated that households in the roads within the proposed new extended zone (C1) area who objected to the new operational hours generally did not support the proposals during the initial consultation. They either voted for alternative hours of control or did not respond at all.

Road Objections received

Response to initial consultation

Did not respond

In favour of CPZ

Not in favour of CPZ

Wellington Road 13 9 2 2

Havelock Road 5 3 2 0

Gordon Road 3 2 1 0

Cecil Road 2 0 1 1

Wolseley Road 1 1

Whitefriars Ave 4 3 1

Graham Road 2 2

Summary and Conclusion

The statutory consultation generated a large number of responses. It should be noted that although there were a large number of responses the majority of the objections were generated from a proforma letter, which indicates that the responses are not necessarily individual responses. The responses from the religious organisations indicate that their users are reluctant to consider alternatives to the car to attend the various services and functions that these organisations operate. These objections do not suggest that they prove material grounds for objection as there are alternative options available such as public transport,

parking in the nearby multi storey car park, pay and display bays and or other forms of sustainable transport. The scheme has been developed to address long standing issues concerning obstructive parking and congestion in the area, especially in the evenings, that have been the subject of extensive correspondence with the Council over a number of years and concerns raised by local councilors. The objectors have been mobilised by the various organisations in (or bordering) the area whose attendees, by their own admission, are driving to these venues and parking their vehicles in the adjacent residential streets. These vehicles are contributing to (or causing) the parking problems that the residents have been complaining about. However, it is recognised that the various religious establishments form an important part of the community and some accommodation needs to be made to allow some necessary parking to take place on street. It is therefore proposed to introduce shared use (resident and pay and display) parking bays in the roads near these establishments that will provide on street facilities for those members of the congregations who must drive to services.

Recommendations

It is recommended that although the objections are not substantive some provision should be made to accommodate attendees of the religious institutions in the area, and the scheme is allowed to proceed to implementation as detailed below: 1. Gordon Road, Havelock Road, Wellington Road, Wolseley Road, Cardinal

Way, Graham Road, Whitefriars Avenue and Cecil Road be omitted from the existing zone (CA), which will be operational Monday to Friday 10am to 11am and 2pm to 3pm and be included in the existing extended zone C1 operational Monday to Sunday 8am to midnight.

2. Eligible properties in the following roads or sections of roads in Headstone

Drive, Ellen Webb Drive, The Bridge, Palmerstone Road, Canning Road, George Gange Way, High Street and Gladstone Way be omitted from existing zone (CA), which will be operational Monday to Friday 10am to 11am and 2pm to 3pm and be included in the existing extended zone C1 operational Monday to Sunday 8am to midnight.

3. Introduction of “At any time” (double yellow lines) at key locations

throughout the consultation area at junctions, bends and narrow sections of the road to help remove obstructive and dangerous parking and improve access.

4. Introduction of new resident permit bays in Cardinal Way.

5. The section of Tudor Road northwest of Cecil Road is omitted from zone

(CA) as detailed in the consultation leaflet.

6. The introduction of shared use (resident and pay and display) parking bays in Whitefriars Avenue, near the mosque, operational Monday to Sunday 8am to midnight.

7. The introduction of shared use (resident and pay and display) parking

bays in Wolseley Road, near the church, operational Sunday 10am to 9pm. Outside of these hours the bays to remain resident parking only.

8. The shared use bays in Graham Road, opposite the church, to remain

shared use throughout the operational hours of the zone, Monday to Sunday 8am to midnight.

9. It is further recommended that the LBH Travel Planning team contact the

organisations that have raised objections to encourage them to adopt travel plans and alternative modes of transport when attending the venues.

10. Residents are to be informed of the decision.

Consultation with Ward Councillors and the Portfolio Holder

The consultation responses have been discussed with ward councillors and with the Portfolio Holder via email. With regards to options to try to mitigate the impact of the proposed extension on the religious establishment the following points were made. • We could consider disabled bays outside these premises so that blue

badge holders are afforded a degree of priority. - possibly 1-2 bays on Graham Road, Wolseley Rd, and Whitefriars Ave. This would require another statutory consultation exercise.

• It is also worth noting that there are some existing pay and display bay on the eastern side of Gordon Road between Mon-Sun 8am-6.30pm after which anyone can park there.

• We could consider pay and display bays / shared use bays outside these establishments to allow non residents to park (consider having pay and display only at service times). Again, this would require another statutory consultation exercise.

• Peel Road car park is now open on a Sunday during service times the costs are 80p an hour. There is pay and display in Wealdstone Square and parking in the Civic centre.

• Agree that officers will meet with faith establishments and work with them to set up Travel Plans. Please see attached guidance from Westtrans regarding faith sites.

• It is not recommended that we do not enforce any new restrictions as this could result in complaints from the local residents and would not be consistent with the enforcement regime of similar schemes throughout the borough.

Following this discussion members and the PH agreed that the introduction of shared use bays should be investigated.

Implications of the Recommendation

Staffing/workforce

The delivery of the schemes in the parking programme of investment will be undertaken by existing staff resources within the Traffic, Highways & Asset Management team supported by technical consultants as required.

Performance Issues

The implementation of the schemes in the programme of investment will support the wider aims, objectives and targets in the Transport Local Implementation Plan 3 (LIP3) and help to deliver Harrow’s corporate priorities and in particular building a better Harrow

Environmental Impact

The current Transport Local Implementation Plan 3 (LIP3) has undergone a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) which has indicated that there are environmental benefits from delivering the proposed parking programme of investment. Key population and human health benefits include reducing reliance on travel by car, reducing casualties, reducing congestion, encouraging active travel and improving air quality.

Risk Management Implications

Risk included on Directorate risk register? No Separate risk register in place? Yes

Legal Implications

Subject to statutory consultation requirements, the Council has powers to introduce, implement and change CPZs under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, The Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 and The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016. In particular, section 122 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, under which the Council has a duty to secure free movement of vehicular and other traffic (including pedestrians) and maintain the provision of suitable and adequate parking facilities on and off highway.

Financial Implications

The scheme is part of the 2020/21 Parking Management Programme. There is £300k budget allocation in the existing capital programme. A sub-allocation of £35k for the statutory consultation and implementation of the review has been agreed by TARSAP. Therefore the cost of implementing the scheme can be funded from within this budget. Once the scheme is implemented, parking income will be generated from parking permits, Pay & Display charges and from penalty charge notices for

parking offences. Any income raised will be used to fund the costs of administration and enforcement.

Procurement Implications

There are no procurement implications associated with this report. The scheme will be implemented by the Council’s term contractor.

Equalities implications / Public Sector Equality Duty

A programme of CPZ schemes was included in the Transport Local Implementation Plan (LIP) which was approved by full Council. The LIP was subject to an Equalities Impact Assessment where schemes were identified as having no negative impact on any equality groups. In addition, all CPZs have a positive impact on those with mobility difficulties as more spaces are identified for disabled parking. As a result of double yellow lines at junctions, there is also increased protection at junctions which will protect dropped crossing and prevent dangerous parking at these locations and thereby further assist those with mobility difficulties. Typical benefits are likely to be as follows:

Protected characteristic

Benefit

Gender Mothers with young children and elderly people generally benefit most from controlled parking as the removal of all-day commuters frees up spaces closer to residents’ homes. These groups are more likely to desire parking spaces with as short a walk to their destination as possible.

Disability The retention of double yellow lines at junctions will ensure level crossing points are kept clear. Parking bays directly outside homes, shops and other local amenities will make access easier, particularly by blue badge holders for long periods of the day.

Age Fewer cars parked on-street in residential roads will improve the environment for children. Parking controls can help reduce the influx of traffic into an area, and therefore reduce particulates and air pollution, to which children and the elderly are particularly sensitive.

Each scheme that is developed has a design risk assessment undertaken which includes an assessment of the impact on equalities issues. In addition, all public consultations are subject to issue of the Council’s corporate Equality Monitoring Forms. The returned forms are subject to analysis to ensure that they reflect the local community by comparing them to data held by the Council at the time such as Census and vitality profiles. Any significant

differences are used to adapt future consultations and would be reported to the Panel as part of the scheme reports.

Council Priorities

The parking scheme detailed in the report accords with the Council’s priorities as follows:

Corporate priority Impact

Making a difference for communities

Parking controls make streets easier to clean by reducing the number of vehicles on-street during the day, giving better access to the kerb for cleaning crews. Regular patrols by Civil Enforcement Officers deter criminal activity and can help gather evidence in the event of any incidents. By introducing demand management measures the demand to travel by car can be regulated leading to reduced road congestion and greater use of sustainable transport modes like public transport and cycling lessening the impact on the local environment.

Making a difference for the vulnerable Making a difference for families

Parking controls generally help vulnerable people by freeing up spaces for carers, friends and relatives to park during the day. Without parking controls, these spaces would be occupied all day by commuters and other forms of long stay parking.

Making a difference for local businesses

The changes to parking pay and display facilities will support local businesses to give more customers parking access to shops.

The principle of enforcing parking controls is integral to delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy and the Council’s adopted Transport Local Implementation Plan.

Section 3 - Statutory Officer Clearance

Statutory Officer: Jessie Mann Signed on behalf of the Chief Financial Officer

Date: 25 August 2020

Statutory Officer: Jimmy Walsh Signed on behalf of the Monitoring Officer

Date: 20 September 2020

Section 3 - Procurement Officer Clearance

Statutory Officer: Nimesh Mehta Signed by the Head of Procurement

Date: 9 September 2020

Section 3 – Corporate Director Clearance

Statutory Officer: Paul Walker Signed by the Corporate Director

Date: 18 September 2020

Mandatory Checks

Ward Councillors notified: YES

EqIA carried out: YES

EqIA cleared by: An EqIA has been undertaken for the Transport Local implementation Plan of which this project is a part. A separate EqIA is therefore not necessary

Section 4 - Contact Details and Background

Papers

Contact: Bruce Bolton/Sajjad Farid, Project Engineers. Tel: 020 8424 1484 Email: [email protected]; [email protected] Background Papers: Results of initial consultation

Signature: Paul Walker

Position: Corporate Director Community Name: (print) Paul Walker

Date: 18 September 2020

For Portfolio Holder

* I do agree to the decision proposed

* I do not agree to the decision proposed

* Please delete as appropriate

Notification of disclosable non-pecuniary and pecuniary interests (if any):

[Should you have a disclosable pecuniary interest, you should not take this decision.]

Additional comments made by and/or options considered by the Portfolio Holder

Signature: ………………………………………………………………………… Portfolio Holder

Date: ……………………………………………………

Call-in waived by the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Committee

NO