The Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report providing the Committee with a summary of the Council’s intention in respect of the motion that had been moved at Council on 26 February 2019 that had declared a ‘Climate Emergency’, the report also set out the intended course of action.

The report explained that in February 2919 the Council had received a petition from 798 residents urging the Council to declare a Climate Emergency.  A motion was moved at Council on 26 February 2019 confirming that the Council believed the world was now in a ‘Climate Emergency’ and committing the Council to play a full role in achieving a carbon neutral Reading by 2030.  The Council had instructed officers to report to SEPT and Policy Committees on further potential measures that could accelerate the timescale for reducing carbon dioxide emissions to zero by 2030, but recognised that this date could only be achieved with substantial policy changes from national government.  The Council had also requested officers to ensure that forthcoming revisions to the Local Transport Plan and Climate Change Strategy and any other relevant policy statements, reflected the urgency of the motion.  The Council had also instructed the Chief Executive to write to local MPs and to the Prime Minister and to relevant Government departments (DEFRA, MHCLG, DfT and Treasury) setting out the above requirements and the need for new legislation and financial support to deliver this radical agenda.

In response to a question by Tony Goodchild, Extinction Rebellion Reading, Councillor Page explained that work on the Climate Change Strategy was ongoing and included 127 actions.  The work would need to be done properly, be given appropriate and adequate time to complete and done in partnership, involving a range of officers and departments.  When completed the updated Strategy would be submitted to a future meeting.

Resolved -

(1)        That officers be instructed to submit a report to the next meeting on further potential measures that could accelerate the timescale for reducing carbon dioxide emissions to zero by 2030;

(2)        That the Chief Executive of the Council be instructed to write to local MPs, the Prime Minister and to relevant Government Departments setting out the requirements and the need for new Legislation and financial support to deliver this agenda;

(3)        That officers be instructed to ensure that upcoming strategy revisions including the Local Transport Plan and Climate Change Strategies reflect the urgency of the motion.

The Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report setting out the planned 2019/20 work programme for delivery of various highways and transport schemes in Reading.  A list of the projects was attached to the report at Appendix 1.

The report explained that the programme set out in Appendix 1 provided the detail of the Highways and Transport projects to be delivered throughout the 2019/20 financial year.  The projects were in line with the aims and objectives of the current Local Transport Plan 2011 to 2026, the Council’s Transformation Programme and the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy.  Full details of the schemes would be reported at meetings of Traffic Management Sub-Committee and SEPT Committee.  In some cases delivery of schemes was dependent on Traffic Regulation Orders and Public Consultation and regular updates on progress with the implementation of individual schemes would also continue to be reported at meetings of Traffic Management Sub-Committee and SEPT Committee.

Resolved -

(1)        That the report be noted;

(2)        That progression of the programme as detailed in Appendix 1, attached to the report, be approved.

The Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report providing the Committee with an update on key progress and milestones associated with the current programme of major transport and highways projects in Reading namely:

• Reading Station Area Redevelopment (Cow Lane Bridges)
• South Reading Mass Rapid Transit;
• Reading Green Park Station;
• Thames Valley Park and Ride;
• East Reading Mass Rapid Transit;
• National Cycle Network Route 422;
• Reading West Station Upgrade.

The report also gave an update on the following unfunded schemes:

• South Reading Mass Rapid Transit (Future Phases);
• Tilehurst Station Access Improvements;
• Third Thames Crossing East of Reading.

With regard to the Cow Lane Bridges the report explained that the route had been opened to two-way traffic without signals for the first time on 25 February 2019, with the full scheme, including pedestrian and cycle routes, to be completed in summer 2019.  It was clarified that the meeting that the scheme was not yet complete with work on lighting, the footpath and resurfacing of the road still to be carried out and that there would be a further closure of the route over the weekend of 13 and 14 April 2019 for this work to be done.  Road signage also needed to be changed and talks were ongoing with Network Rail over the removal of the height restriction signs.

The report also explained that a revised planning application to address concerns that had been raised by Wokingham Borough Council’s Planning Committee in relation to the East Reading Mass Rapid Transit had been prepared, including further public consultation that had been carried out during September 2019 on possible amendments to enhance the appearance of the scheme.  Fundamental structural changes had not been possible as the scheme had needed to retain the core public transport, walking and cycling elements as set out in Reading and Wokingham’s Planning and Transport Plans and the scheme business case, therefore hanging landscaping had been selected as the preferred option, which was consistent with the revised proposal for the Thames Valley Park, Park and Ride scheme.  Wokingham Borough Council’s Planning Committee had refused permission for the revised scheme in December 2018.  The second planning application refusal by Wokingham meant that the scheme could not be delivered in the timescales required by the funding grant conditions, therefore the Berkshire Local Transport Body had reallocated the funding to other schemes across Berkshire, including Reading West Station Upgrade, Theale Station Park and Rail Upgrade and Coppid Beech Park and Ride site.  The Council did not intend to pursue the scheme further at the current time and would be carrying out a consultation on development of a new Local Transport Plan to invite suggestions to tackle the current and forecast congestion and air quality issues within the Borough.

With regard to National Cycle Route 422, improvements to a privately owned wall, between New Lane Hill and Greenwood Road, and adjacent footway widening works, were subject to further feasibility work and budget availability after the completion of the final phase.  Cris Butler, Acting Head of Transportation and Streetcare, reported that the wall was failing and talks with the landowner were ongoing and that officers were committed to resolving the issue.

Resolved –

(1)        That the progress on delivery of the programme of major transport schemes as set out within the report be noted;

(2)        That the opening of Cow Lane to two-way traffic without signals for the first time on Monday 25 February 2019 be noted;

(3)        That the reallocation of funding for the East Reading MRT scheme to other schemes across Berkshire, including the Reading West Station Upgrade, Theale Station Park & Rail Upgrade and Coppid Beech Park and Ride schemes be noted.

The Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report asking the Committee to consider whether eligibility tests or fees should be introduced in determining planning applications for self-build homes.

The report stated that there was a statutory requirement for the Council to maintain a Self-Build Register, which listed those who had registered an interest in building their own home in the Borough.  Reading’s Self-Build Register had been in existence since 2015, but up to the current time the Council had not sought to apply any eligibility tests or charge a fee.  The report considered whether such tests or fees should be introduced, particularly since the number of entries on the Register might have implications for the Council’s functions, mainly in determining planning applications.

The legislation enabled authorities to charge a fee for entry onto the Register, but given that the number of new entrants each year onto the Register would be relatively small, averaging one per week for the previous three years, and could potentially decline with the introduction of local eligibility tests, the report recommended that introducing a charge would not be worthwhile.  The Council had also received New Burdens Funding from Government which was of a level that would cover most of the costs of maintaining the Register in the first year.

The report explained that the specific criteria that had been proposed for a Local Connection test were that an applicant should:

• Have lived in the Borough for at least two years; and/or
• Have been in full-time employment (greater than 16 hours per week) within the Borough for at least two years; and/or
• Have an immediate family member who had lived in the Borough for the previous five years (immediate family were defined as a close relative, limited to spouse/partner, parent, sibling or adult child).

The report recommended that delegated authority be granted to the Head of Planning, Development and Regulatory Services to make amendments to the specific criteria above in order to respond to issues that might arise through operation of the criteria.  Those that did not pass a local connection test would still be included on the Register, but the Register would then be split into Part 1 and Part 2, with Part 1 containing the list of those who had passed the test and it would be only Part 1 which would be counted for the ‘duty to grant permission’.

The Council was not required to specifically justify requiring a test of sufficient resources, although applying such a test was logical as it would ensure that those on the Register were those who would be in a position to actually build if a plot were available, rather than those with only a passing interest in self-build.  The report therefore recommended that a test of sufficient resources should be introduced which would require applicants to demonstrate that they had, or would be able to access, funds to purchase land worth £75,000 (the likely estimated minimum cost of purchasing a self-build plot of land in Reading).  The following detailed criteria were proposed:

• An offer for a self-build mortgage from a verifiable lender;
• Written confirmation and evidence from a qualified financial advisor with active membership of a verifiable and appropriate professional body;
• Any other information which would demonstrate to the Council’s satisfaction that the applicant had sufficient resources to purchase land for their own self-build and custom housebuilding.

The report again recommended that delegated authority be granted to the Head of Planning, Development and Regulatory Services to make amendments to the specific criteria above in order to respond to issues that might arise through the operation of the criteria and to allow the specified land value to change in line with any land value changes locally.

Once approved the new tests would be brought into force by 1 April 2019.  The Council would then contact the existing entrants on the list and ask them to demonstrate compliance with the two tests.  Those who could not demonstrate compliance with the local connection test would remain on the Register, but only on part 2, which would not count towards the ‘duty to grant permission’.

Resolved -

(1)        That the changes to the Self-Build Register process to introduce a local connection test and a test of sufficient resources be approved;

(2)        That the Head of Planning, Development and Regulatory Services be authorised to make any minor amendments necessary to the specific criteria for the local connection test and test of sufficient resources in consultation with the Lead Councillor for Strategic Environment, Planning and Transport.

The Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report asking the Committee to approve for community involvement the consultation paper on the Statement of Community Involvement.  An Equality Impact Assessment was attached to the report at Appendix 1 and the proposed consultation paper on the Statement of Community Involvement was attached to the report at Appendix 2.

The report explained that the Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) was a planning document that detailed how consultation and community involvement on plans and applications would be carried out.  It was a statutory requirement to have an SCI in place and one of the considerations for examination of any future development plans would be whether it had complied with the SCI.  The Council’s most recent SCI had been adopted in March 2014 and there was now an opportunity to consider whether there was a need to revise the SCI, to ask the community whether this represented the best way of consulting, learn from experience and take account of any legislative changes.  Rather than produce a full draft at this stage it had been proposed to consult on this in the form of a discussion paper.

Resolved -      That the Consultation Paper on the Statement of Community Involvement, attached to the report at Appendix 2, be approved for community involvement.

The Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report updating the Committee on the progress in delivering year 1 activities as part of ‘Reading, place of culture’ funded through the ‘Great Place Scheme’.  The Council learned in April 2017 that the bid had been successful (one of only 16 grants awarded across England and the only urban area to receive a grant in the South-east region).  The amount of grant awarded had been £558,400 to deliver a range of programmes over three years linked to the objectives of the Great Place Scheme and complementing cultural activities and initiatives already underway in the Borough.  The Council received formal ‘permission to start’ from the funders on the 12 December 2017 and the report summarised progress in delivering the programme against the ‘approved purposes’ agreed by the funders, these were:

• Strategic partnership building;

·         Research and evaluation;

·         Cultural outreach and creating a platform for cultural commissioning;

·         Reading-on-Thames Festival;

·         Economic Development and business engagement.

These strands of the programme were intertwined with many connections between different elements but the above provided a useful framework for tracking and evidencing activities and impacts.  A narrative of the successful Great Place Bid was attached to the report at Appendix A and a summary presentation given to funders at a progress meeting in October 2018, which summarised significant progress made in year 1 of the programme, was attached to the report at Appendix B. 

The report, in paragraph 4.1, provided an overview against key strands of the programme and highlighted, in particular, how the programme was beginning to address the needs of Reading’s more vulnerable communities.  The report also, in paragraph 4.2, set out the proposals to further develop the programme of work.  The work over the next two years would be increasingly informed by evaluation feedback, strengthened partnership working and a better understanding of local needs and community aspirations.

Resolved –     That the progress made to date on delivering ‘Reading, Place of Culture’ as set out in paragraph 4.1 of the report be noted and the proposals to further develop the programme of work as set out in paragraph 4.2 of the report be endorsed.

The Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report seeking authority for the award of a contract for the installation of fire sprinkler systems to circa 280 Council properties in flatted blocks.  The expected contract value will be approximately £700,000.

The report stated that despite the Council’s high rise blocks differing in design to Grenfell Tower, the Council had appointed an external qualified Fire Engineer to carry out a review of the fire safety practice and systems.  The company, Fireskills, had also been asked for a professional view on whether additional fire precautions were advised in any of the building types surveyed, to improve the fire safety standard in the context of recent incidents nationally and the learning from those.

Overall FireSkills noted that the Council’s Housing Service has a ‘forward facing and proactive fire safety strategy’.  Whilst the Council was fully compliant with current legislation, FireSkills recommended that the Council could consider implementing a number of additional fire protection measures.  This included the installation of sprinklers in some circumstances.

The value of expenditure was currently estimated on previous quotations obtained for similar sprinkler system works.  The budget for the fire sprinkler systems was estimated at £700,000 and provision had been made in the Housing Revenue Account capital budgets to fund this work.  Ongoing maintenance and service costs would have to be provided each year, the estimated budget allowance was £50,000 and provision has been made in the Housing Revenue Account Budget and Business Plan.

Resolved –     That the Head of Housing and Neighbourhood Services, in consultation with the Lead Councillor for Housing, be delegated authority to award a contract for the installation of fire sprinkler systems in specified Council flatted blocks.

The Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report that outlined the action taken and planned to protect Reading Borough Council’s land from unauthorised encampments.  The report also set out the latest position in respect of the provision of transit or permanent pitches for travellers.

The report stated that the Council continued to review land that had or might be camped upon to identify how it could be protected.  Between April 2017 and March 2018 the Council spent £104,000 on defending its most vulnerable sites.  Managers from across Council services had carried out a review of land and agreed with the Lead Councillor for Neighbourhood Services a process for prioritising work.  Defensive works were implemented at 13 locations across Reading by the end of March 2018.  Since April 2018, protection works had been completed at a number of other Council owned sites that had been repeatedly encamped including Portman Road, Walnut Way, Pottery Road, Bran Close, Landsdowne Rd/Portman Gardens, Coronation Square and Burford Court.  The report detailed the current status of the works.

The report stated that Reading had an above average number of unauthorised encampments when compared to other areas across the Thames Valley.  A Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment (GTAA) in 2017 had identified accommodation needs for 10-17 permanent pitches and for a transit site to house 10 caravans for gypsies and travellers in Reading.  In 2017/18 there had been 87 unauthorised encampments in Reading, most of which had been on Council land.  Having a transit caravan site could meet this element of need and reduce the number of unauthorised encampments.  However, identifying a site had been challenging.  Further to this independent study, the Council had undertaken a thorough assessment of 80 possible sites across the borough.  These had been considered against a range of planning policy criteria.  One potential transit site had been identified on land at the junction of Cow Lane and Richfield Avenue but this option had been dropped following strong objections from residents and Reading Festival organisers and the proposal to locate a new school on the site.  The Council had committed to undertake a further review of its land holdings and other opportunities in order to review potential sites and continued to raise the unmet need with adjoining Councils.

Resolved –

(1)        That the action taken to protect local authority land from unauthorised encampments be noted;

(2)        That the ongoing programme of works to protect those areas of Council land at risk of unauthorised encampments with physical measures, or other such measures as appropriate, be approved.

Further to Minute 18 of the meeting held on 12 September 2018, the Director of Environment 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.

Appendix 1 provided the list of schemes/proposals, with officer comments and recommendations.

Resolved –

(1)        That the report be noted;

(2)        That the schemes set out in Appendix 1, attached to the report, be supported for further officer investigation.

Further to Minute 41 of the meeting held on 10 January 2019, the Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report informing the Sub-Committee of comments and objections that had been received during the statutory consultation for the agreed proposals to amend a number of parking restrictions within the Hospital and University parking scheme area.  The comments and objections that had been received during the statutory consultation were attached to the report at Appendix 1 and drawings showing the amendments that were advertised were attached to the report at Appendix 2.

The report explained that the statutory consultation had taken place between 7 February and 28 February 2019 and that those proposals that had not received objections, or other comments, would be implemented as advertised.  As yet, the previously agreed changes to the scheme had not been implemented, this included the agreement to increase the Pay and Display charges by 10p per tariff.  It was intended that the implementation of restriction changes in this parking scheme area would be conducted as a single scheme, once all changes had been agreed.  This approach would be more cost-effective and would ensure clarity of the restrictions across the scheme area, supporting enforceability.

Resolved –

(1)        That the report be noted;

(2)        That, having considered the comments and objections noted in Appendix 1, the proposed restrictions on Elmhurst Road around and into Marlborough Avenue be removed from the scheme;

(3)        That the Head of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to seal the resultant Traffic Regulation Order and no public inquiry be held into the proposals;

(4)        That the objectors be informed of the decision of the Sub-Committee.

Further to Minute 39 of the meeting held on 10 January 2019, the Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report providing the Sub-Committee with an update on the lists of requests for Resident Permit Parking, including progress of developing schemes and any new requests that had been received and revised proposals for the Wokingham Road element of the East Reading Study Area Scheme.

The comments and objections that had been received during the statutory consultation were attached to the report at Appendix 1 and the drawings showing the amendments that had been advertised were attached to the report at Appendix 2.

Requested Schemes List – Update

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.

Revised Proposal for Wokingham Road (East Reading Study area)

Appendix 2 of the report set out the drawings showing the amendments that had been developed by officers following consideration of the feedback from the consultation on the proposal for the bays on Wokingham Road.  This included another ‘shared use’ type restriction, which would allow permit holders to park at any time but also allowed non-permit holders to park up to 24 hours a day, seven days a week with a Pay and Display ticket.  These new proposals were intended to meet the needs of residents by providing additional parking permit bays within the wider scheme area, but also provided flexible parking for visitors throughout the day along with the turnover and relative ease of enforcement that Pay and Display restrictions provided.  It had been proposed that these restrictions would overcome the objections that had been made primarily by visitors, that the maximum stay period could be prohibitively short and limited to the 8.00am to 8.00pm period.

At the invitation of the Chair, Peter Cowling of the Earley Christian Fellowship addressed the Sub-Committee in respect of the proposals for Wokingham Road.

Resolved –

(1)        That the report be noted;

(2)        That the priorities for scheme progression, as set out in paragraphs 4.2 to 4.4 of the report, remain on the list for future consideration;

(3)        That the scheme for Wokingham Road, as set out in Appendix 2 attached to the report, proceed to statutory consultation;

(4)        That the Head of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to carry out the statutory consultation and advertise proposals in accordance with the Local Authorities Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 and subject to no objections received, the Head of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to make the Traffic Regulation Order;

(5)        That any objections received following the statutory advertisement be submitted to a future meeting;

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

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

The Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report informing the Sub-Committee of objections received in respect of the traffic regulation order, which had recently been advertised as part of the waiting restriction review programme 2018B.  The report also provided the Sub-Committee with the list of new requests for potential inclusion in the 2019A programme.

The following appendices were attached to the report:

Appendix 1 – Objections, support and other comments that had been received during statutory consultation for the 2018B programme.

Appendix 2 – New requests for consideration in the 2019A programme.

At the invitation of the Chair, Glenn Dennis addressed the Sub-Committee in respect of Thirlmere Avenue.

Resolved -

(1)        That the report be noted;

(2)        That the objections noted in Appendix 1 with the appropriate recommendation to either: implement, amend or reject the proposals be noted;

(3)        That the following proposals made under the waiting restriction review 2018B, as set out in Appendix 1, be implemented, amended or removed from the programme as follows:

·         Amersham Road - implemented as advertised;

·         Denby Way - implemented as advertised;

·         Lower Armour Road - implemented as advertised;

·         Thirlmere Avenue - removed from the programme;

·         Berkeley Avenue - implemented as advertised;

·         Bexley Court - removed from the programme;

·         Quantock Avenue - implemented as advertised;

·         Chiltern Road - implemented as advertised;

·         Hemdean Road - Remove the timed restriction from 8.00am to 5.00pm Monday to Friday and implement the double-yellow line only;

·         Longships Way - implemented as advertised;

(4)        That the Head of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to seal the resultant Traffic Regulation Order and no public inquiry be held into the proposals;

(5)        That the respondents to the statutory consultation be informed of the decision of the Sub-Committee accordingly;

(6)        That the requests made for waiting restriction changes as shown in Appendix 2 be noted and, officers write to the Development Manager in respect of Haden Square and Reservoir Crescent in Minster Ward to find out what the objection was and subject to the removal of Culver Mews in Park Ward from the list, officers investigate each remaining request as part of the 2019A review programme;

(7)        That the officer recommendations, following investigation of the new requests, be shared with Ward Councillors, providing an opportunity for their comments to be included in the next report submitted to the Sub-Committee;

(8)        That, should funding permit, a further report be submitted to the Sub-Committee requesting approval to complete the Statutory Consultation on the recommended schemes for the 2019A programme.

The Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report providing the Sub-Committee with an update on key progress and milestones associated with the current programme of major transport and highways projects in Reading namely:

• Reading Station Area Redevelopment (Cow Lane Bridges)
• South Reading Mass Rapid Transit;
• Reading Green Park Station;
• Thames Valley Park and Ride;
• East Reading Mass Rapid Transit;
• National Cycle Network Route 422;
• Reading West Station Upgrade.

The report also gave an update on the following unfunded schemes:

• South Reading Mass Rapid Transit (Future Phases);
• Tilehurst Station Access Improvements;
• Third Thames Crossing East of Reading.

With regard to the Cow Lane Bridges the report explained that the route had been opened to two-way traffic without signals for the first time on 25 February 2019, with the full scheme, including pedestrian and cycle routes, to be completed in summer 2019.  It was clarified at the meeting that the scheme was not yet complete with work on lighting, the footpath and resurfacing of the road still to be carried out and that there would be a further closure of the route over the weekend of 13 and 14 April 2019 for this work to be done.  Road signage also needed to be changed and talks were ongoing with Network Rail over the removal of the height restriction signs.

The report also explained that a revised planning application to address concerns that had been raised by Wokingham Borough Council’s Planning Committee in relation to the East Reading Mass Rapid Transit had been prepared, including further public consultation that had been carried out during September 2019 on possible amendments to enhance the appearance of the scheme.  Fundamental structural changes were not possible as the scheme had needed to retain the core public transport, walking and cycling elements as set out in Reading and Wokingham’s Planning and Transport Plans and the scheme business case, therefore hanging landscaping had been selected as the preferred option, which was consistent with the revised proposal for the Thames Valley Park Park and Ride scheme.  Wokingham Borough Council’s Planning Committee had refused permission for the revised scheme in December 2018.  The second planning application refusal by Wokingham meant that the scheme could not be delivered in the timescales required by the funding grant conditions, therefore the Berkshire Local Transport Body had reallocated the funding to other schemes across Berkshire, including Reading West Station upgrade, Theale Station Park and Rail upgrade and Coppid Beech Park and Ride site.  The Council did not intend to pursue the scheme further at the current time and would be carrying out a consultation on development of a new Local Transport Plan to invite suggestions to tackle the current and forecast congestion and air quality issues within the Borough.

Resolved -

(1)        That the progress on delivery of the programme of major transport schemes, as set out in the report, be noted;

(2)        That the opening on 25 February 2019 of Cow Lane to two-way traffic without signals for the first time be noted;

(3)        That the reallocation of funding for the East Reading MRT scheme to other schemes across Berkshire, including the Reading West Station upgrade, Theale Station Park and Rail Uugrade and Coppid Beech Park and Ride schemes be noted.

The Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report providing the Sub-Committee with an update on the introduction of a Red Route waiting restriction along the Reading Buses Route 17 corridor.  A copy of the consultation sample material was attached to the report as Appendix 1, a sample of bus journey times, east side Red Route was attached at Appendix 2 and Red Route Penalty Charge Notices (PCN) issued to the end of January 2019 was attached to the report at Appendix 3.

The report explained that the Red Route waiting restriction had been in place on the east, from the Borough boundary to the IDR, of the Reading Buses Route 17 for just over a year.  The west side Red Route restriction from the junction of Park Lane with Mayfair in Tilehurst to the IDR had been in place since late summer 2018.  Initial enforcement had been limited to busiest periods and had focused on drivers pulling up onto the footway.  Since October 2018 enforcement had been increased to daytime operations using a camera vehicle.

Relatively few comments had been made on the use of the no stopping restriction and those that had been received were very specific to individual experiences.  A sample of bus journey times that had been taken in January 2019 had been compared to the same journey in the same period in January 2018 and had shown promising benefits to public transport.

The report sought to make permanent the east side Red Route restriction and an assessment of the west side would be made and a report submitted to the Sub-Committee in June 2019.

Resolved –

(1)        That the report be noted;

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

(3)        That the issue of parking on the verge and footway within the Red Route as highlighted in paragraph 4.5 of the report be addressed at the next meeting;

(4)        That no public enquiry be held in to the proposal.

(a)        Petition from Residents of Norcot Road, House Numbers 275 to 291 – Objection to Red Route

The Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services submitted a report on the receipt of a petition objecting to a section of the Red Route Scheme.

The petition read as follows:

‘We are petitioning for the red route scheme recently implemented along the stretch of Norcot Road house numbers 275-291, to be replaced by an alternative scheme. Our houses sit back from the highway, with tarmac access to our driveways for vehicles and there are 2 pedestrian pathways (one by the road and one in front of the houses). In the past we have always parked cars on the access to our driveways or on the grass in between. (Photo attached). By parking there we didn’t cause an obstruction or hazard on the highway or the pedestrian paths. Since the introduction of the red route, numerous parking fines have been incurred due to cars being parked in this way. The impact of the scheme has meant that we are now having to park cars in local side streets where space is already limited and the obvious difficulties that occur with deliveries being made.

It seems ludicrous that these areas cannot be used to park vehicles in when it causes no disruption to traffic flow or presents obstacles or hazards to pedestrians or cyclists, which is why the scheme was implemented.

Attached are details of the residents raising objections to this scheme together with contact details. We would welcome a site visit to discuss in more detail.

We understand the need for busses and cars to flow freely and the need for a scheme that stops parking on the highway. We would like the red route changed to another scheme to enable us to park outside our houses without incurring fines or an exclusion area for this stretch of the road’

The report stated that a petition had been received from residents of Norcot Road which had contained 11 signatures on behalf of 14 persons at nine different addresses.

The report explained that the western section of the Red Route, to which the petition referred, had been implemented under the experimental order and was still in the formal consultation phase.  The process had invited objections and other comments that could be considered for potential alterations to the experimental, and/or final Traffic Regulation Order.  Officers would record and consider the contents of the petition in the context of the consultation and would be submitting a report on the western section of the Red Route to a future meeting.

The report explained that parking on footways and verges could cause obstruction to pedestrians, particularly those with mobility aids or push-chairs, and obstructions to sightlines for users of other vehicles, whether motor vehicles or bicycles.  The footways and verges were not constructed to support vehicle traffic, unless specifically indicated otherwise, and there were legislative offences that applied to obstruction, driving on a footway and damaging the public Highway.  Damage could make an area look unsightly, increase maintenance costs and put members of the public at increased risk.  Red Route restrictions were waiting restrictions, in the same ‘family’ as yellow-lines, and just like these other waiting restrictions they applied to the entire width of the Highway land, from the centre of the carriageway to the boundary on the same side of the road as the marking/signing, this included the areas of footway and verge.

At the invitation of the Chair, lead petitioner Jenny Pickett and Councillor Daya Pal Singh addressed the Sub-Committee.

Resolved –

(1)        That the report be noted;

(2)        That the petition and its contents be recorded as an objection to the Red Route, for inclusion in a future report on the western section of the Red Route;

(3)        That the lead petitioner be informed accordingly.