Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber, Civic Offices, Reading

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

Link: Link to observe meeting

Items
No. Item

1.

Minutes of previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 140 KB

Minutes:

The Minutes of the meeting of 3 March 2022 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

 

2.

Questions from Members of the Public and Councillors pdf icon PDF 435 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 Climate Strategy and Transport on behalf of the Chair:

Questioner

Subject

Susan McCarville

Hogarth Avenue/New Lane Hill

Councillor White

More Accidents on Kings Road

(The full text of the questions and replies were made available on the Reading Borough Council website).

 

3.

Waiting Restriction Review Programme pdf icon PDF 189 KB

(a)     The Mount (2021B)

(b)     2022A proposals for statutory consultation

A report seeking a decision on whether or not the proposal for The Mount should be implemented and for officer to undertake statutory consultation for recommended new/alterations to waiting restrictions as part of the 2022A waiting restriction programme.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Executive Director for Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report that sought a decision as to whether or not the proposal for The Mount should be implemented.  A proposal to amend the existing restrictions on The Mount had been included in the 2021B waiting restrictions programme and following a full statutory consultation, the results had been submitted to the previous meeting (Minute 42 refers).  Having reviewed the objections, a decision had been made to defer the decision pending further discussions between Ward Councillors and residents; the programme was currently on hold pending this decision. 

The report also sought approval for officers to carry out statutory consultation for recommended new/alterations to waiting restrictions as part of the 2022A waiting restrictions programme.  These proposals aimed to address the issues that had been raised in the initial list of requests, which had been submitted to the previous meeting and agreed for investigation.

The following appendices were attached to the report:

Appendix 1 A drawing that showed the proposal for The Mount, which had formed part of the 2021B programme consultation in February 2022;

Appendix 2 included the recommendations and drawings, by Council Ward for the 2022A programme.

At the invitation of the Chair Jill Simpson attended the meeting and addressed the Sub-Committee in support of the proposals for The Mount.  At the invitation of the Chair Paul Bennett attended the meeting and addressed the Sub-Committee against the proposal in respect of The Mount.

At the invitation of the Chair, Councillors Cross and McElroy attended the meeting and also addressed the Sub-Committee in respect of The Mount.

The Sub-Committee discussed the report and agreed that the proposals for The Mount should be removed from the 2021B programme, but that the situation be monitored following the implementation of the Shinfield Road scheme later in 2022 which might result in displacement parking, (see minute 5 below), local residents continued to be consulted and a report submitted to a future meeting at the appropriate time.

Resolved –

(1)     That the report be noted;

(2)     That the following proposals made under the waiting restriction review 2021B programme, as set out in Appendices 1 attached to the report, be implemented, subject to the removal of The Mount from the programme and the situation be monitored following the implementation of the Shinfield Road scheme later in 2022, see minute 5 below, local residents continued to be consulted and a report submitted to a future meeting at the appropriate time;

(3)     That the Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to seal the resultant Traffic Regulation Order for the 2021B programme and no public inquiry be held into the proposals;

(4)     That respondents to the statutory consultation be informed of the decision of the Sub-Committee accordingly, following publication of the agreed minutes of the meeting;

(5)     That the Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to undertake a statutory consultation for the 2022A programme in accordance with the Local Authorities Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

4.

School Streets - Park Lane Junior School, Thameside Primary School and Wilson Primary School pdf icon PDF 161 KB

Three reports providing the Sub-Committee with an update on progress with delivering the Park Lane Junior School, Thameside Primary School and Wilson Primary School Streets as part of the Council’s Active Trave programme and to seek approval to make the Experimental Traffic Regulation Order permanent.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Executive Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services submitted three reports seeking approval from the Sub-Committee to make Experimental Traffic Regulation Orders permanent in respect of School Streets for Park Lane Junior School, Thameside Primary School and Wilson Primary School.

The reports explained that in Spring 2020 the Council had launched a School Street application process that had included guidance and had subsequently engaged with several schools which had expressed an interest in the potential implementation of a School Street outside their school.  Delegated authority had been granted at the 15 March 2021 meeting of the Strategic Environment, Planning and Transport Committee (Minute 18 refers) for the Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services to be authorised to make the experimental Traffic Regulation Order permanent on the basis that no objections were received.  However, during the time of the Experimental Traffic Regulation Order for the School Streets on objection had been received for each of the schemes and was detailed in each of the reports.

In response to a question about camera enforcement of School Streets, Councillor Page told the Sub-Committee that camera enforcement related to many traffic offences and reported that the Council had been successful in its application to be one of twelve local authorities to be designated in the first tranche of allocations for equipment for this purpose, but that it would be used first at priority sites.

Resolved –

(1)     That the progress of the School Street scheme for Park Lane Junior School, Thameside Primary School and Wilson Primary School, as outlined in the report be noted;

(2)     That the Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to make the Experimental Traffic Regulation Order permanent for Park Lane Junior School, Thameside Primary School and Wilson Primary School.

 

5.

Active Travel Tranche 2 - Consultation on Shinfield Road Traffic Restrictions pdf icon PDF 167 KB

A report seeking approval to implement new traffic restrictions in the form of double yellow lines along the entire length of Shinfield Road from Christchurch Green to Shinfield Rise as part of the Active Travel Fund Tranche 2 Shinfield Road Scheme and informing the Sub-Committee of objections received during statutory consultation for the implementation of the traffic restrictions.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Executive Director for Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report that sought approval from the Sub-Committee to implement new traffic restrictions in the form of double-yellow lines along the entire length of Shinfield Road Christchurch Green to Shinfield Rise as part of the Active Travel Tranche 2 Shinfield Road Scheme.  The report also provided information about the objections that had been received during the statutory consultation for the implementation of the traffic restrictions.  A copy of the Shinfield Road Traffic Restrictions – Statutory Consultation Responses, was attached to the report at Appendix 1.

The report explained that as part of the overall scheme, and in order to facilitate the delivery of the enhanced cycle and pedestrian facilities, the Council was required to impose traffic restrictions, in the form of double-yellow lines, along the entire route between Christchurch Green and Shinfield Rise.  A Statutory consultation had been carried out and had commenced on 12 May 2022 and had finished on 2 June 2022.  A total of 22 responses had been received, of which 78% had been in support of the proposed traffic restrictions.  With regard to the objections, there had been two common themes:

·         Individuals had not been aware of the detail of the Active Travel Tranche 2 scheme and therefore their objections had identified that the current parking on Shinfield Road was not causing an unsafe obstruction or increasing congestion;

·         Individuals had also been concerned that the traffic restrictions might cause parking to be displaced to the local residential streets.

The Council would continue to review the impact of these traffic restrictions on nearby streets to ensure that such displacement was minimised as far as possible and would discuss options with the university to utilise campus parking for staff and students, to reduce on-street parking in the surrounding area.

Resolved –

(1)     That the report be noted;

(2)     That the Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to approve the proposed traffic restrictions on Shinfield Road in accordance with the Local Authorities Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996;

(3)     The Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services be granted authority to make the Traffic Regulation Order.

6.

Cox & Wyman - Proposed Alterations to Waiting Restrictions pdf icon PDF 168 KB

A report setting out traffic management measures associated with the development of the former Cox and Wyman site bounded by Cardiff Road, Milford Road, Addison Road and Meadow Road and seeking approval to carry out a Statutory Consultation on changes to the waiting restrictions surrounding the site.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Executive Director for Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report informing the Sub-Committee of traffic measures associated with the development of the former Cox and Wyman site which was bounded by Cardiff Road, Milford Road, Addison Road and Meadow Road.  The report also sought approval to carry out a Statutory Consultation on changes to the waiting restrictions surrounding the site which included the following:

·         Creation of three shared use residents parking bays with two-hour waiting with no return within two hours between the hours of 8am and 8pm along Meadow Road;

·         Provision of double yellow lines along the remainder of Meadow Road between Milford Road and Addison Road;

·         Provision of double yellow lines either side and opposite of the new access onto Milford Road;

·         Provision of double yellow lines either side of the new main access onto Addison Road formalising a break in the existing shared user bay;

·         Provision of double yellow lines across the single vehicle dropped crossing onto Addison Road formalising a break in the existing shared user bay;

·         Extension of the existing shared user bay on Addison Road towards the Meadow Road junction by 10m.

The report explained that the proposed scheme included no alteration along Cardiff Road, although where Highways works were required to facilitate the reinstatement of the existing dropped crossings some lines might require a refresh which would be carried out by the developer. 

A plan illustrating the proposals surrounding the development was attached to the report at Appendix 1.

The Sub-Committee discussed the report and asked they be sent a clearer drawing and that it be included as part of the statutory consultation pack.

Resolved –

(1)     That the report be noted;

(2)     That the Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to undertake a statutory consultation for the 2022A programme in accordance with the Local Authorities Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996, for the proposals contained within Appendix 1, attached to the report;

(3)     That subject to no objections being received, the Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to make the Traffic Regulation Order for the 2022A programme;

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

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

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

7.

CIL Norcot Road Zebra Crossing - Results of Statutory Consultation pdf icon PDF 173 KB

A report informing the Sub-Committee of objections that have been received during the latest statutory consultation for the proposal to install a zebra crossing on Norcot Road.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Executive Director for Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report informing the Sub-Committee of objections that had been received during the latest Statutory Consultation for the proposal to instal a zebra crossing on Norcot Road.  Feedback that had been received to the statutory consultation was attached to the report at Appendix 1 and a drawing showing the proposal for the zebra crossing was attached to the report at Appendix 2.

The report explained that a consultation had been carried out in October 2022.  However, it had been decided that the affected bus stop needed to be moved further away from the crossing in order to ensure there was adequate visibility of pedestrians; a second consultation had therefore been carried out in February 2022.  This proposal required the removal of on street parking bays and following objection from residents, the decision had been deferred.  Officers had now carried out a third consultation with a new location for the zebra crossing, which did not require the removal of any on street parking bays and ensured there was good visibility of pedestrians who would be using the crossing.

Resolved –

(1)     That the report be noted;

(2)     That having considered the consultation feedback in Appendix 1, attached to the report, the proposal be implemented;

(3)     That respondents to the statutory consultations be informed of the decisions of the Sub-Committee accordingly, following publication of the agreed minutes of the meeting;

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

 

8.

Active Travel Tranche 1 - Recommendations for Temporary Schemes pdf icon PDF 186 KB

A report providing the Sub-Committee with recommendations for the temporary active travel schemes that were implemented using the Governments emergency ‘Tranche 1’ funding that was awarded during the start of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Executive Director for Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report providing the Sub-Committee with recommendations for the temporary active travel schemes that had been implemented using the government emergency ‘Tranche 1’ funding that had been awarded during the start of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020.  Scheme details, plans and recommendations were attached to the report at Appendix 1.

The report recommended agreement by the Sub-Committee to the majority of the schemes being considered as permanent measures, supporting cycling within the Borough.  However, it recommended that the temporary scheme on Sidmouth Street, which required a Traffic Regulation Order, proceeded to statutory consultation to openly seek public feedback on whether it should become permanent.  This was in the context of future potential to increase linking to the wider surrounding cycle network.

With regard to Sidmouth Street and its connectivity to other schemes, Councillor Page reported that under the Bus Service Improvement Plan there was provision for an in-bound bus lane along London Road that could be used by cyclists, but there was much work to do with the Department of Transport before this would be signed-off.

Resolved –

(1)     That the report be noted;

(2)     That the Tranche 1 Active Travel Schemes in the following locations be considered as permanent measures:

·         George Street (Reading Bridge);

·         Southampton Street, Silver Street, Mount Pleasant and Whitley Street;

·         Oxford Road;

·         Christchurch Road;

·         Redlands Road;

(3)     That in relation to the Tranche 1 Active Travel Scheme on Sidmouth Street:

(a)     The Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to undertake statutory consultation processes for the proposed (permanent) implementation of the scheme in accordance with the Local Authorities Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996;

(b)     The Highways & Traffic Services Manager, in agreement with the Lead Councillor for Climate Strategy and Transport, be able to make minor alterations to the agreed proposals;

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

(d)     Should any objection(s) be received during the statutory consultation period, that these be reported to a future meeting of the Sub-Committee for consideration and decision regarding scheme delivery;

(4)     That in relation to the petition received for the removal of the Sidmouth Street scheme (referred in Appendix 1, attached to the report, and in paragraph 11.1 of the report) the lead petitioner be informed of the decision of the Sub-Committee;

(5)     That subject to the Sub-Committee decisions regarding each scheme, Officers be authorised to undertake investigations for the additional enhancements referenced in Appendix 1, attached to the report, subject to funding, and reporting to appropriate Committees as might be necessary to obtain scheme and spend approval;

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

9.

Digital Parking Permits Pilot Project pdf icon PDF 462 KB

A report seeking approval for officer to undertake statutory consultation for an amendment to the Lower Caversham Traffic Regulation Order which will enable the issue of Digital Permits which will not need to be displayed on vehicles.

Minutes:

The Executive Director for Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report that sought approval for officers to carry out statutory consultation for an amendment to the Lower Caversham Traffic Regulation Order which would enable the issue of Digital Permits that would not need to be displayed on vehicles.  The Notice of Proposal was attached to the report at Appendix 1, the Draft Order was attached at Appendix 2 and the Scheme Changes were attached to the report at Appendix 3.

The report explained that the change would be piloted for residents and visitor parking permits within the chosen area of Lower Caversham, Zone 02R, including the new Ward boundaries.  The geographical location of the pilot had been considered because it was a well defined and self-contained area, but was a reasonably sized zone. 

The report stated that digital permits worked where the permit allocated to the vehicle was known within the parking management systems and specifically the enforcement system.  No physical permit was required resulting in a more efficient service for residents and reduced service costs through savings in printing and postage.  Residents gained where paperless permits were issued instantly without a delay or break in cover due to delivery of a physical permit.  It had also been found that most local authorities offered greater flexibility in the use of visitor permits where they could be purchased by session rather than defined by a day or part of a day.  Shared experience of digital permits suggested resident and visitor satisfaction was far greater when compared to a paper based system and from an enforcement perspective paperless permits were not compromised by the physical disc falling off the window of the vehicle or visitor scratch cards being used incorrectly.  The changes proposed would mean that:

·         Permits were not printed and posted (residents and resident visitor permits);

·         Scheme no longer required a permit to be displayed in the vehicle (residents and resident visitor permits);

·         Each household would be entitled to purchase in blocks of hours not books, also known as scratchcards (resident visitor permits);

·         Residents would not be asked to allow up to 14 days for these permits to be issued.

Finally, the report stated that procurement of a new Parking Services contract might lead to a change of supplier within the next 12 months and if Digital Permits were to go live across the Borough prior to this a transition plan from the existing system would need to be in place and this would form part of any full rollout plan.

The Sub-Committee discussed the report and concern was expressed that without a physical permit on display it would be difficult to identify vehicles that were parked in the zone without a permit and it was suggested that the facility to enter a vehicle’s registration number on the Council’s website to check if it had a permit could be investigated.

Resolved –

(1)     That the Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to undertake  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

10.

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 11 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.

11.

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 the decisions to refuse applications for Discretionary Parking Permits from twenty-one applicants, who had subsequently appealed against these decisions.

Resolved –

(1)     That, with regard to applications 3, 6, 7 and 8 a first discretionary permit be issued, personal to the applicants;

(2)     That, with regard to applications 1, 4 and 13 a first discretionary permit be issued personal to the applicants subject to the applicant submitting all the required proofs;

(3)     That, with regard to application 5 two free books of discretionary visitor permits be issued personal to the applicant and a further five charged at the usual rate;

(4)     That, with regard to application 11 residents of the four new houses at 96-102 George St RG1 7NT are formally included within the RP Zone 05R and eligible to apply for permits on the normal basis;

(5)     That, with regard to application 2 and 12 a second discretionary permit be issued, personal to the applicant subject to the applicant submitting all the required proofs;

(6)     That a decision in respect of application 10 be deferred and that Councillor White meet with residents on the road and report back to officers;

(7)     That, with regard to application 19 a first discretionary Healthcare Professional Parking Permit be issued and these staff roles added to the officer delegated decision list;

(8)     That the Executive Director for Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services’ decision to refuse application 21 be upheld and officers reply to the applicant’s query as to whether or not they could apply for a blue badge;

(9)     That the Executive Director for Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services’ decision to refuse applications 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 20 be upheld.

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