Agenda and draft minutes

Venue: Council Chamber, Civic Offices, Reading

Contact: Richard Woodford - Committee Services  Email: richard.woodford@reading.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

47.

Minutes of previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 104 KB

Minutes:

The Minutes of the meeting of 9 January 2020 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Further to Minute 43, Oxford Road Corridor Study Update, the Sub-Committee noted a report would be submitted to the next meeting in relation to resolution (2) regarding the investigation of whether a ‘free’ period could be retained in parking bays along the Oxford Road and the possibility of introducing a free period in all pay and display car parks/ streets and roads around local shopping areas outside the town centre.  The Sub-Committee also noted that, contrary to the impression given at the previous meeting, Chester Street Car Park did have a ‘free’ period during the day and there was no charge for parking there on a Sunday.

 

48.

Questions from Members of the Public and Councillors pdf icon PDF 32 KB

Questions submitted pursuant to Standing Order 36 in relation to matters falling within the Sub-Committee’s Powers & Duties which have been submitted in writing and received by the Head of Legal & Democratic Services no later than four clear working days before the meeting.

Minutes:

Questions on the following matters were submitted, and answered by the Lead Councillor for Strategic Environment Planning and Transport on behalf of the Chair:

Questioner

Subject

Jasmine Hicks

Priory Avenue Surgery

(The full text of the question and reply was made available on the Reading Borough Council website).

 

48a

Response to a Petition Requesting Reinstatement of Traffic Island on Berkeley Avenue pdf icon PDF 69 KB

A report in response to a petition, submitted to the Council on 21 January 2020, requesting the reinstatement of a traffic island on Berkeley Avenue between Ashley Road and Bath Road that was removed as part of the NCN Phase 2 scheme.

Minutes:

The Executive Director for Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report on the receipt and response to a petition requesting the reinstatement of a traffic island on Berkeley Avenue between Ashley Road and Bath Road that had been removed as part of the National Cycle Network (NCN) Phase 2 scheme.

The report explained that the petition, which had contained 93 signatures, had been submitted to the Council on 21 January 2020 and read as follows:

To comply with the making of two on road cyclingways wider (bearing in mind we already had a combined cyclingway on the west side of Berkeley Avenue), Reading Borough Council have removed the Traffic Island – Crossing Point between Bath Road and Ashley Road. We think this is a dangerous step as many people including those living in Coley Park area used this crossing point. Especially those who are older, children and push chairs, no consultation took place!”

The petition was in relation to Phase 2 of the NCN scheme, proposals had included the reallocation of road space along Berkeley Avenue to facilitate the upgrade of the existing 1.2m wide advisory cycle lane to a mandatory 1.5m wide cycle lane.  This had been achieved by removing the traffic island between Bath Road and Ashley Road, which was the focus of the petition, and associated hatched road markings.  The traffic island did not meet standards for a safe pedestrian crossing, including its unsuitability for those with mobility aids or pushchairs, due to the lack of dropped kerbs and the steep grass verge on approach to the carriageway from the northern footway.  Prior to removal of the traffic island consideration had been given to the availability and location of alternative crossing facilities, which had included a formal pedestrian crossing facility approximately 115m to the west. 

The report had recommended that the traffic island on Berkeley Avenue, between Bath Road and Ashley Road was not reinstated due to it not being designed as a pedestrian crossing point, lack of other crossing features, such as dropped kerbs, and the availability of alternative safe pedestrian crossing points in close proximity to the location.  There had also been concerns that its reinstatement would compromise the cycle infrastructure works that had been delivered.  However, in light of the comments made by the petitioners, it was agreed that consideration should be given to reinstating some form of pedestrian crossing in the vicinity of the former traffic island and a meeting would be arranged with local residents to discuss possible options.

At the invitation of the Chair the petition organisers, Terry Dixon and Gordon Baum, addressed the Sub-Committee on behalf of the petitioners and they presented an updated version of the petition, which had now received 204 signatories.

Resolved –

(1)         That the report be noted;

(2)         That a meeting be arranged between Transport Officers and local residents to discuss the options for the reinstatement of a pedestrian crossing on Berkeley Avenue in the vicinity of the former traffic islandwhich  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48a

48b

Other Petitions pdf icon PDF 101 KB

To receive any other petitions on traffic management matters submitted in accordance with the Sub-Committee’s Terms of Reference.

Minutes:

Petition in respect of Making Reading’s Cycling Routes fit for Cycling

At the invitation of the Chair, John Lee, presented a petition which read as follows:

“Reading Borough Council has announced that it will implement “Reading’s biggest ever road repair programme with £9million on new road surfaces, prioritising residential streets.”

After years of cuts to local government funding it is recognised that Reading’s roads are in a poor state of repair.  Pot-holed and rutted road surfaces disproportionately affect cyclists, who are amongst the most vulnerable of road users, and this discourages the take up of cycling for urban journeys.

Reading Borough Council has declared a climate emergency and needs to take action to actively promote sustainably modes of transport.  To this end we request that the upcoming road repair programme prioritises the roads that form Reading’s designated and branded cycle network.”

A report was tabled recommending that officers consider the contents of the petition and make any consequential recommendations to a future meeting.  Additionally, the Sub-Committee was advised by the Lead Councillor for Strategic Environment, Planning & Transport, that the Strategic Environment, Planning & Transport (SEPT) Committee on 16 March 2020 would be receiving an outline of the proposed Highway Maintenance 2020/2021 works programme and spend allocation and an update on the 2019/2020 Highway Maintenance Programme.  The agenda papers for the meeting would be available for public inspection from 6 March 2020.

Resolved –

(1)     That the report be noted;

(2)     That the issue be investigated and a report be submitted to a future meeting for consideration;

(3)     That the lead petitioners be informed accordingly.

49.

Response to a Petition Requesting to change the Parking Restrictions on De Beauvoir Road pdf icon PDF 63 KB

A report in response to a petition, submitted to the Council on 30 December 2019.

Minutes:

Further to Minute 37 of the previous meeting, the Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report providing the Sub-Committee with a response to a petition that had requested the change to parking restrictions on De Beauvoir Road, to ‘13R permits only’. 

The report explained that officers had considered the contents of the petition and the report recommended that the changes would be considered as part of the next Waiting Restriction Review Programme.

Resolved -

(1)     That the report be noted;

(2)     That amendments to the restrictions be considered as part of the next Waiting Restriction Review Programme;

(3)     That the lead petitioners be informed accordingly.

50.

Response to a Petition Requesting to change the Parking Restrictions on Wrenfield Drive pdf icon PDF 517 KB

A report in response to a petition, submitted to the Council on 6 January 2020.

Minutes:

Further to Minute 37 of the previous meeting, the Executive Director for Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report providing the Sub-Committee with a response to a petition that had requested Double Yellow Lines (DYL) at the very end of the Wrenfield Drive in the turning circle between house numbers 18 and 45.

The report explained that officers had considered the contents of the petition and the report recommended that the changes would be considered as part of the next Waiting Restriction Review Programme.

Resolved –

(1)     That the report be noted;

(2)     That amendments to the restrictions be considered as part of the next Waiting Restriction Review Programme;

(3)     That the lead petitioners be informed accordingly.

51.

Bi-Annual Waiting Restriction Review - 2019B Further Proposals for Statutory Consultation pdf icon PDF 59 KB

A report providing the Sub-Committee with and update following further investigations on a number of schemes, as requested by the Sub-Committee in January 2020, and seeking approval for Officers to undertake statutory consultation to enable progression of the 2019B programme.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Further to Minute 37 of the previous meeting, the Executive Director for Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report providing the Sub-Committee with an update following further investigation of a number of schemes, as requested at the previous meeting, and sought approval for officers to carry out statutory consultation to enable progression of the 2019B programme.  Recommendations and drawings that had been proposed for statutory consultation were attached to the report at Appendix 1.

The report explained that the proposal sought to address parking issues that had been raised with the Council, alongside those that had been reported at the previous meeting.  The initial list of requests, which had been agreed for investigation by the Sub-Committee, had been reported to at the meeting on 11 September 2019 (Minute 16 refers).  The drawings setting out the proposals, which were included in the report, had been shared with Ward Councillors and an opportunity had been provided for comment.  However, due to the relatively short period of time between the January and March 2020 meetings, there had been less time in which to seek comments, compared with the time allowed in the typical operation of the programme.

Resolved -

(1)     That the report be noted;

(2)     That the requests made for waiting restrictions as shown in Appendix 1 be agreed for statutory consultation, removed from the programme or moved into the next review programme for further investigation /consideration, as follows:

(i)      Elm Park – endorse installing double yellow lines as shown in drawing WRR2019B/BA1;

(ii)     Wensley Road – endorse installing double yellow lines as shown in drawing WRR2019B/MI5;

(iii)    Allcroft Road – endorse deferring this request to the next waiting restriction review;

(iv)     Combe Road – endorse installing double yellow lines as shown in drawing TI1;

(v)      Elvaston Way - endorse deferring this request ot the next waiting restriction review;

(3)     That the Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to undertake a statutory consultation in accordance with the Local Authorities Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996, for the proposals contained within Appendix 1, alongside those agreed for this programme in January 2020;

(4)     That subject to no objections being received, the Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to make the Traffic Regulation Order;

(5)     That any objection(s) received following the statutory advertisement be reported to a future meeting of the Sub-Committee;

(6)     That the Head of Transport, in consultation with the appropriate Lead Councillor be authorised to make minor changes to the proposals;

(7)     That no public inquiry be held into the proposals.

52.

Kings Road Experimental Bus Lane Order pdf icon PDF 56 KB

A report asking the Sub-Committee to consider the objections that have been received to the experimental restriction that was implemented on 11 July 2019 and recommending agreement to make the Order permanent.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Further to Minute 60 of the meeting held on 11 January 2018, the Director of Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report asking the Sub-Committee to consider the objections that had been received in respect of the implementation of an experimental Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) that altered the Kings Road inbound bus lane restriction.  A plan showing the location of the inbound bus lane was attached to the report at Appendix 1 and the objections to the order/restrictions, which had been received to date, were attached to the report at Appendix 2.

The report explained that the experimental restriction permitted buses, bicycles, motorcycles and ‘authorised vehicles’, to pass along the lane.  The TRO defined ‘authorised vehicles’ to be Hackney Carriages and Private Hire Vehicles, which had been licensed by Reading Borough Council.  The restriction had been intended to reduce the overall volume of traffic using the lane, with the outcome of providing more consistent journey times for the Borough’s public transport providers, in addition to making the lane more appealing for use by cyclists. 

An experimental TRO could run for a maximum period of 18 months and local authorities were required to invite objections for a minimum period of six months before the Order could be made permanent.  The Kings Road experimental TRO had been in place for more than six months and the report recommended that it was now made permanent.

Resolved –

(1)     That the report be noted;

(2)     That, having considered and taken account of the objections set out in Appendix 2, attached to the report, they be determined as insufficient to outweigh the benefits of the experimental order, which restricted access to onlypermitted buses, bicycles, motorcycles and ‘authorised vehicles’ on the Kings Road inbound bus lane;

(3)     That the Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to make the experimental Traffic Regulation Order into a permanent Traffic Regulation Order under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, advertised in accordance with the Local Authorities Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996.

53.

Resident Permit Parking Scheme Review pdf icon PDF 76 KB

A report advising the Sub-Committee on the proposal to change Residents Parking Scheme rules for Healthcare Professional, Carer, Temporary and Daily and Annual Landlord and Tradesperson Permits and on options to allow Hunter’s Wharf Residents visitor parking permits.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

emporary Permits – The Council had introduced Print at Home permits for Temporary Permits in August 2019 and the current permit scheme rules stated that Temporary Permits were eight week permits, charged at £15.  They were issued to residents who had just moved into a property, changed their vehicle or had a temporary change of vehicle.  The temporary permit gave the residents time to change their address details on documents such as bank statements, utility bills, insurance and DVLA documents for their residents permit.  With the success of the print at home Temporary Permits a further option was to expand the scheme to permits for Emergency Cover.  The permit would be issued directly on application with a statement of reasons but no proofs provided, it would be valid for seven days and only one permitted every six months to each household.  The charge would be £30 or £40 for the permit and they could be issued one week in advance of the start date or on the date of issue.  The permit would be sent by email to the applicant and they could be printed and displayed immediately.

Daily Tradesperson and Landlord Permits – The current arrangement for Daily Tradesperson and Landlord Permits was still processed by the Customer Services Team or by the Permit Team through postal applications.  The permits were provided as one day scratchcards and charged at £10 per day, with a maximum of 30 per year per vehicle.  The print at home option could be extended to cover the daily tradesperson permits and allow traders to apply for the application through the online service.  This would decrease the number of visits to the Council offices and provide a self serve system to the traders.  The charge of the permit discouraged some traders from purchasing them and insisting on residents providing their visitor permits.  The report recommended that the fee should be reduced to £7.50 for online Trader and Landlord permits but to leave the £10 fee for applications that were processed by the Customer Services Team or by post.  The online self-service option would require the Traders to provide the date and vehicle registration number for the permits to be validated, the scratchcard permits could be issued without a date but the vehicle registration would still be required.

Annual Landlord Permits – The current rules stated that annual Landlord Permits were issued to Landlords who owned four or more properties, anything less and they could apply for daily Landlord Permits.  The fee for an Annual Landlord Permit was £330 and there had been eight issued in 2018/19.  Landlords who owned less than four properties were willing to purchase an annual permit and the report recommended that this requirement was removed.  The landlord would still have to provide proof of ownership of properties within a permit scheme.  Landlords had also stated that most of their viewings took place after 7.00pm and had requested that the 7.00 am to 7.00 pm limit was removed or the evening extended.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

54.

Residents Permit Parking pdf icon PDF 62 KB

(a)     New and Outstanding Requests

(b)     Results of Informal Consultations

A report providing the Sub-Committee with an update on the list of requests for Resident Permit Parking (RPP), including the progress of developing schemes and any new requests that have been received and also providing the results of the informal consultations that were undertaken on the areas agreed as part of the concurrent scheme development programme (CSDP).

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Further to Minute 19 of the meeting held on 11 September 2019, the Executive Director for Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report providing the Sub-Committee with an update on the list of requests for Resident Permit Parking (RPP), including progress on developing schemes and any new requests that had been received, and the results of the informal consultations that were carried out on the areas agreed as part of the concurrent scheme development programme.  An updated list of requests for Resident Permit Parking was attached to the report at Appendix 1 and the informal consultation results were attached to the report at Appendix 2.

Appendix 1 of the report set out the list of requests that had been received for Resident Permit Parking Schemes and included the comments and objections that had been received during the statutory consultation.  Where the Sub-Committee had previously allocated a priority to a scheme this had been recorded and where a request had been previously reported to the Sub-Committee but had not been allocated a priority, this had also been recorded, along with any schemes that were ‘new’ to the list.  Schemes that were being developed in the concurrent scheme development programme had been recorded as the same priority, alongside the acronym ‘CSDP’ (Concurrent Scheme Development Programme).

The report stated that since the last update report the RPP schemes in East Reading (Area 1) and Lower Caversham had been implemented and officers were developing a delivery programme for the East Reading (Area 2) scheme alongside the Steering Group and intended to introduce this scheme in July 2020. 

The report stated that officers had carried out informal consultations between 30 September and 28 October 2019.  In addition, the summarised results from the informal consultation in respect of the Grovelands Road area that had been carried out by Ward Councillors was set out in Appendix 2.  Councillors had also arranged a drop-in session for local residents.  It was intended that offices and Ward Councillors should use the informal consultation results to consider how the scheme should be developed further or if there was considered to be sufficient demand to develop further a scheme.  The report included a table that provided a summary of intended development of the CSDP and officers would continue to work with Ward Councillors to consider the next development steps for schemes and to agree a detailed scheme for statutory consultation, following investigation.

Resolved –    That the report be noted

55.

Requests for New Traffic Management Measures pdf icon PDF 82 KB

(a)     Updated List

(b)     Schemes Proposed for Consultation

A report informing the Sub-Committee of requests for new traffic management measures that have been raised by members of the public, other organisations/representatives and Members of the Borough Council and also providing concept designs for requested traffic management schemes that have received funding from local Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), or private contributions.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Executive Director for Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report informing the Sub-Committee of requests for new traffic management measures that had been raised by members of the public, other organisations/representatives and Councillors and concept designs for requested traffic management schemes that had received funding from Local Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) or private contributions.  The list of schemes/proposals, with initial officer comments and recommendations was attached to the report at Appendix 1 and the concept drawing proposals were attached to the report at Appendix 2.

Resolved –

(1)         That the report be noted;

(2)     That the entries recommended for removal in Appendix 1, attached to the report and summarised in paragraph 4.8 of the report, be removed as follows:

(i)      Line 31, Katesgrove, Alpine Street;

(ii)     Line 69, Park, Liverpool Road area;

(iii)    Line 73, Park, Wokingham Road; and

(iv)     Line 78 Redlands, Northumberland Avenue;

(3)     That the request for waiting restrictions on Shinfield Road between Wellington Avenue and Northcourt Avenue, in Church Ward, be added to the next Waiting Restriction Review programme for investigation by officers;

(4)     That the Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to undertake the statutory advertisement processes for each scheme, as set out in paragraph 4.12 of the report;

(5)     That subject to no objections being received, the Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to seal any resultant Traffic Regulation Orders;

(6)     That any objection(s) received following the statutory advertisements be reported to a future meeting;

(7)     That the Head of Transport (or appropriate Officer), in consultation with the appropriate Lead Councillor, be authorised to make minor changes to the proposals;

(8)     That no public enquiry be held into the proposals.

56.

Exclusion of Press and Public

The following motion will be moved by the Chair:

“That, pursuant to Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) members of the press and public be excluded during consideration of the following item on the agenda, as it is likely that there would be disclosure of exempt information as defined in the relevant Paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of that Act”

Minutes:

Resolved -

That, pursuant to Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) members of the press and public be excluded during consideration of item 58 below, as it was likely that there would be disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1 and 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of that Act.

 

57.

Applications for Discretionary Parking Permits

To consider appeals against the refusal of applications for the issue of discretionary parking permits.

 

Minutes:

The Executive Director for Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report giving details of the background to her decisions to refuse applications for Discretionary Parking Permits from a total of 13 applicants, who had subsequently appealed against these decisions.

Resolved -

(1)        That, with regard to application 1 a third discretionary resident permit be issued, personal to the applicant, subject to adequate proofs being provided

(2)        That with regard to application 2 a discretionary resident permit be issued personal to the applicant and charged for at the second permit rate;

(3)        That with regard to application 3 a first discretionary resident permit be issued personal to the applicant;

(4)        That, with regard to application 6 a first discretionary resident permit be issued personal to the applicant, subject to adequate proofs being provided;

(5)        That, with regard to application 11 a Discretionary Business Permit be issued, personal to the applicant, on the basis of the circumstances of the applicant as a blue badge holder and the issue of the permit being without prejudice to any future decisions relating to Business Permit applications;

(6)        That with regard to application 12, officers be authorised to write to the Care Agency to encourage the purchase of the appropriate Health Care Professional permit and in the meantime visitor permits continue to be issued free of charge to the applicant;

(7)        That with regard to applications 5 and 7, two free books of visitor permits be issued with the option to purchase a further five books;

(8)        That the Executive Director for Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services’ decision to refuse applications 4, 8, 9, 10 and 13 be upheld.

(Exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1 and 2).