A report proposing that the Sub-Committee give officers authorisatin to seal the Traffic Regulation Order and proceed to implement the waiting restriction changes reported to the previous meeting and asking that the responses that had been received following the statutory consultation that was carried out between 14 October and 4 November 2021 is considered.

Further to Minute 16 of the previous meeting, the Executive Director for Economic Growth and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report that provided the Sub-Committee with the results of the statutory consultation on a proposal that would maintain taxi ranking at the Reading Station ‘horseshoe’ rank, while considering the needs of the Station Hill development construction and the competition for kerb space and access with the town centre.  Anonymised feedback that had been received during the statutory consultation was attached to the report at Appendix 1 and a plan to show the proposed alterations was attached to the report at Appendix 2.

The report proposed that the TRO being sealed should be agreed and the proposal should be implemented as advertised.  This would reduce the theoretic feeder ranking capacity on Garrard Street, it would inevitably continue to be the case through temporary restrictions that would be needed to be implemented throughout the Station Hill area development works.  Once the development was complete, consideration could be made for on-street restrictions that would accommodate the needs of the area and the results of the development might make alterative options more desirable.  The proposal was therefore intended as a ‘temporary’ measure. 

In response to the request by Mr Rashid, Chairman of the Reading Taxi Association, for CCTV, the bus gate restriction that restricted unauthorised vehicles from exiting Garrard Street onto Station Road was already enforced by CCTV and would continue to be so.  Enforcement of the taxi rank waiting restrictions was not currently permissible by CCTV but, would continue to be enforced by foot patrol as part of the Council’s Parking Civil Enforcement contract.  Indicative costings for installing a CCTV and display screen system for taxi drivers at the south west interchange, wishing to view the proposed taxi feeder rank on Garrard Street, were £25k plus the cost of the electrical connections, which would potentially double this cost, and ongoing electrical usage and maintenance costs.  This compared with the renewed low power indicator devices that had been purchased for £5k already, which provided a newer version of the system the taxi trade had been using for many years and used the existing electrical supplies.  The request for CCTV had not been budgeted and was not considered to be appropriate and did not represented value for money for the temporary nature of the scheme.  There were also public safety and privacy concerns regarding the public display of live CCTV footage at an alternative nearby location.  Therefore, the report did not recommend that this proposal should be pursued.

Resolved –

(1)     That the report be noted;

(2)     That the Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to make (seal) the Traffic Regulation Order, as advertised, and that the resultant notice be advertised in accordance with the Local Authorities Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996;

(3)     That the scheme be implemented with the renewed bay indicator device as set out in paragraph 4.6 of the report;

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

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

(Councillor Ayub declared an interest in the above item on the grounds that he owned a hackney carriage.  He left the room and took no part in the discussion or decision making)